Chancing their arm?

[Davidrh]

Tell me about it Buzzard
I had one guest who was upgraded to a luxury 4 poster (we have just sept £13K on the room)
The hotel is non smoking, the room doors are plastered with non smoking signs.
The rooms have non smoking signs. AND the guests sign a registry that they understand that the hotel is non smoking.
Guess what. The customer checks out the next morning and the room is found by the cleaning staff FOUL with Cigar smoke

and that was the point we changed from cash sales to credit card only

[Wiz]

davidrh,
I can sell you a smoking detector that plays a message that would get on any smokers nerves!

[Allen Higginson]

davidrh,
I can sell you a smoking detector that plays a message that would get on any smokers nerves!

Expensive (in comparison) little items those but ideal for their purpose.

[Graeme]

Thanks for that steve..someone whose sees the others guys point of view at last !!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't think anyone would be in dispute had she been smoking against hotel policy but the reasons behind the oginal post are clear.
As an aside - I've lost count of how many times I have requested a non-smoking room and it has been used as a smoking room on more than one occasion.

the classics like the shower cap or condom over the detector.

I stayed in a hotel last month in Glasgow that had scelotape over the detector.

[Allen Higginson]

Thanks for that steve..someone whose sees the others guys point of view at last !!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't think anyone would be in dispute had she been smoking against hotel policy but the reasons behind the oginal post are clear.
As an aside - I've lost count of how many times I have requested a non-smoking room and it has been used as a smoking room on more than one occasion.

the classics like the shower cap or condom over the detector.

I stayed in a hotel last month in Glasgow that had scelotape over the detector.

THats one of those old dual-technology detectors.The fire melts through the plastic before the smoke detector activates!

[Steven N]

Stevo, not a single person who has posted has disagreed that someone smoking in a non-smoking room should be held to account for their actions.

In the case in question someone was smoking in a 'smoking allowed' room and was 'fined' £1600 (Everyone but davidrh considers this to be daylight robbery!)

The question I would ask is what would happen if there was an unwanted alarm caused by steam, aerosol, dust or excessive flatulence created by the guest. (I've established unwanted alarms have been caused by all of these) Would there be a similar charge? Could the hotel prove it was the guest who caused the problem?

Even if someone was to have smoked in a non-smoking room there is the likely probability that they would deny this. I would imagine that, legally, it would be up to the hotel to prove that they did. This could be very difficult.

If however hotels are allowed to debit someone's payment card on their unilateral desicion it opens up the system for abuse.

How long will it be before someone is fined £1600 for the fire detector operating in their room even though they did nothing to cause it? The hotel says they must have been smoking and takes a charge. how would anyone feel in these circumstances.

I believe the practice of deducting money from someone's card under these circumstances is less legal than the people who wheelclamp and even they are being taken to task these days.

Hotels would be better placed to get all guests to sign a contract where it was understood that no claims could be made by guests against the hotel for any loss of the guests enjoyment due to circumstances beyond the hotel's control i.e due to fire alarms activating etc. They don't cover loss or damage to vehicles on their property so why not fire alarm systems.

The guests would just have to understand that the fire alarm system is installed for their own safety and they would therefore have to accept the consequences of the operation of such systems.

Wiz can we discuss some  of these point by point
Point 1 I'm glad we all agree that if you book a smoking room you can smoke, very poor show then to have a smoke detector that activates due to smoking, i think we all agree that the original lady in question was all but mugged

Point 2 UWFS caused by steam? in my expeirience its normally where people have skimped on the fitting of the detectors & sited them right by the shower cubicle door, I would suggest the hotel move them, in much the same way that its not overly clever to fit the detection above the mirror as that leads to hairspray/deoderant problems. Dust, maintain the system! Cant comment on the flatulence a lot more difficult to prove than smoking unless perhaps the hotel is nest door to the local curry house! The point being here that these are managment issues for the hotel & are not down to the guest deliberately flouting the rules.
Point 3 I agree its up to the hotel to prove the person had been smoking, if they deny this then fine, the hotel could always refuse their custom in the future
Point 4 if they debited my card for £1600 theys be very disapointed in fact if they tried for £16 sometimes they would get far either! (sorry couldn't resist that.
Point 5 may be a charter to not maintain the system.
The fire service are asking premises to prevent UWFS, sometimes & again on this it was wrong, the only way to do things is to hit people in the pocket-we as the FRS cant do that but I'll support hotels that genuinely try to use these methods.

[Wiz]

I think it would be very unwise for any FRS to even intimate support of hotels levying a £1600 fine for someone smoking in a smoking room because it caused the fire alarm system to operate.

The police and even council employees are already suffering a backlash against tbeir involvement in the government's ban and financially punish policies. Do we want the fire service to become another organisation that the public despises? The line between hero and villain can be very narrow.

[Steven N]

Wiz
 I offer no suport whatsoever to any hotel that rips people off in the manner previously described. I do not under any circumstances support the action taken not even tacitly. I am trying to argue the point that if a customer flouts the smoking ban in a non-smoking room I believe the hotel has the right(whether they deem it commercially prudent to exercise that right is another matter) to bill a customer for any inconveiniences they cause the hotel.

[Davo]

Pray tell

How can flatulence set off a detector?

Its gas

No particles

No heat (well not enough to set off a HD unless you have had  the afterburner curry!)

davo

ps don't forget fly spray, we had a chambermaid try to get a pesky fly, guess where it settled?
Yup!

[nearlythere]

Wiz
 I offer no suport whatsoever to any hotel that rips people off in the manner previously described. I do not under any circumstances support the action taken not even tacitly. I am trying to argue the point that if a customer flouts the smoking ban in a non-smoking room I believe the hotel has the right(whether they deem it commercially prudent to exercise that right is another matter) to bill a customer for any inconveiniences they cause the hotel.

Can, therefore, the innocent guests, who had to leave their beds in the middle of the night, bill the hotel for any inconveniences caused to them?

[Graeme]

especially if you had paid for a movie and you had to evacuate halfway through....

[Mike Buckley]

Perhaps part of the bill given to the customer flouting the ban could be passed onto the other guests as compensation for their inconvenience?

"All guests are cordially invited to enjoy a drink at the bar at the expense of the occupant of room 124 who set off the fire alarm by smoking in a non smoking bedroom!"

[Steven N]

Perhaps part of the bill given to the customer flouting the ban could be passed onto the other guests as compensation for their inconvenience?

"All guests are cordially invited to enjoy a drink at the bar at the expense of the occupant of room 124 who set off the fire alarm by smoking in a non smoking bedroom!"

Now I do think thats a splendid ideal, make mine a double Mike
 that would be damned inconveinient eh Graeme if the film was nearing its climax...
nearlythere perhaps thats where the £1600 came from?

[Midland Retty]

Thanks for that steve..someone whose sees the others guys point of view at last !!!!!!!!!!!!

At last???

I don't think anyone disagrees that a hotel has the right (and therefore should) penalise guests who smoke where / when they shouldn't  - so why did you say that David?

You seem to suggest that most of us are unsymapthtic to the plight of hoteliers and we aren't! You appear to be on the defensive at every turn.

In this instance however the hotel are totally out of order. Their actions are indefensible and actually might even be illegal. No 'ifs', 'buts' or 'maybes'

I fully sympathise with hoteliers who have to deal with their property being vandalised or removed illegally by guests, I totally understand why credit / debit cards are used to secure bookings, and I think hotleiers should be able to penalise genuine unsociable behaviour / actions of guests.

But this thread is about a lady who was legally entitled to smoke in her room and many people have asked you  what she has done wrong - and you haven't actually answered that question.

It seems as though you are defending the hotel by saying "yes but hoteliers have to put up with other issues from unscrupulous guests who do all manner of unsociable things" as if that somehow balances things out; that it gives them carte blanche to get away with charging silly costs.

I can assure you David that here you will receive sympathetic and balanced views / advice from all members so long as you are balanced in your views in return.

PS:- The complimentary drink idea is great! ...However I suspect some dastardly guests might abuse this.

They would sneak around popping "SMOKING PERMITTED" stickers on non smoking rooms, deliberately causing the unwitting resident to smoke in their rooms, get caught by hotel management and made to fork out for complimentary drinks.

Just think, if you went round and did that to 5 or 6 guests in one go you wouldn't have to put your hand in your pocket for a drink all night - there'd be complimentary drinks coming at you left right and centre.

I'm off to get some "smoking permitted" signs printed off forthwith.

[nearlythere]

Thanks for that steve..someone whose sees the others guys point of view at last !!!!!!!!!!!!

At last???

I don't think anyone disagrees that a hotel has the right (and therefore should) penalise guests who smoke where / when they shouldn't  - so why did you say that David?

You seem to suggest that most of us are unsymapthtic to the plight of hoteliers and we aren't! You appear to be on the defensive at every turn.

In this instance however the hotel are totally out of order. Their actions are indefensible and actually might even be illegal. No 'ifs', 'buts' or 'maybes'

I fully sympathise with hoteliers who have to deal with their property being vandalised or removed illegally by guests, I totally understand why credit / debit cards are used to secure bookings, and I think hotleiers should be able to penalise genuine unsociable behaviour / actions of guests.

But this thread is about a lady who was legally entitled to smoke in her room and many people have asked you  what she has done wrong - and you haven't actually answered that question.

It seems as though you are defending the hotel by saying "yes but hoteliers have to put up with other issues from unscrupulous guests who do all manner of unsociable things" as if that somehow balances things out; that it gives them carte blanche to get away with charging silly costs.

I can assure you David on here you will recieved sympathetic and balanced views / advice from all members so long as you are balanced in your views in return.

Quite so. Davidrh seems to have no sympathy whatsoever for the plight of the individual who asked for a smoking room, was given a "smoking room", had a smoke which set off the fire alarm, caused an evacuation resulting in the hotel stealing money from her bank account. (They as much as stole that money out of her handbag.)

Davidrh then seems to suggest that it the fault of the lady in question and she should have used some common sense.

I'm afraid that Davidrh no longer receives any sympathy from me. With such a blinkered mindset and an inability to acknowledges any one elses point of view or reasoning I am sending him to Coventry.    

I do hope that Buzzard905's friend gets the money back that was stolen from her and if he could advise her that if I can help in any way she can get me through him at any time.