Can we refuse to change room in the middle of week's stay?

[Fasttr]

Not for me. At a minimum I'd want a refund of the entire last night plus the 20% premium for every night. But in addition, I'd want an exec to explain how the system is supposed to work and what went wrong as far as this single reservation.

I get the desire to be compensated for the entire last night, but I don't understand the logic of expecting to be compensated for the 20% points premium paid for the entire stay which was paid by the OP as compensation for the ability to book in the 13 month window. If the OP had the status to book at 13 months without paying the additional 20%, are you suggesting they should receive less compensation in that situation?

I just don't get the logic of making the 20% premium paid on the other nights part of the desired compensation.

 

[SueDonJ]

I get the desire to be compensated for the entire last night, but I don't understand the logic of expecting to be compensated for the 20% points premium paid for the entire stay which was paid by the OP as compensation for the ability to book in the 13 month window. If the OP had the status to book at 13 months without paying the additional 20%, are you suggesting they should receive less compensation in that situation?

I just don't get the logic of making the 20% premium paid on the other nights part of the desired compensation.

Because I'd be basing it on the premise that had I known at the time of booking that an unreasonable expectation was attached to the reservation as presented, i.e. that a unit change would be required for the last night, it would have been my choice then whether to confirm or not the reservation as it was presented. From my Post #103: "I would have instead waited and taken my chances when the Reservation Window opened for the six uninterrupted nights," which in the OP's case wouldn't have required the 20% Points premium.

But again, that'd be my minimum. This is about much more than just incorrect inventory allocation. This OP was treated with indifference that should never be acceptable at a Marriott resort.

 

[Fasttr]

Because I'd be basing it on the premise that had I known at the time of booking that an unreasonable expectation was attached to the reservation as presented, i.e. that a unit change would be required for the last night, it would have been my choice then whether to confirm or not the reservation as it was presented. From my Post #103: "I would have instead waited and taken my chances when the Reservation Window opened for the six uninterrupted nights," which in the OP's case wouldn't have required the 20% Points premium.

But again, that'd be my minimum. This is about much more than just incorrect inventory allocation. This OP was treated with indifference that should never be acceptable at a Marriott resort.

Seems your logic on the 20% falls apart in that you could have booked at 12 months without paying the 20% premium and still theoretically gotten the 7 nights without paying the premium thus only being harmed for the final night.

In my opinion asking for the 20% on all nights cheapens the argument as the OP clearly wanted to secure that particular window of time and thus chose to pay the 20% for the privilege to do so.

I agree with your other arguments, but just felt the 20% for the other nights was a reach.

 

[SueDonJ]

Seems your logic on the 20% falls apart in that you could have booked at 12 months without paying the 20% premium and still theoretically gotten the 7 nights without paying the premium thus only being harmed for the final night.

In my opinion asking for the 20% on all nights cheapens the argument as the OP clearly wanted to secure that particular window of time and thus chose to pay the 20% for the privilege to do so.

I agree with your other arguments, but just felt the 20% for the other nights was a reach.

The OP says this in Post #86: "I wish I had known earlier and could have avoided the hassle. We actually flew in on Friday and stayed at Reno for a night. I could have booked Friday check in if I knew this problem at the time of the booking." In other posts s/he says that s/he understands how breakage happens and that a move might be required during a single stay with multiple confirmations, because during a previous MountainSide stay booked as a segmented reservation they'd been required to change units.

None of us knows if the OP "clearly wanted" seven nights uninterrupted or if at the time of booking s/he would have accepted the segmented reservation, although it certainly appears that s/he'd pay the 20% Points premium for the uninterrupted seven-night Friday check-in. But regardless, the OP's known precedence is that when a move is required multiple confirmations will be issued. In the OP's shoes I'd certainly argue that MVW has no right in hindsight to make the determination for him/her that this interrupted stay would have been accepted at the time of booking, no right to determine under what circumstances the OP would be willing to pay the 20% Points premium.

 

[dioxide45]

There was the chance that when the window opened up for only 6 nights, which would have been at the 10 month mark. That there wouldn't have been any availability at all. Chances are that it wouldn't even have been there at 12 months when the 20% penalty wouldn't have been in place. The option to make a 6 night reservation wouldn't have even been an option at 13 or even 12 months for the OP.

 

[dioxide45]

I'm usually right there with you, right at the head of the pack!, in thinking that the docs contain far more protections for MVW than they do for owners/members. But not in this situation. It is simply not reasonable for MVW to expect that owners/members can be required to change units during a single reservation. As far as I can see the IT system protects against it, and there is no specific wording in the docs that will protect MVW if a legal challenge is brought by a competent, qualified attorney.

It might be difficult to get an attorney to take such a case. First they would have to identify the class. It could be done pretty easily, but the class would be pretty small. It is only a very small percentage of the ownership that would have had to move. Wouldn't they need to show some kind of financial hardship or loss? It seems that the owners are accepting compensation for the inconvenience, while they aren't signing rights away to sue, it doesn't look good in a lawsuit? Owners really aren't out any money other than perhaps vacation investment. In the end it may perhaps bring some transparency to the inventory allocation process, but you know MVC would fight any lawsuit tooth and nail, ultimately costing owners more money. Because the customer pays for everything.

 

[spottie]

it's been an interesting experience

Thank you all for your advice and support during the past couple of days while we went through this issue. Now that we are back home and finally caught up after vacation, I do have an interesting experience to report.

The move had not been very smooth. Since we were planning to ski that day, we chose to have them help us move when we went out around noon. When we came back around 3:15 pm, the room was not ready for another 30 minutes and I found our diary/frozen food lying on the floor instead of getting put in their fridge in the storage area.

Needless to say, I was not happy with this whole experience and was planning to write a letter as Susan suggested, but did not yet get a chance to do that. Then last Wednesday, somebody from Marriott corporate called me and told me that he had learned about my experience and offered me full refund for the night (including the premium we paid for the night). He said my situation was not suppose to happen and if 7 consecutive nights were not available then I should not have seen it during reservation.

The only place I had described this experience was on this board and I doubt the GM would volunteer about my situation? So I guess somebody at Marriott corporate must have read my post then. If so, I am impressed that they took the extra effort to locate me in real life to make things right.

Overall, I am happy with the resolution as I felt that ultimately Marriott does care about customer experience. Marriott reaching out to me proactively makes the difference for me. If I had not received the call and had to write my letter and get the same compensation in the end, I think I would not be as satisfied.

 

[SueDonJ]

I'm happy that you're satisfied with MVW's concern and response, Spottie. And also impressed that they apparently searched for you after reading TUG! I know of a few other situations where the same thing happened but in those cases the TUGgers' User Names were very close to or the same as their real names so it didn't take too much effort to find them. In your case it appears they would have had to take a few extra steps to correlate the situation as you related it here with the GR Tahoe reservation records; maybe that wasn't difficult but it does say something positive about MVW that they were concerned enough to do it.

Thanks for the follow-up post - it's appreciated very much.

 

[SueDonJ]

It might be difficult to get an attorney to take such a case. First they would have to identify the class. It could be done pretty easily, but the class would be pretty small. It is only a very small percentage of the ownership that would have had to move. Wouldn't they need to show some kind of financial hardship or loss? It seems that the owners are accepting compensation for the inconvenience, while they aren't signing rights away to sue, it doesn't look good in a lawsuit? Owners really aren't out any money other than perhaps vacation investment. In the end it may perhaps bring some transparency to the inventory allocation process, but you know MVC would fight any lawsuit tooth and nail, ultimately costing owners more money. Because the customer pays for everything.

Don't know how I missed this before now ...

When I mention getting qualified attorneys involved I don't mean with the intent of filing a class action suit as the first step. I'd want their professional opinion about what I'm thinking and I'd follow their lead whether they think something is worth pursuing. If so then I'd hire them to correspond with MVC Exec on my behalf because I think a letter signed by an attorney would be taken more seriously than a letter from me as a dissatisfied owner/member, especially if I'm asking questions that I don't expect them to answer as a matter of course. Plus you've seen how often I edit my posts - it'd take me days to put all my thoughts together for something that important!

 

[Fasttr]

He said my situation was not suppose to happen and if 7 consecutive nights were not available then I should not have seen it during reservation.

This goes to the root of the debate between SueDonJ and GregT....and certainly follows with my expectations when booking a ressie for consecutive nights on one Marriott ressie number.

 

[DeniseM]

It is known that there are Marriott employee's who visit TUG (anonymously) on a daily basis.

 

[SueDonJ]

It is known that there are Marriott employee's who visit TUG (anonymously) on a daily basis.

Yep. I'd assumed for years before becoming a TUG moderator that Marriott (and any other timeshare-related companies) would have to be stupid to not follow this and other sites on a routine basis. They're not stupid. Since becoming a mod I know it's true because I've been contacted out of the blue on a couple occasions by PM and email. I've also a couple of times asked a Marriott contact to take a look at certain TUG threads in order to clarify rules or provide documentation for all of us - each time I posted the response and the fact that it came directly from MVW.

 

[dioxide45]

It is known that there are Marriott employee's who visit TUG (anonymously) on a daily basis.

But how would they know who spottie was? No way to attach a name to a user here unless they contact the TUG Admin. I suspect that someone at the property contacted corporate or corporate contacted the property for more information. Or perhaps there were some notes in the system that jumped out and fell on a some type of report for review.

 

[dioxide45]

This goes to the root of the debate between SueDonJ and GregT....and certainly follows with my expectations when booking a ressie for consecutive nights on one Marriott ressie number.

The problem is, what a front line escalation or customer service rep knows about the back end system functionality may be limited. They may be making the same assumptions that we are?. We will probably never know for sure.

 

[DeniseM]

But how would they know who spottie was? No way to attach a name to a user here unless they contact the TUG Admin. I suspect that someone at the property contacted corporate or corporate contacted the property for more information. Or perhaps there were some notes in the system that jumped out and fell on a some type of report for review.

It could have happened a lot of ways, but if someone in corporate saw the post, they could have called the resort manager, who would certainly be familiar with the issue.

I have no idea - I was just commenting that Marriott does monitor TUG.

 

[SueDonJ]

But how would they know who spottie was? No way to attach a name to a user here unless they contact the TUG Admin. I suspect that someone at the property contacted corporate or corporate contacted the property for more information. Or perhaps there were some notes in the system that jumped out and fell on a some type of report for review.

Unless you're talking about something extreme like a warrant issued by law enforcement which obviously isn't the case here, I don't think TUG Admin would release the name or contact info of any guests/members no matter who's asking. At least I hope they wouldn't. If as a mod I were asked to do it, I'd immediately forward the request to Admin without doing anything - no way would I want to be involved.

It seems as though there was some level of deductive reasoning at play here. If Spottie asks I'm sure they'll let her/him know how they made the connection.

 

[Passepartout]

It seems as though there was some level of deductive reasoning at play here. If Spottie asks I'm sure they'll let her/him know how they made the connection.

This ain't rocket science. Spottie stated in post #1 his/her resort name and that s/he checked in that day for 7 nights- AND was assigned a room that only had 6 nights of availability. Assuming that 'Spottie' is some sort of take-off on their real name, it wouldn't take Sherlock Holmes to narrow it down pretty close. Even if his/her real name is something totally unrelated, anyone with access to reservations and room assignments could pinpoint them in a very few keystrokes.

Jim

 

[SueDonJ]

This ain't rocket science. Spottie stated in post #1 his/her resort name and that s/he checked in that day for 7 nights- AND was assigned a room that only had 6 nights of availability. Assuming that 'Spottie' is some sort of take-off on their real name, it wouldn't take Sherlock Holmes to narrow it down pretty close. Even if his/her real name is something totally unrelated, anyone with access to reservations and room assignments could pinpoint them in a very few keystrokes.

Jim

:hysterical: Sorry but that rocket science comment makes me laugh every time I hear it! Of course it'd be simple for Marriott to put two and two together based on just the info here. It's still interesting trying to figure out how the connection was made from here to corporate - likely it's what Denise said, that someone from Marriott read it and made sure it ended up on the correct desk for resolution.

 

[Seaport104]

Came across this thread doing research on Grand Residences in Tahoe since I just booked a 3BR there for a large family trip.

This is making me nervous as the date I booked is Wednesday to Wednesday as this was the only availability for a week. It will be a royal pain in the $%## if we have to move 12 people to go to another unit!!!

How worried should I be? There was no mention of this possibility when I booked this wed to wed week. In fact, I told the agent that wed to wed seems weird since I thought all check in dates were friday

 

[GregT]

Came across this thread doing research on Grand Residences in Tahoe since I just booked a 3BR there for a large family trip.

This is making me nervous as the date I booked is Wednesday to Wednesday as this was the only availability for a week. It will be a royal pain in the $%## if we have to move 12 people to go to another unit!!!

How worried should I be? There was no mention of this possibility when I booked this wed to wed week. In fact, I told the agent that wed to wed seems weird since I thought all check in dates were friday

Are you going during prime season or shoulder season? If you are shoulder, I think you will be okay. If prime season, where lots of owners might be using the property, then this may be an issue for you. When are you going?

Best,

Greg

 

[Seaport104]

Are you going during prime season or shoulder season? If you are shoulder, I think you will be okay. If prime season, where lots of owners might be using the property, then this may be an issue for you. When are you going?

Best,

Greg

Hi Greg,

I am booked for August 3-10 (wed to wed).

 

[SueDonJ]

Came across this thread doing research on Grand Residences in Tahoe since I just booked a 3BR there for a large family trip.

This is making me nervous as the date I booked is Wednesday to Wednesday as this was the only availability for a week. It will be a royal pain in the $%## if we have to move 12 people to go to another unit!!!

How worried should I be? There was no mention of this possibility when I booked this wed to wed week. In fact, I told the agent that wed to wed seems weird since I thought all check in dates were friday

There is no way I'd leave this to chance! I'd write an email now to customer.care@vacationclub.com with a copy to the GM at Grand Residence Tahoe (call the resort for the correct email address,) saying that you know from reading on the internet that people have been forced to change units mid-stay despite having a single reservation confirmation for a multi-night stay. Say that's unacceptable to you and you want a guarantee now, in advance of the stay, that it won't happen. If they can't give you that guarantee, contact MVW Exec Leadership and ask them to please explain why the system is issuing single confirmation numbers for multi-night reservations which require a unit change.

I understand some people aren't as bothered by this as me, why some wouldn't choose to handle it the same way. I'm not saying that everyone should do what I would do, but if you don't do something ahead of the stay then you should be prepared for a unit change. That to me is unacceptable.