-
As a diamond member this is one of our family haunts as it has a large pool for the kids and a decent executive lounge.
Usually get a nice upgrade as well.
On this occasion we have just checked in and been told as of the 1st of May the pool and spa is no longer free for members and now have to cough up £20 for a family swim, oh and yes you only get 90 minutes.
Just checked the Hilton elite benefits and looks like complimentary access to the pool/spa has been removed from the list.Absolute joke that hotels are doing this now. Leave a 1 star review and encourage others to do so until this trend is stamped out.
This cuts both ways as the majority of guests probably don’t use the pool and shouldn’t really be asked to subsidise what is a very specific and hugely costly amenity to provide. Also, by effectively rationing the use of the pool by price and limiting time, the hotel is probably creating a far better experience for those who are serious about using the pool.
@JDB sounds reasonable, until you think that they could still let you use it for 90 minutes as a paying guest of the hotel and still keep a nice pool environment. Or let a high status guest have the use for free, even if only for 60-90 minutes.
A blanket fee for everyone just engenders annoyance for those who feel taken advantage of.If they were really concerned about non-users subsidising the cost of the pool, they could always give those guests a discount …! IIRC the DT Harrogate charges something like £15 pp to use the pool now. I feel that if a hotel has a specific facility, it should be included in the room price, even though we often end up not actually using a pool as we tend to be out and about sightseeing most of the day.
I love how @JDB almost always takes the contrarian point of view.
They sell memberships for the pool/gym so can you really pretend that they care about the overall experience for hotel guests? Maybe they should charge for those who check in at reception rather than online? Perhaps a supplement for those who leave their bedrooms messy as it isn’t fair on other guests to have to subsidise them.
Never charge for something that was once free unless you want to alienate your customers.
I’d write to the manager saying how much I’ve enjoyed my prior stays but I am seriously questioning if I want to come back. When a hotel starts nickel-and-diming on stuff like this you can safely assume that they will be cutting back on other things also. Be very nice and emphasise your disappointment. £20 for a family swim is not an unreasonable price but quite simply you are staying as a guest at the hotel and this makes you feel like a revenue optimisation challenge, rather than a guest.
I’d expect you’ll get an invitation to use the pool free of charge next time you’re in town.
Right, I’m off to my hotel based swimming facility.
Absolute joke that hotels are doing this now. Leave a 1 star review and encourage others to do so until this trend is stamped out.
+1
@Froggee sums it up nicely.
I often choose a hotel specifically because it has a pool. I expect to be able to use it as I’ve paid for the room at the hotel. I don’t expect to have to pay extra for the privelege.
It’s bad enough that unless you have status the breakfast is separately chargeable.
If they keep going with this a la carte separate charging nonsense I can see in future you may find a separate “room cleaning” charge or how about giving you the bed but charging you extra for the pillows?
I love how @JDB almost always takes the contrarian point of view.
They sell memberships for the pool/gym so can you really pretend that they care about the overall experience for hotel guests? Maybe they should charge for those who check in at reception rather than online? Perhaps a supplement for those who leave their bedrooms messy as it isn’t fair on other guests to have to subsidise them.
I also don’t have children and very rarely use the NHS, so I think I should get a tax discount too! 🙂
For me it all comes down to what you were told when you booked. Did they make it clear that the pool was chargeable? Did they imply that the pool was included in your room rate? I don’t have an issue with charging for a hotel amenity if the guest knows what they’re signing up for.
I just checked their website and on the rooms page it prominently says:
Your stay includes
✓ Free WiFi
✓ Non-smoking rooms
✓ On-site restaurant
✓ Indoor pool
✓ Fitness center
✓ Pet-friendly rooms
✓ Business centerSo on that basis I’d refuse to pay extra for the pool since it’s included in your room rate.
Service charges, pool/spa charges…
I am pessimistic, they are here to stay. Inflated number of hotel status holders are not helping either.
But in this case I’d start a dispute with the credit card and keep that room info with free pool access. That may be the easiest
@aseftel – so, on your analysis is the food in the “on-site restaurant” also included? The principle of what you say is bang on, but it doesn’t quite say that use of the pool is free.
I think that’s stretching it a bit @JDB. I suspect that it’s more a case of they haven’t updated the website to reflect that there’s now a surcharge to use the pool.
You don’t expect to pay a fee just to enter the restaurant. Well at least I don’t but YMMV.
I think that’s stretching it a bit @JDB. I suspect that it’s more a case of they haven’t updated the website to reflect that there’s now a surcharge to use the pool.
You don’t expect to pay a fee just to enter the restaurant. Well at least I don’t but YMMV.
Yes, it is stretching it a bit, but one wouldn’t win a case by citing the above and the inclusion of the restaurant in the list is a bit of a killer, even though it sort of makes a mockery of the whole thing. The unbundling of hotel amenities is the future and, in my view, a good thing. In a city, we just don’t want to pay for the hotel to have a pool, spa, fancy restaurant etc. A cheaper small, comfortable boutique or Airbnb is preferable to a chain trying to punch above its weight by offering a pool.
@Froggee – yes, apologies for being contrarian; don’t always like HfP shibboleths / dogmatic views as there are usually two sides to the story. Also, a generally successful contrarian investor and you wouldn’t catch us in Dubai, Maldives, Barbados etc. for all the tea in China; difficult to believe reading this site, but other destinations are available.
@aseftel – so, on your analysis is the food in the “on-site restaurant” also included? The principle of what you say is bang on, but it doesn’t quite say that use of the pool is free.
I thought you might point that out.
Not quite. In the first instance, some sort of ‘average consumer’ test would probably interpret that the pool was free but I’m not sure about the restaurant. I’d also draw a distinction between ‘restaurant’ and ‘meal’ (by analogy I think it would be more reasonable to charge for a towel or locker at the ‘included’ pool).
That said, I wouldn’t approve their restaurant wording if it came across my desk.
Consumer rights law isn’t my area of expertise, but you’re right to imply that misrepresentation is a high bar and I don’t feel confident that the hotel has erred in fact. Before one gets to the courts though there is the realm of customer service. Personally, I would fancy my chances on this one.
Market forces will maybe sort in time. At the moment we are living through a business environment of maximising income. Prices increasing even when not influenced directly by inflationary cost increases. Businesses more than ever looking at optimising profits through extra charges, it has become ‘infectious’.
Certainly not hoping for an economic downturn but reduced spending will curtail this. Perhaps also feeding back dissatisfaction can help. If front line staff feedback customer satisfaction then maybe it will have an impact.
Here comes the grim reaper of charges, this is just the beginning.
First, I can’t imagine staying in a place rated 3.5 on TripAdvisor and 4.0 on Google Maps. What did you expect? Online ratings are often manipulated, but a score that bad tells you that the hotel management really doesn’t care what guests think.
Second, I can’t find reference to the charge anywhere on the Hilton website. That’s deceitful, but, to be honest, is completely consistent with the low online ratings. Caveat emptor.
But, more widely, if I don’t intend to use a pool, I prefer hotels without one: I don’t like coss-subsidising other guests. For the same reason, I prefer hotels and airlines without loyalty schemes unless I have status in the scheme: I don’t want to cross-subsidise other guests or be treated like a second-class citizen while the red carpet is rolled out for others. And I never eat breakfast in a hotel unless it is included in the deal; it’s the old cross-subsidy thing again.
I’m a firm believer in the power of markets. This will sort itself out in the long run. Unless, of course, people choose to stay in any old dive because…points!
To be fair we have stayed here numerous times, the hotel has recently undergone a refurbishment, so a nicer place to stay, not like it was before. A new large executive lounge located on the ground floor, decent breakfast and a good range of drinks with canapés in the evening. The pool issue has now spoiled the hotel experience for us as a family. If the hotel wants to alienate its loyal customers that’s fine by me but I’ll look elsewhere in future. £60 to use the over a weekend is frankly taking the you know what.
First, I can’t imagine staying in a place rated 3.5 on TripAdvisor and 4.0 on Google Maps. What did you expect? Online ratings are often manipulated, but a score that bad tells you that the hotel management really doesn’t care what guests think.
Second, I can’t find reference to the charge anywhere on the Hilton website. That’s deceitful, but, to be honest, is completely consistent with the low online ratings. Caveat emptor.
But, more widely, if I don’t intend to use a pool, I prefer hotels without one: I don’t like coss-subsidising other guests. For the same reason, I prefer hotels and airlines without loyalty schemes unless I have status in the scheme: I don’t want to cross-subsidise other guests or be treated like a second-class citizen while the red carpet is rolled out for others. And I never eat breakfast in a hotel unless it is included in the deal; it’s the old cross-subsidy thing again.
I’m a firm believer in the power of markets. This will sort itself out in the long run. Unless, of course, people choose to stay in any old dive because…points!
Yes, I don’t buy branded corn flakes in the supermarket, I’m definitely avoiding cross subsidying others.
Can OP add to the existing thread (which should be pinned IMO) Northernlass started on sh1tlisting hotels levying service charges/resort fees et al in the UK. This is more of the same.
Can OP add to the existing thread (which should be pinned IMO) Northernlass started on sh1tlisting hotels levying service charges/resort fees et al in the UK. This is more of the same.
Disagree. This is a choice, pay and use, don’t pay don’t use. Resort/Destination fees are not optional and simply disguise the real cost.
The pool situation is annoying as I use this hotel pretty much weekly for work and enjoyed using the Spa, but at least the gym is still ‘free’. And it’s so hot in there you are basically getting a Sauna with your workout anyway.
Hotel itself is pretty good as stated earlier, and I’ve never had an issue with a gold upgrade here. I usually book a ‘single deluxe’ and end up in an exec King.
One of the better upgrades I’ve had out of Hilton was here – booked the Single room for work and ended up in the Penthouse Suite … the only price I had to pay was walking in on someone half undressed, already occupying the first room they gave me.
The hotel has added a prominent banner to the website advising of a new policy that takes effect from 1st June. Might be worth asking whether the new fees were charged in error if you stayed in May.
https://www.hilton.com/en/hotels/bhxmetw-hilton-birmingham-metropole/amenities/
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
