Online hotel reservation service fined for refusal of accommodation | Chandigarh News

[email protected]
Ludhiana: District Consumer Dispute Resolution Commission ordered online hotel and house service (Oyo rooms) to pay guest 25,000 rupees for serious service failure for alleged denial of reserved rooms and prepaid by him. The commission, made up of chairman KK Kareer and member Jaswinder Singh, also ordered the company to reimburse Rs 25,506 to client Dr Kulwant Singh of Guru Nanak settlement in Ludhiana.
The complainant said he and his medical colleagues intended to travel to Nainital during the summer vacation, for which he had booked four rooms in a hotel on the opposing party’s website on June 7. 2017. The Complainant paid 42,200 rupees for the reservation of four coins from his bank account. According to the opposing party’s booking confirmation, the complainant and his friends were to check in on the afternoon of June 10 and leave on June 13, 2017 at around 11 a.m. The complainant received the booking confirmation via a WhatsApp message on his mobile number.
When the complainant, his family and friends arrived at the relevant hotel in Mallital (Nainital) at around 8 p.m. and showed the booking confirmation to the service staff, the staff refused to acknowledge any booking. The complainant contacted the opposing parties and complained about the unavailability of the rooms but was refused any help, due to which the group had to face inconvenience, harassment and humiliation. The complainant had to stay at another hotel after paying a much higher rate. When the complainant asked the opposing party for reimbursement of the amount of the reservation, they only reimbursed 14,494 rupees. This was alleged to amount to a lack of service and an unfair trade practice on the part of the respondents. The complainant obtained a legal notice dated September 19, 2017 through his lawyer, but to no avail. In his complaint, he asked that the opposing parties be invited to reimburse the balance of Rs 25,506, as well as compensation of Rs 60,000.
However, the Respondent asserted that on June 7, 2007, the Complainant had reserved four rooms for four people through his platform using his account and the cell phone number of his friend Sukhmander Singh at Nainital. The complainant paid 42,200 rupees for the reservation, which was confirmed by SMS by them. According to respondents, the reservation was for only four people instead of four families or 16 people, as claimed by the complainant. Even in the confirmation message, it was specifically mentioned that the four bedroom reservation was for four people. As a result, the applicant was refused accommodation in rooms for four families, ie 16 people. Due to high season no refund policy was applicable but as a goodwill gesture they refunded the one night rate.
Can be added as a box:
The commission, after considering the assertion raised by the lawyers of the opposing parties, considered that without a doubt in the WhatsApp message sent by them it is mentioned that the reservation was made for four rooms from June 10 to 13, 2017 for four guests, but it is totally unthinkable that there could be a restriction on the stay of one person in a room. In the event of a stay of more than two people, especially in the case of children accompanying the couple / parents, the hotel will generally charge a supplement for an additional bed for the additional person / child staying in the room.

Comments are closed.