Hotel ripoff

[Linas.P]

5 hours ago, H3XME said:

What's this issue about parking fees at hotels? Yes, some are paid, and some (rarely) are free but at the of the day, I am looking for a hotel that is convenient. If I'm going to Edinburgh for a weekend away, I look for a hotel in the City Centre so everything is walking distance away for us. If you go to large busy cities like that, there is no way you should expect free parking. If they have it, it's a nice surprise, if not, understandable. It's been the case for many years, leaving the car at the NCP down the road for something like £16/day. Small price to pay for the overall convenience, no?

Why go out of your way to find a hotel, not just with parking, but one with a FREE parking out of principle? If you find something like that it certainly won't be in the City Centre or it won't be cheaper overall because you'll have to either get a Taxi or Public Transport to get where you want to go from your hotel.. I can't imagine anything worse than going for a weekend away and getting on a bus or calling a cab after a little pub crawl just because the hotel I chose had free parking but is in the middle of bumf*ck nowhere 2+ miles away from the City Centre. 🤣

Same thing goes for towns like Shrewsbury, which is actually quite local to me. It's not a huge town, it's all very "traditional" and old, space is an issue (look at the property prices in the UK!) so it's completely NORMAL that the majority of hotels, especially the little ones, won't have parking at all.. and that they're quite pricey.

We drive everywhere we go, and this never once bothered me to be honest. It's a NORMAL thing that 1) Hotels don't always have parking 2) Hotels charge for parking if they have it..(If they don't have it, you go elsewhere and Pay, so might as well pay the Hotel for a parking right there) It's capitalism, get over it. You pay for convenience. Just because a hotel has a car park doesn't mean it should be free. If it is, bonus, but if not, what's the problem? It's like going to a restaurant and asking for FREE food at the end of the day just because they didn't sell out and you know they'll throw it away when they close.

We're going to Penrith in the North Lakes this weekend. Found a lovely hotel with good reviews on booking.com for £95/night. Have I even considered looking for one with parking? No.. Why would I? It's a small town, I know I'll have to park somewhere on the road or on a public car park. Do I check if they have air con? Mini bar? Certainly not. I don't need it nor care about it.

Just personal preferences and priorities... I actually prefer hotels little bit out of town - you can find real gems!

Overall, I can't remember EVER staying in hotel where I had to pay for hotel parking, I have stayed in few hotels where they did not have parking at all and parked car in public car park - yes that happened! But never hotel where they charge for parking. And they were never too remote, too expensive (value for money is kind of my thing) or bad in any shape or form in comparison.

I cannot say I lose sleep over it - if I am driving to the hotel I usually just check where I am going to park or if hotel advises anything about car parking. In my experience most of the time it is FREE on site parking, but in few occasions I found hotel which does not have parking, in which case I just look for alternatives and usually find another hotel that does have parking... overall I have not seen many hotels that charge for parking, maybe I am not visiting right places? But indeed - if I was told parking at the hotel will cost me (price mostly irrelevant) I would be surprised. 

[H3XME]

16 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

I cannot say I lose sleep over it - if I am driving to the hotel I usually just check where I am going to park or if hotel advises anything about car parking. In my experience most of the time it is FREE on site parking, but in few occasions I found hotel which does not have parking, in which case I just look for alternatives and usually find another hotel that does have parking... overall I have not seen many hotels that charge for parking, maybe I am not visiting right places? But indeed - if I was told parking at the hotel will cost me (price mostly irrelevant) I would be surprised. 

Yeah but Linas, you drive a lot for work. That's slightly different.. We were all talking about leisure. If I go on a work trip, I don't really care how much it costs as long as it's within the allowance, and I too would go out of my way to find hotels with parking, but If I'm going away somewhere in my personal time it's completely different. I couldn't care less if they had a car park as long as location is convenient. 

[Linas.P]

13 minutes ago, H3XME said:

Yeah but Linas, you drive a lot for work. That's slightly different.. We were all talking about leisure. If I go on a work trip, I don't really care how much it costs as long as it's within the allowance, and I too would go out of my way to find hotels with parking, but If I'm going away somewhere in my personal time it's completely different. I couldn't care less if they had a car park as long as location is convenient. 

I am talking about leisure as well. When I drive for work I don't care - work pays, even then I haven't seen many hotels charging for parking, most of the time when I drive for work I use hotels that happens not to have parking at all. Like Grand in Birmingham... and then NCP with ***** on every corner cost £36/day. 

[Bluemarlin]

21 hours ago, Linas.P said:

Who said it is objective? Yes people choose hotels based on what they like and value or need that day. If I am not driving then I would not care if car park is paid or not paid, or even exists. But when I drive I would not use hotel that does not offer free parking (unless there are extremely compelling reasons). Overtime, I build preference to certain hotels, so perhaps if hotel offers free parking when I have car and I like their service, next time I will stay there even if I don't drive. It is just personal priorities so it is mostly subjective.  

I am not speculating here - I know it does. I know that local councils puts certain restrictions on parking... and when it comes to absolutelly anything related to their approval they will put parking as bargaining chip. As I said "if you don't make that parking paid, wont allow you to refurbish". Also now there are woke people in management and workforce and some hotels started charging for parking as they think it is "environmentally friendly to punish guests who drive". So it is both personal politics and world view and sometimes just politics. 

That is why I don't go to US... actually many more reasons, like I just generally don't find US attractive or interesting destination. Also I don't tip and remove "suggested" tip or service charge, unless I really like service (like if they really go above and beyond). 

I said that also - if it adds value (and valet parking does add value) then I don't mind paying for it. I simply don't see being allowed to self park next to sign that I am doing it at "my own risk" as "value add".

For example if there was free car park and somebody wants to make me pay for it, then they have to offer the actual service. Parking the car is not a service... they either have to do valet, or have to clean it, or have to guarantee it's security. That is a service and I happy to pay for it.

Finally, I have noticed the trend of hotels turning car parks that used to be free and can be free to paid ones... because of all reason above. So some common sense has to be applied - yes we know some hotels charge for parking, because they always charged for parking, because they have very limited space and are in area where it is hard to expand that space. Yet there is now new trend (of last 20 years probably) where car parking is becomes paid for no reason e.g. quiet family run hotel in country side where car park is basically just a field with virtually unlimited space. In the past they just said "yeah park in that field just around the corner", now they say "we offer car park for a £5 fee". The field cost nothing for them to maintain, does not add any value, but they now decided to add arbitrary charge. So in such case I vote with my valet and go to stay elsewhere and instead of making £5 out of me they lose customer who pays maybe £100 for a night. They have a principle and I have a principle. 

It's just people/businesses charging for what they can, based on a mixture of their revenue expectations,  outgoings, and supply and demand. It's the basic economics of a western capitalist society.  Things are moving more and more in that direction and, given that you're a relatively young man, I foresee many more things ahead that will annoy you. As for me, I'm meh, it is what it is.

For all it's faults, the US is awesome Linas, you don't know what you're missing. Sure, tipping is a way of llife, but the food is cheaper and the service is way better, so you get what you pay for. Servers over there are exempt from minimum wage requirements, and so some just get around $2 an hour to  be there, and make their income in tips. That said, depending on how good they are, and where they work, it can be a lot.

As you're young,  and seemingly successful, focus your energies on making money,  and you'll become less sensitive about where you spend it.

[Linas.P]

33 minutes ago, Bluemarlin said:

It's just people/businesses charging for what they can, based on a mixture of their revenue expectations,  outgoings, and supply and demand. It's the basic economics of a western capitalist society.  Things are moving more and more in that direction and, given that you're a relatively young man, I foresee many more things ahead that will annoy you. As for me, I'm meh, it is what it is.

For all it's faults, the US is awesome Linas, you don't know what you're missing. Sure, tipping is a way of llife, but the food is cheaper and the service is way better, so you get what you pay for. Servers over there are exempt from minimum wage requirements, and so some just get around $2 an hour to  be there, and make their income in tips. That said, depending on how good they are, and where they work, it can be a lot.

As you're young,  and seemingly successful, focus your energies on making money,  and you'll become less sensitive about where you spend it.

I am not even sure what is the argument here - they can charge what they want for I can pay what I want for... it is all self-explanatory. I just don't want to pay for parking, never paid for parking and never will. 

As for US - that is separate topic, I just don't like the country overall. That they get $2 that is kind of their problem not mine, customer shouldn't pay their wage, their employer has to do it. Find another job. 

On the last sentence I partially agree - just looking at the bottom line is bad idea. But parking is not bottom line for me, honestly cost of parking would make no difference financially for me, but that is principle. 

[Bluemarlin]

No argument, just a different perspective.

Have a good weekend.

[GMB]

3 hours ago, Bluemarlin said:

For all it's faults, the US is awesome Linas, you don't know what you're missing. Sure, tipping is a way of llife, but the food is cheaper and the service is way better, so you get what you pay for. Servers over there are exempt from minimum wage requirements, and so some just get around $2 an hour to  be there, and make their income in tips. That said, depending on how good they are, and where they work, it can be a lot.

Very interesting comment. I used to work for an international company which hired lots of people from lots of countries.

Long story short - USA = hire and fire system. If you don't fit in you are gone. No more medical cover, no more job, no redundancy.    I know, because we went through a lot of sackings in 2010.

The good news is that US employers will give people a chance and hire them to see how they do. Lots of jobs for skilled IT folk as we all were.

By contrast - France =  Hard to get a new job and reluctance to hire staff because of the bureaucracy, costs, responsibilities etc. But most of all because it is almost impossible to fire someone who is not performing well. You have to spend weeks/months retraining them or helping them and then pay massive penalties/salaries for months and so on.

Google it and see.  The US system might seem harsh but it certainly works better.

 

Here's a classic example below. Any US or UK firm will find this shocking:

US tyre giant Goodyear has been found by a French court to have unfairly dismissed more than 800 employees at a factory it closed in 2014 that had become a symbol of the anger of workers at multinational firms as the country's industrial heartland erodes. The labour court in the northern city of Amiens ruled that Goodyear fired 832 employees without a valid economic motive, a decision their lawyer Fiodor Rilov called an "enormous victory". No information on the amount of damages awarded the employees was immediately available. The company said it was evaluating its options to appeal the ruling. French labour law requires that firms be losing money in order to lay off workers, and the lawyer for the employees made much of the fact in court that Goodyear had "record profits" and rising sales, citing a company filing to US market regulators at the time reporting net profits of $2.5 billion (2.2 billion euros).While the 1,143 employees at the factory in the northern city of Amiens received severance packages, Rilov sought payments representing two to four years' salary for each of the 832 workers claiming unfair dismissal. Unions had fiercely resisted management's restructuring plans and the closure, and after the shutdown of the factory was announced, workers held two executives hostage for 30 hours in protest, in a case of so-called "bossnapping". The conflict made international headlines in 2013 when the CEO of a potential US buyer for the site ended talks and mocked French workers." They get one hour for breaks and lunch, talk for three and work for three," Maurice Taylor of Titan International wrote to the French government." How stupid do you think we are?" he said. A former union delegate at the factory said she was happy with the ruling even though it wouldn't mean jobs for those who still haven't found work."But it is a victory that restores our dignity against a multinational that scorned and humiliated us," said Evelyne Becker, a former CGT representative.

[Boomer54]

34 minutes ago, GMB said:

Very interesting comment. I used to work for an international company which hired lots of people from lots of countries.

Long story short - USA = hire and fire system. If you don't fit in you are gone. No more medical cover, no more job, no redundancy.    I know, because we went through a lot of sackings in 2010.

The good news is that US employers will give people a chance and hire them to see how they do. Lots of jobs for skilled IT folk as we all were.

By contrast - France =  Hard to get a new job and reluctance to hire staff because of the bureaucracy, costs, responsibilities etc. But most of all because it is almost impossible to fire someone who is not performing well. You have to spend weeks/months retraining them or helping them and then pay massive penalties/salaries for months and so on.

Google it and see.  The US system might seem harsh but it certainly works better.

 

Here's a classic example below. Any US or UK firm will find this shocking:

US tyre giant Goodyear has been found by a French court to have unfairly dismissed more than 800 employees at a factory it closed in 2014 that had become a symbol of the anger of workers at multinational firms as the country's industrial heartland erodes. The labour court in the northern city of Amiens ruled that Goodyear fired 832 employees without a valid economic motive, a decision their lawyer Fiodor Rilov called an "enormous victory". No information on the amount of damages awarded the employees was immediately available. The company said it was evaluating its options to appeal the ruling. French labour law requires that firms be losing money in order to lay off workers, and the lawyer for the employees made much of the fact in court that Goodyear had "record profits" and rising sales, citing a company filing to US market regulators at the time reporting net profits of $2.5 billion (2.2 billion euros).While the 1,143 employees at the factory in the northern city of Amiens received severance packages, Rilov sought payments representing two to four years' salary for each of the 832 workers claiming unfair dismissal. Unions had fiercely resisted management's restructuring plans and the closure, and after the shutdown of the factory was announced, workers held two executives hostage for 30 hours in protest, in a case of so-called "bossnapping". The conflict made international headlines in 2013 when the CEO of a potential US buyer for the site ended talks and mocked French workers." They get one hour for breaks and lunch, talk for three and work for three," Maurice Taylor of Titan International wrote to the French government." How stupid do you think we are?" he said. A former union delegate at the factory said she was happy with the ruling even though it wouldn't mean jobs for those who still haven't found work."But it is a victory that restores our dignity against a multinational that scorned and humiliated us," said Evelyne Becker, a former CGT representative.

I remember that case well. Thought just how typical it was of the French approach to working life. It is a great example of the huge gulf that exists and separates France and much of Europe from the USA. The latter remains the closest example of what free market capitalism is even if it still is not that. France is far more representative  of socialism in practice. The UK cannot make up its mind which it wants to be.

[dutchie01]

This security for employees is not only in France but thesame in most European countries. Germany, Benelux, Spain, Scandinavia etc. Only thing setting France apart is they take management hostage!  If the company is successfull and profitable but changes course so no longer need you or your department fine, but they will have to to pay no questions asked. And yes this could be expensive but all will be calculated in the total reorganisation package. Whats the issue.

[GMB]

Having worked in France and other countries  I have seen first hand what goes on in these different places and how they get round the employment laws and legislation. It is always good to have some unemployment protection but there must be a common sense limit. I have seen staff who are abusive to customers and they cannot be sacked. The company has to retrain them and must almost go bust to be able to sack them. It just goes a bit too far.

The method some companies have used to rid themselves of redundant or unpleasant or just plain bad people is to promote them to a job that does not exist. They sit in an empty office alone, with nothing to do. They soon get out before they go mad. It can take six months or a year. Some famous cases have hit the papers where people have hanged themselves in the office or on the stairs.

I have had dealings with a VERY large US company with offices in Germany that decided to close one of the offices. All the staff were told by email from head office in New York that they were being fired with immediate effect. They were told that the staff are welcome to take the company to court for unfair dismissal. That they would undoubtably win the case and be paid damages. That they would be paid the damages awarded by the court and that they are still going away tomorrow with no immediate payment anyway. Finally told that the company is big and wealthy enough to pay for all this and it would be cheaper for the company in the long run.

Some of these loyal and quality people had been in the department for over 20 years.

Believe me it's true.

[Boomer54]

15 hours ago, dutchie01 said:

This security for employees is not only in France but thesame in most European countries. Germany, Benelux, Spain, Scandinavia etc. Only thing setting France apart is they take management hostage!  If the company is successfull and profitable but changes course so no longer need you or your department fine, but they will have to to pay no questions asked. And yes this could be expensive but all will be calculated in the total reorganisation package. Whats the issue.

You are right that is why I added other "EU countries" when I said the gulf between them and the USA was huge. It really is a cultural thing I suspect. The Americans still believe strongly  in the 'individual' and the individuals responsibility to look after themselves etc. Out of this springs an attitude to commercialism that also centres on taking responsibility for your profits and losses. It also means they find nothing intrinsically wrong with companies hiring and firing in response to market forces. They have of course tempered that with things like Medicare etc, but really their attempts to provide social safety nets are really mere tokens comparative to European approaches where the state plays a much bigger role in governing the ups and downs of economic activity.

The cultural differences mean it's very unlikely European countries will ever really mirror the growth prospects of the USA simply because they are much more reluctant to step aside and reduce their role in managing society.

[Boomer54]

3 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

You are right that is why I added other "EU countries" when I said the gulf between them and the USA was huge. It really is a cultural thing I suspect. The Americans still believe strongly  in the 'individual' and the individuals responsibility to look after themselves etc. Out of this springs an attitude to commercialism that also centres on taking responsibility for your profits and losses. It also means they find nothing intrinsically wrong with companies hiring and firing in response to market forces. They have of course tempered that with things like Medicare etc, but really their attempts to provide social safety nets are really mere tokens comparative to European approaches where the state plays a much bigger role in governing the ups and downs of economic activity.

The cultural differences mean it's very unlikely European countries will ever really mirror the growth prospects of the USA simply because they are much more reluctant to step aside and reduce their role in managing society.

We are of course on a whole new subject here. Nonetheless it is crystal clear that the safety nets that exist today have been widely abused and misused and indeed in they were never meant to exist in their current form. The unforseen psychological consequences of them are expensive both in economic terms and in terms of their effect upon human behaviour.

I did see a program perhaps a couple of years back on TV where some claimants were subjected to the tests that were originally applied to social policy. Extremely interesting to note the differences between then and now and gave you a clear sense of how matters had dramatically shifted. The move away from personal responsibility towards collective responsibility is I am sure going to carry on being a source of vigorous debate. Not one I am going to get into as I would much rather drive my car.🙂

[Malc1]

and the    Hotel Rip Off    scenario with the above is that in France and Germany if the hotel staff get fired then they just poison the Guests Food and the firing is justified ( maybe )  ! 🤩

Malc

[Boomer54]

Thinking back to the food I have eaten in those countries if it were poisoned, best case scenario, I couldn't tell the difference, worst case scenario, at least I wouldn't have to eat any more of it so big tip to staff.

[dutchie01]

2 hours ago, Malc1 said:

and the    Hotel Rip Off    scenario with the above is that in France and Germany if the hotel staff get fired then they just poison the Guests Food and the firing is justified ( maybe )  ! 🤩

Malc

In France they will simply occupy the hotel refuse to leave for months and hostage the management. All other hotels in the region will go on a support strike as will the suppliers. Taxidrivers in town will lay down their job as well as all lorry drivers. In Germany they will send in the lawyers, activate the trade organisation and trade unions.

[Boomer54]

37 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

In France they will simply occupy the hotel refuse to leave for months and hostage the management. All other hotels in the region will go on a support strike as will the suppliers. Taxidrivers in town will lay down their job as well as all lorry drivers. In Germany they will send in the lawyers, activate the trade organisation and trade unions.

As an ex business owner I cannot say I approve. However, from the comfort of my retirement I cannot blame anyone for trying to protect their standard of living. All a matter of perspective then.

[Bluemarlin]

It's swings and roundabouts.

I've worked with US and European companies, and travelled to the US and various parts of Europe. Here are a few random observations, based partly on dealings with high level execs at large corporates, or successful entrepreneurs, and partly from visiting family over the last 25 years. Mostly I like the US, but it has it's downsides too.

Europeans tend be happier and more chilled out, with a better quality of life. Americans seem more stressed, and will be dealing with routine work at all hours.

Met far more European entrepreneurs than US ones, as most of the latter seemed to be employees, albeit senior level.

Americans tend to treat negotiation in a confrontational, win at all costs way, while Europeans tend more towards win/win solutions. I found that with Europeans (and even more so Middle Easteners), that you could do a deal on a handshake, leave the contracts to the lawyers, and both parties will understand and honour the spirit of the deal. With American companies one had to examine the contract line by line because, if there was a loophole they could exploit, that would benefit them at your expense, they would have no qualms about using it.

The level of service, and hence expectation is far higher in the US. People will complain more readily, and expect results. Somewhat surprisingly, other than in the leisure/entertainment/hospitality sector, this doesn't seem to result in any noticeable improvement in quality. In Europe, people are less likely to complain, as often it only results in a shrug.

Things tend to get done quicker in the US, Europe less so. Spain is manana and Greece a day or so after that.

They have some strange ideas about freedom. You can own a gun at virtually any age, go to war and get married as a teenager, watch porn at 18, but can neither celebrate nor commiserate any of these things with a beer till you're 21.

Strangely they think that anything other than their way is not only socialism, but consists of third world living standards. I once heard an American being  genuinely concerned about a move to a Canadian city, because he was worried about basic utlities like water and electricity.

On a wider level, both are socialistic, but in different ways. European policy is weighted more towards the individual, with things like holidays, healthcare, employment laws etc. The US heavily subsidises certain corporations and industries, either directly with taxpayer money or through regulation, such as corn, food production, finance, agriculture, aircraft and auto manufacture. This results in certain things like making it harder for smaller businesses and entrepreneurs, as well as reducing consumer choice. Corn syrup appears in virtually all food items, which is why their Coke tastes so bad, and bioethanol in fuel has been an issue for much longer.

The US is both a great place to live or visit, with many things to experience and enjoy. The people are mostly friendly and hospitable. It's very much sink or swim though and, if you're a swimmer, life is great but, start to tread water, or sink, not so much, and you're on your own. Oddly, and perhaps as a result of the myth of the American Dream, those either drowning, or most likely to, are just as vociferous about maintaining the status quo as the swimmers.

 

[Malc1]

1 hour ago, dutchie01 said:

In France they will simply occupy the hotel refuse to leave for months and hostage the management. All other hotels in the region will go on a support strike as will the suppliers. Taxidrivers in town will lay down their job as well as all lorry drivers. In Germany they will send in the lawyers, activate the trade organisation and trade unions.

And in China they’ll just be shot and no one dare say owt about it  😰

Malc 

[Alan305]

Whilst valet parking is usually price dependent in the UK it’s harder to avoid in the US. We’ve stayed at a few hotels where the only way you can park in their car park is via valet and all the shopping malls offer it. It does seem crazy to see people drop their car at the mall entrance for it be valet parked just a few yards away. Tried to impress the kids at Planet Hollywood by throwing the keys to the valet parker only for him to throw them back to me saying, private party tonight, we’re closed.

But, leaving your car at Gatwick Airport with a valet parker, with no driving licence, looking for the nearest ploughed field…

[Dells]

I seem to have opened a hornet’s nest , don’t get me wrong I am not totally opposed to hotels charging for parking it’s just the underhand way some go about it , IE waiting until you have booked before saying by the way parking is £5 per day , the only reason we are staying at that particular hotel is because it is less than a mile from our son’s house and parking there is difficult so it’s in walking distance, if we could park at our sons house then it wouldn’t be a problem because we would just drive there and leave it there .

Also the fact that when a member parking is supposed to be free ( we will see ) so why not just give it free because surely it will attract more customers.

[Bluemarlin]

16 minutes ago, Dells said:

I seem to have opened a hornet’s nest , don’t get me wrong I am not totally opposed to hotels charging for parking it’s just the underhand way some go about it , IE waiting until you have booked before saying by the way parking is £5 per day , the only reason we are staying at that particular hotel is because it is less than a mile from our son’s house and parking there is difficult so it’s in walking distance, if we could park at our sons house then it wouldn’t be a problem because we would just drive there and leave it there .

Also the fact that when a member parking is supposed to be free ( we will see ) so why not just give it free because surely it will attract more customers.

Derek, any topic can potentially be a hornet's nest, as they can often drift. So even posting the most innocuous thing can sometimes be like a game of online Russian roulette 🙂

As to your last point, I suppose it's because of the value people place on gathering data, and the ability to market to people. Bit like saying why don't Tesco give everyone a discount, and not just clubcard holders.

[bandetop]

On 12/7/2023 at 6:04 PM, Linas.P said:

Just personal preferences and priorities... I actually prefer hotels little bit out of town - you can find real gems!

Overall, I can't remember EVER staying in hotel where I had to pay for hotel parking, I have stayed in few hotels where they did not have parking at all and parked car in public car park - yes that happened! But never hotel where they charge for parking. And they were never too remote, too expensive (value for money is kind of my thing) or bad in any shape or form in comparison.

I cannot say I lose sleep over it - I am driving to the hotel I usually just check where I am going to park or if hotel advises anything about car parking. In my experience most of the time it is FREE on site parking, but in few occasions I found hotel which does not have parking, in which case I just look for alternatives and usually find another hotel that does have parking... overall I have not seen many hotels that charge for parking, maybe I am not visiting right places? In last year when i go Catamaran charter Victoria  indeed - if I was told parking at the hotel will cost me (price mostly irrelevant) I would be surprised. 

Hello! In my travels, I've noticed that hotel parking policies vary greatly depending on the location and type of hotel. In city centers, it's more common to find hotels that charge for parking due to limited space. However, in suburban or rural areas, free parking is often a standard amenity.

[Linas.P]

15 hours ago, bandetop said:

Hello! In my travels, I've noticed that hotel parking policies vary greatly depending on the location and type of hotel. In city centers, it's more common to find hotels that charge for parking due to limited space. However, in suburban or rural areas, free parking is often a standard amenity.

Indeed, but now there is new trend of woke rural hotels to charge some arbitrary fee, like £5-10. It is almost like "pollution charge" and I don't play that game.

[GMB]

25 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

Indeed, but now there is new trend of woke rural hotels to charge some arbitrary fee, like £5-10. It is almost like "pollution charge" and I don't play that game.

Me neither. They do it because they can, and there are enough mugs out there prepared to pay.

I know it's sad but I don't go out as much now ( eat out, holiday etc ) because I won't pay the ridiculous charges. We can eat and drink better at home anyway.

They will probably find my emaciated dead body in the shed clutching an empty bag of Walkers salt and vinegar crisps.

[dutchie01]

All surcharches have absolutely nothing zilch nada to do with woke or politics. Its all about profit. If mu neighbour does it so can i. Look at the airline industry. They used to charge for you as a person to fly. Then extra for your baggage in the hold. Then extra for your trolly in the cabin. All to create added value and increase profit, nothing else. Parking lots are thesame. Dont know if you know but i know, a single parking area for a car is more profitable than a hotelroom!