default logo

Online hotel booking service fined for refusing accommodation | Chandigarh News

[email protected]
Ludhiana: The District’s Consumer Dispute Redress Commission ordered an online service of hotels and homes (Oyo rooms) to pay Rs 25,000 to a customer for acute service deficiency for alleged denial of reserved and prepaid rooms by him. The commission, comprising chairman KK Kareer and member Jaswinder Singh, also ordered the company to reimburse Rs 25,506 to the client, Dr Kulwant Singh of Guru Nanak Colony in Ludhiana.
The plaintiff stated that he and his fellow doctors intended to visit Nainital during the summer holidays, for which he booked four rooms in a hotel on the opposing party’s website on June 7, 2017. The plaintiff paid Rs 42,200 for the reservation of four rooms 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 depart on June 13, 2017 at around 11 a.m. The complainant received confirmation of the reservation 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 service staff refused to acknowledge any booking. The complainant contacted the opposing parties and complained about the non-availability of rooms but was denied any assistance, which caused the group to suffer inconvenience, harassment and humiliation. The complainant had to stay at another hotel after paying a much higher rate. When the plaintiff asked the opposing party to refund the amount of the reservation, he only refunded 14,494 rupees. It has been alleged that this amounts to poor service and an unfair trade practice on the part of the Respondents. The complainant obtained a formal notice dated September 19, 2017 through his lawyer, but to no avail. In his complaint, he requested that the opposing parties be asked to reimburse the balance of Rs 25,506, as well as an indemnity of Rs 60,000.
The Respondent, however, claimed that on June 7, 2007, the Complainant booked four rooms for four people through their platform using his account and the mobile number of his friend Sukhmander Singh in Nainital. The plaintiff paid Rs 42,200 for the booking, which was confirmed by SMS by them. According to the respondents, the reservation was only for four people instead of four families or 16 people, as alleged by the complainant. Even in the confirmation message it was specifically mentioned that the four room reservation was for four people. As a result, the Complainant was denied a room for four families totaling 16 people. Due to high season, there was no applicable refund policy, but as a gesture of goodwill, they refunded the one night rate.
Can be added as a box:
The commission after reviewing the assertion raised by the lawyers of the opposing parties found that undoubtedly in the WhatsApp message sent by them, it is mentioned that the reservation was made in respect of four rooms from June 10 to June 13 June 2017 for four guests, but it is totally unthinkable that there could be a restriction of only one person staying in a room. In the event that a stay of more than two people is required, particularly in the case of children accompanying the couple/parents, the hotel generally charges an additional bed supplement for the additional person/child staying in bedroom.