No one told me about the resort fee

[Web Monkey]

You'll say "then just put it in the room rate" right? Be careful what you ask for!

If they put the $25 in the room rate, it will have to be grossed up..

• 20% or so to cover taxes, service charges, etc
• 5% or more to cover potential commisions
• another 5-10% to cover corporate/government/affinity/promotional discounting
• a couple of percent to cover internal cost accounting variances

So, again, under the assumption that they are going to get that first $25 out of you, would you rather have it be a $25fee...or a $34.50 increase in the room rate.

Because that's what it will cost you to have it added on to the room rate.

Hate to be the "bearer of reality" but...

It's only reality if I pay it. I don't mind paying for stuff I want and use, but I'm sure as hell not going to pay an extra undisclosed charge for a spa that I didn't ask for and didn't use.

Unless they disclose the "spa fee" when I book, they're just S*** Out of Luck as far as I'm concerned.

Terry

 

[RJP]

It's only reality if I pay it. I don't mind paying for stuff I want and use, but I'm sure as hell not going to pay an extra undisclosed charge for a spa that I didn't ask for and didn't use.

Unless they disclose the "spa fee" when I book, they're just S*** Out of Luck as far as I'm concerned.

Terry

I hear what you're saying, but you're arguing a different point than the one I'm making.

My point is - if you decide you want to stay there, you are going to pay that $25 whether you use the spa or not. You really are. You will either pay:

$175room and taxes + $25 resort fee = $200

or

$209.50 room and taxes (which includes the $25 grossed up)

You are effectively saying that if the room is $175+ $25 "they're just S*** out of luck" and you'll go elsewhere.

but if there's no resort fee you'll pay $209.50, as long as you're not paying for the spa.



From a marketing standpoint, the reality of the situations is you would never be able to make these comparisons because that marketer would never let you see them. Of course you may decide to stay somewhere ELSE for $200, or somewhere else for $175 instead of this hotel for $209 - but that's a whole different issue which has nothing to do with the resort fee.

 

[fisheater]

I hear what you're saying, but you're arguing a different point than the one I'm making.

My point is - if you decide you want to stay there, you are going to pay that $25 whether you use the spa or not. You really are. You will either pay:

$175room and taxes + $25 resort fee = $200

or

$209.50 room and taxes (which includes the $25 grossed up)

You are effectively saying that if the room is $175+ $25 "they're just S*** out of luck" and you'll go elsewhere.

but if there's no resort fee you'll pay $209.50, as long as you're not paying for the spa.



From a marketing standpoint, the reality of the situations is you would never be able to make these comparisons because that marketer would never let you see them. Of course you may decide to stay somewhere ELSE for $200, or somewhere else for $175 instead of this hotel for $209 - but that's a whole different issue which has nothing to do with the resort fee.

I understand what you're saying, but I can't escape the conclusion that this is just a fancy form of lying.

 

[Web Monkey]

I hear what you're saying, but you're arguing a different point than the one I'm making.

My point is - if you decide you want to stay there, you are going to pay that $25 whether you use the spa or not. You really are. You will either pay:

$175room and taxes + $25 resort fee = $200

or

$209.50 room and taxes (which includes the $25 grossed up)

You are effectively saying that if the room is $175+ $25 "they're just S*** out of luck" and you'll go elsewhere.

but if there's no resort fee you'll pay $209.50, as long as you're not paying for the spa.



From a marketing standpoint, the reality of the situations is you would never be able to make these comparisons because that marketer would never let you see them.

So they're intentionally lying to me, and hoping I'll just bend over and take the additional "fees." Yet another reason to call the credit card company and protest the charge.

Of course you may decide to stay somewhere ELSE for $200, or somewhere else for $175 instead of this hotel for $209 - but that's a whole different issue which has nothing to do with the resort fee.

I'm saying that I make my decision based on my cost and perceived value. If the room was $209, I might have gone somewhere else or not, but at least it would be my decision. Hidden fees change the value of the room rental after the fact.

Terry

 

[RJP]

I understand what you're saying, but I can't escape the conclusion that this is just a fancy form of lying.

Make no mistake, advertising is all about telling you the lie you want to hear.

:cool2:

 

[DandyDon]

I have taught Consumer protection law for over 30 years. I have to say that RJP has swallowed the vendor's lines hook line sinker rod boat.
It takes a while but the bottom line in moSt civilized countries is

1) a booking agent is fully responsible for proper disclosure A BOOKING AGENT IS NOT A PAPER BOY.

2) Any automatic fee has to be properly disclosed before you make any kind of deposit, not merely at check in
3) Any non automatic fee where the hotel does not provide proof of your use cannot be charged

Yes I know we dive in some corrupt countries where the rule of law is at a minimum, but the booking agents are fully amenable to our courts

I do agree that as an experienced consumer lawyer, I NEVER EVER EVER deal with Hotwire. Life is just too short and I dont need that much practice

Thanks. That's pretty much how I saw it, but lack your credibility, accepting that you are who you say you are. Anyway, that's the play I'd run in.

 

[RJP]

I'm saying that I make my decision based on my cost and perceived value. If the room was $209, I might have gone somewhere else or not, but at least it would be my decision. Hidden fees change the value of the room rental after the fact.

Terry

You're talking about something different. I'm not talking about fees that were unknown to the traveler and consciously hidden by the hotel and not revealed until checkout. That's wrong and unacceptable. This thread was started about something completely different. This thread - and my comments - are about fees that a shopper-selected travel website FAILED TO PROVIDE.

The fees in question were not hidden by the hotel, they were obfuscated by the website that was used to shop. Should the website provide accurate information? Yes. Did they? No. But that's not the hotel's fault. It's really not. It's the travel website's fault. I know you don't CARE about the distinction, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. If you think about it, the travel website has a much greater vested interest in hiding those fees as it creates an enhanced perception that they are getting you a better rate that is available elsewhere.

I'm going through this right now. Looking at the Grand Wailea Resort for vacation. The room rate is $399 a night plus a $25/night resort fee. That fee is not hidden at all. It's clear and obvious on the hotel's website, and appears everywhere, every step of the way. You cannot make a reservation on the hotel's website without seeing it at the top of the page all along the way. You cannot miss it. In fact, they almost go too far.

However, when I look at that same hotel via some of the travel websites mentioned above....I'm hard pressed to find any mention of the $25 fee. Where it WAS present it was burried at the bottom of the page or otherwise hidden in the fine print. I would likely have never found it if not for the fact that I was specifically/purposely looking for it. Expedia probably did the best job, but they still hid it a little bit, and required me to not only find it, but click on a "Click Here For Details" link to really understand.

Again, if Company A's website does a crappy job of providing you information about Company B's product and pricing...I'm not sure how/why you'd get mad at Company B about it.

There was another thread recently where a new diver starts by saying he was told by his friend that the LDS fee of $249 for an OW class would include purchase of mask, fins, snorkle and course materials. The newb went to the shop and - not surprisingly - quickly found out his friend was wrong (s**t-awful stupid obviously). However, the newb then proceded to blast the LDS as a rip-off joint to be avoided because they misled him and tried to trick him into buy gear that was supposed to be included.

The start - and continuation - of this thread is not much different. If a person or a company lies to you, you should get mad. But get mad at the person who TOLD the lie...not the person the lie was ABOUT.

 

[RJP]

I have taught Consumer protection law for over 30 years. I have to say that RJP has swallowed the vendor's lines hook line sinker rod boat.

1) a booking agent is fully responsible for proper disclosure A BOOKING AGENT IS NOT A PAPER BOY.

2) Any automatic fee has to be properly disclosed before you make any kind of deposit, not merely at check in

3) Any non automatic fee where the hotel does not provide proof of your use cannot be charged

"a booking agent is fully responsible for proper disclosure"

HOLY CR@P I DON'T KNOW HOW TO BE CLEARER!!!

That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

PS - The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

 

[tajkd]

What is lost here is that the consumer ALWAYS has options and needs to read the fine print. I never book with strangers and mostly book personally. The days where a travel agent passed any savings on to the consumer are long gone. Do your homework. And if you find something out that you should have known... accept the cost of blaming yourself.

There is also a recourse for booking agents that lie. One of them is here at this board and the other is to go elsewhere. Both options work pretty well.

"a booking agent is fully responsible for proper disclosure"

HOLY CR@P I DON'T KNOW HOW TO BE CLEARER!!!

That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

PS - The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

 

[firelaw]

"a booking agent is fully responsible for proper disclosure"

HOLY CR@P I DON'T KNOW HOW TO BE CLEARER!!!

That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.
The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

PS - The booking agent is at fault. Not the hotel.

they are both active in the fraud. Its just easier to sue the booking agent

And yes its fraud. Any hotel that tries to spring a fee on you at check in that was not disclosed in the reservation is committing fraud. Tehy have induced you to travel there. thats all it takes.

And yes I have sued them for it without any problem. But its still easier to sue the booking agent.