Woman and granddaughter kicked out of U.S. hotel at 8:40 p.m. for three-star review. If you’re thinking about giving your Georgia hotel a poor review, you might want to think about checking out first. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Unfortunately for Susan Leger and her six-year-old granddaughter, police say it’s perfectly legal for their hotel to kick them out during their first night after they gave it a bad online review.
The duo had booked their stay at the Baymont Inn and Suites, located in Helen, a city in the U.S. state of Georgia for three nights.
On the first night, still in their PJs, the 63-year-old woman and her granddaughter received an email from Hotels.com, asking the two to review their room.
Leger gave the room three of five stars, to which the website asked: “What went wrong?”
“Rundown. Pool’s not open. Toilet doesn’t flush well,” reads Leger’s response.
By 8:40 p.m. that night, she received a call from an allegedly angry hotel manager, who she claimed ranted at her, stating that he called the police to kick her out.
“This guy is on my cell phone ranting at me, and he said that he’s kicking me out,” Leger told 11Alive, an Atlanta news outlet. “He’s called the police and I have to leave the room,” she added.
“And then I hear, literally, bam, bam, bam!”
It was a police officer from the Helen Police Department, 11Alive reported.
“They can truly kick me out in the middle of the night, from a hotel for giving a review of three and five?” Leger asked the police officer. “And he says, ‘yes, ma’am. It’s within the law.’ This was scary. This is just horrifying,” Leger said.
According to the police report obtained by 11Alive, Leger and her daughter had been removed for one reason: “Leger had given the motel a bad review.”
The officer helped them get a room at a nearby Fairfield Hotel.
Leger said she never received a refund for the room from Danny Vyas, the hotel manager and after sending her request to Hotels.com, was declined.
“Unfortunately, we were unable to contact the property and will need to abide by the terms and conditions of the booking which states refunds are not allowed,” reads the website’s response to her request.
It was only after 11Alive contacted the website for comment that they consented to refund Leger, two months after she and her granddaughter were kicked out.
On the 911 call to the dispatcher, Vyaswas heard saying that they were going to refund the two guests because they “reviewed that the room is dirty and the place is rundown.”
He also said that Leger and her daughter initially refused to go, but Leger disputed the allegation, saying that she initially assumed the call was a prank, but left once the police asked her to.
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Vyas initially told 11Alive that they let Leger and her granddaughter go because they never reported any issues to him or his staff. “We can fix that, right? If you let us know. But she never let us know anything,” he said in the recorded conversation.
However two months later, he gave a different reason — they asked the guests to leave because they made multiple complaints. “They called me at least ten-eleven times in maybe one hour. Sink is not working. Everything is not right,” he said.
According to state law, hotels can kick their guests out without sufficient notice — which can’t be shorter than the time they paid for — if there is “cause, such as failure to pay sums due, failure to abide by rules of occupancy, failure to have or maintain reservations, or other action by a guest.”
The phrase “other action by a guest” is so vague, it can be used as a loophole by hotels to kick a guest out for any reason, including a bad review.
Hotels.com has since removed Baymont Inn and Suites from their website while they conduct their own investigation.
“Hotels.com has a zero-tolerance policy regarding retaliation and we will remove any guests, hosts and/or properties from our website who exhibit or promote such behavior in-stay or offline. We have temporarily removed this property from our sites while we conduct an investigation to determine the appropriate next steps,” their statement to 11Alive reads.
“If you don’t want to be walking in your pajamas with your six-year-old granddaughter, don’t leave a review if you’re currently still at the place,” Leger advised.
Canada is back to buying new fighter jets. The federal government has launched yet another process to freshen up our fleet, but this comes with a Canada-first twist. David Akin reports – Dec 12, 2017
The federal government has told Boeing that its bid to replace Canada’s aging CF-18s with a new fleet of the American company’s Super Hornet fighter jets did not meets its requirements.
Three sources from industry and government say the message was delivered Wednesday as the other two companies competing for the $19-billion contract — U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin and Swedish firm Saab — were being told they did meet the government’s requirements.
READ MORE: Canada launches contest for 88 fighter jets, with clause taking aim at Boeing trade challenge
Companies had been ordered to show that their fighter jet was able to meet the military’s requirements for missions at home and abroad, but also that winning the contract would result in substantial economic benefits to Canada.