It’s disheartening to see how some companies don’t empower frontline employees to do the right thing, even when it’s not very costly, and even when it should be the obvious course of action.
Continue reading: Hyatt Backtracks On Promise For Elite Credit, “Unable To Make Exception”
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
So is the issue that the Standard Brussels didn't have the ineligible tag when he booked?
Bc if so, then yes it's on Hyatt, if it's just simply that he didn't see it, despite having the rate info say so, then I'd say that their own fault.
I'd also add that 4 months ago on 5/15, it was already known that Standard Brussels wasn't eligible for the Hyatt program at the time. (there's a Reddit thread documenting this and a link to it on the Hyatt website)
And the AA fast track promo came in August, so I find it highly unlikely that they didn't already know that Standard Brussels wasn't part of the program.
So I'm inclined to believe there is no recourse and this is just a user error thinking they could get around it bc of some generic fine print that was probably slapped onto all Standard hotels.
@ yoloswag420 — The ineligible tag wasn’t there, and the confirmation said the stay was eligible for elite nights and points. That seems pretty clear, no?
Not sure if posting links works, but here it is: https://www.reddit.com/r/hyatt/comments/1kn3057/standard_international_integration_update/
So clearly before the AA fast track promos were marketed this year, this info had been known for 3 months.
Hyatt website as well: https://world.hyatt.com/content/gp/en/landing/standard.html
@ yoloswag420 -- The stay was booked in early August for check-in in late August. When he booked, booking was possible through Hyatt's website, there was no indication of ineligibility, and the confirmation confirmed points and elite credits would be earned.
I understand that's no longer the case. If you book the Standard now, it's done through a different system, directly on the Standard's website. But he sent me his confirmation, and it's literally from Hyatt.
"...there is no way or no one that can override or manipulate the system to have this stay added to your account."
That may literally true, but it's also true that they can add any number of stay credits/points if they chose to do the right thing.
It's sad that Hyatt is being Bonvoyed so horribly. Not sure if there's a new CEO or what, but they seem to be contention in the race to the bottom here.
That's doubtful considering at that point the Hyatt/Standard website had already listed it as integration coming at a later date in May.
I personally checked this hotel's information in early/mid-August and it had already said it wasn't participating in Hyatt. The email might have generically said something, but you know very well that's probably because the hotel and travel emails are often templatized and just say the same thing for everything.
What's more likely is that this reader just wasn't careful enough and glossed over it.
@ yoloswag420 -- I'm not sure I follow which part you think is doubtful? If you go to Hyatt's website and make a booking for the Standard Brussels, you'll be redirected to the Standard website, and your confirmation will be from the Standard.
What is your explanation for how his confirmation is from Hyatt rather than the Standard? I'm not sure I follow what a May notice about bookings through Hyatt coming at a later date has to do with a booking that was made in August.
Any regulatory or legal angle on this as it was a part of the terms and conditions Hyatt established for this rate and therefore contractual through the time the service was rendered, no? Not sure it is worth it, but wondering if the EU has a redress opportunity here.
I really don't see how there is a story here.
In May, the Standard integration was announced and it was stated this hotel was not part of the Hyatt program. That should be the end of the story.
To me it seems like this reader tried to skirt around it with some fine print on generic confirmation emails, fafo'd and now wasted their Hyatt status challenge. Skill issue.
@ yoloswag420 -- The booking was made in August, not in May (when Hyatt said Standard integration would come at a later date, and August is later than May). I'm really confused as to how we're talking past one another so much here? What am I missing?
There is no redress. It was published on the Hyatt website (3 months before they booked) this hotel wasn't in the program.
Nominally sure. But you are experienced though to know how bad airline and hotel technology is though.
It's pretty clear to me that this hotel wasn't participating at the time of booking. Hyatt maybe could've done a better job clarifying it, which it's already done now with the tag. I don't think this reader is going to get their tier nights or points though.
"No one has the ability"
UGH- that's Bonvoy level BS, and was the reason I left Marriott altogether a couple years ago.
"We pay a consultant that limits what we can give you for issues like this", is what they told me (I got 75K points, I had been asking for 125K points, for an issue that took me months to resolve).
MAYBE they can't manipulate the system to show an 11 night stay at this property. There is no way they can't manipulate the system to make things right for this guy (either via a generic 11 night credit or offering complimentary Globalist).
The Hyatt website doesn't have a date for the Standard Brussels integration, check it yourself. So it's pretty clear, now in September (or in August) that it wasn't participating.
@ yoloswag420 -- Of course, in retrospect. But why would any guest assume that any hotel that is bookable on Hyatt's website isn't eligible to earn points or elite credits? Could you name a single other Hyatt property bookable on Hyatt's website that's not eligible for elite credit?
If I buy a product on a website, I expect to get what's promised to me during the purchase, and on my confirmation. I don't expect the company to say, "oh, on some random other webpage we list an exclusion, even though we stated something to the exact opposite on your confirmation... too bad!"
@ yoloswag420 -- Respectfully, you're not debating in good faith, and I'm not sure what your motive is. "Hyatt maybe could've done a better job clarifying it." *Maybe?* The confirmation literally lists that the stay as eligible for points and elite credits.
Is that "maybe" or "definitely?"
This isn't a case where Hyatt actively hid the information though?
It's published on their website with Standard hotel info. They've rectified any clarity issues with the additional tag as well.
Given that it's a newly integrated hotel brand, doesn't seem that farfetched to double check, right?
Ultimately, the reader is the one that got the short end of the stick by not doing their due diligence. Policy-wise Standard Brussels wasn't and isn't participating yet.
Is a website that says it's excluded not clear enough?
Let's be fair. The reader just made an honest mistake.
So many bitter mattress humpers on here saying they "switched their loyalty to another hotel chain or only stay at independents now after staying at Marriotts 185 nights per a year. Who cares! They don't miss your business. Close your Marriott credit card, delete your loyalty account and start a new Tinder account. Elite status don't mean jack. It can literally be bought. The big 3 hotel chains that run the world aren't interested in your loyalty. And neither are the airlines. Get over it.
It really means "I have decided that I will not".
Let's have a name (or do they hide that?)
Such BS. I’ve definitely been given courtesy night credits to resolve an issue before. They are lying.
I suspect the message about ineligible for world of Hyatt on the search page was there the whole time, but I agree if the rate details say eligible it should be.
Same here and even in cases where I probably shouldn't have earned them. One wonders why they are going all out here.
One thing you should ask this reader to clarify is what the check-in process and stay was like at the hotel.
Because if they did the AA status challenge, they would've been at least an Explorist and if the hotel actively didn't acknowledge that status, then I would think something is up.
Hyatt status recognition is a standard part of check-in and check-out.
Since the rate states in writing that the stay is eligible that makes it part of the contract. Hyatt took the booking so if the information is incorrect that's irrelevant (see "justifiable reliance").
Hyatt is obligated to honor the contract they made with the customer. If they they refuse the only recourse is to sue them. Assuming damages are less than the the limit for the State you decide to sue in (typically $10,000) then that's the best course of action. But first I'd write a letter to corporate explaining this since it might bring them to their senses. If not being served and having to show up in court probably will.
If you want to belong to a particular loyalty program, you have to accept that it's their game. It is unilateral. It's as simple as that. Don't waste your time and energy fighting it or complaining about it.
The harsh reality: we're at the mercy of these loyalty programs and we have no recourse when they fail to do "the right thing"
I switched my loyalty to Hyatt when Hilton canceled my SLH stay and refused to return my 4 free night certificates.
I realize that Hyatt could betray my trust at any moment, and I'd likely take my business elsewhere. But Alonzo (below) is right - they don't miss our business.
But where's the line? ... or is there none?
What if you're sitting on a million points and (insert Loyalty program) decides to shut down your account without a valid reason?
Do members truly not have any recourse at all?
Good points/questions. Separately, while Yoloswag420 may be lacking in logic and reading comprehension, they certainly know how to troll.
After all that we've seen over the years, everyone is on notice. The terms and conditions invariably state: "In our sole and absolute discretion . . . " There is no line. There is no recourse. Proceed with this understanding. You don't have to like it. But, that's the way it is. Harsh as it is.
Okay, that's gotta be wrong. They're saying that nobody could manually add night-credits as well?
Back in 2015 when @HyattConcierge offered a Diamond status match (pre globalist), Hyatt reneged and only did platinum. Not worth it so I didn't do it. Left a bad taste.
The easy answer is small claims court, unless the publicity from this magically creates a new way for them to be able to add elite nights. Sue them for a full refund, since they would not have stayed there at all if not for the elite nights for the challenge, obviously. Small claims court is the great equalizer: on your home turf, usually no lawyers allowed, and with documentation it's a slam dunk. Hyatt will likely settle and give them what they want instead of the expense of fighting it.
I just earned Hyatt Globalist again, but becoming more disillusioned with them, so for the last time. All major elite programs are a victim of their own success, and generally no longer worth any effort or sacrifice.
I think Ben needs to correct this article. It's just simply not true that "At the time that Jon booked, there was no indication of this"
The Hyatt website covered this explicitly on their site on Standard Hotels.
Anyone who raises the subject of courts and lawsuits in these comments isn't living in the real world. Nobody ever has sued a hotel chain over witheld elite benefits and nobody ever will. Let's be sensible in this convo.
The biggest impact this particular wronged party can impose on Hyatt is Ben's post about it. And yoloswag420's insistence is just weird. This whole story doesn't pass the smell test. There's something pertinent missing from the picture and it'll never be disclosed. I'm out.
I live in the real world. I've sued airlines and hotels when they breached a contract and won.
Small claims court is quite informal. It was created exactly for the purpose of giving ordinary people to have a way of doing something about it when they feel wronged. The cost to file is minimal and you just explain what happened and the judge makes a decision.
This is a simple contract dispute. Hyatt promised, in writing, that they'd do something. Whether it was give points or something else doesn't matter. It's a contract and they didn't live up to their half of the bargain. The purpose of courts is to deal with contract disputes and the purpose of small claims court is to deal with small contract disputes.
So to put it plainly, you are wrong. Lot of people bring all kinds of disputes, including breach of contract, to small claims court because that's what they are there for.
If I'm this guy, I'm filing either filing a complaint with my state attorney general or filing a lawsuit in small claims court if I'm based in the USA or I'm filing a complaint with consumer protection authorities in Europe if I'm European.
Doesn't matter. Hyatt offered points and status at booking. The customer was acting reasonably when they relied upon that.
Hyatt has a duty to provide the correct information. If they don't you allege fraudulent inducement meaning that Hyatt lured you into agreeing to a deal by offering something they had no intention of giving.
This isn't rocket science but more like common sense. If somebody tell you they'll give us your money and will give you a room to stay in and points you can redeem towards future stays and points towards status, then the don't do it you have the right to the damages that are a result of their failure to live up what they promised in order to induce you to enter into a deal. It doesn't matter that the amount at stake is small in this case. We've decided that allowing people/companies to go around cheating people like that is bad public policy.
Hyatt's website explicitly said it didn't participate in it.
I don't know how much clearer it could've been.
AG won't be interested. They have limited resources and are only interested in cases that make a big splash because that's what they shout about in their ads when its time to get reelected and to a much lesser extent to make an example so others don't try similar things.
Its a letter to the president of the company and if that doesn't work then small claims or nothing.
It's not weird. It's called stating facts.
It was publicly disclosed on the Hyatt website that this hotel wasn't participating in the Hyatt loyalty program. In fact, as of writing this, there still is no published date for it to join.
There is no case because it was clearly shown on the Hyatt website.
I'm amazed the number of people who think they have to just take it when somebody is taking advantage of them.
To be fair a lot of the complaints I see at FT are completely out of line but when the other party doesn't deliver what they promised, then you deserve to be made whole. In other words, be paid the value of whatever they didn't deliver.
Lesson for life. First, make sure you are really owed what you think you are. Be hard on yourself, but if its clear you are and the other other party doesn't fulfill their obligations put the matter in front of a neutral party, a judge, who can render and enforceable decision.
You assume whatever statement if it exists, and it's not clear it was there when the booking was made, give Hyatt the right to renege on a written promise of points that was part of the written agreement. That's not likely going to fly.
When one party completely controls the agreement, as Hyatt does here, courts will give the other party, in this case the customer, a lot of deference. The booking said they'd get points. The customer had no reason to doubt that was correct. They had no obligation to assume it was not and to research whether somewhere else Hyatt said points were not going to be given.
Quite the reverse. Hyatt had an obligation to to make sure the information when making the booking was correct. So a court is extremely likely faced with the fact, again in dispute, that Hyatt said somewhere else that points wouldn't be given that this doesn't matter. Hyatt offered points when booking. That governs.
If it were otherwise then one could offer all kinds of things when buying and then refuse to deliver by pointing to some language squirreled away where no-one would ever look for it.
As I said. Common sense. You can't promise something and then disallow it.
Of course if the reservation offer when booking didn't say points would be given then it would be the reverse. That Hyatt offered the points as part of the deal is what matters.
It would have been clear if Hyatt hadn't offered points as part of the booking.
But they did and once they did that governs the agreement because customers have a right to rely on what they are offered. Especially when its in writing.
Why is a non-eligible hotel even bookable through the website? The whole point of Hyatt is the loyalty program otherwise, it's just an OTA.
That is not how that works. It was very easy to verify if this hotel was participating in the Hyatt program or not.
This reader's situation is not going to change because "Steve" thinks so.
Ben has gotten to the heart of the matter.
Absent an explicit offer that points would be accrued then it would be up to the customer to check. But Hyatt promised in writing as part of the booking that they'd earn points. That's the agreement right there.
There are three parts to a binding contract, offer, acceptance and compensation. Hyatt offered a room that would earn points, the customer accepted when they made the booking and paid compensation when they paid for the room.
They are going to have a hard time convincing a judge that they aren't bound by what they offered regardless of any other language somewhere else on their website.
But the real pity here is that Hyatt doesn't simply say "whoops, we screwed up, of course we'll honor what we promised" and instead is going to make somebody sue to get what they're entitled to.
They didn't though.
And I suspect there's much more to this, given that Hyatt status recognition would've been part of the check-in process, and this person would've been an Explorist at least due to doing the challenge.
You ignore the basic tenets of contract law.
A party can't offer something as part of a deal and then claim they are under no obligation to deliver based on language from somewhere else.
If Hyatt hadn't promised the points then the customer would be at fault for assuming they'd get the points but when they were promised in writing then that's what governs. Its as essential part of the contract.
T&Cs govern only tot he extent they aren't in conflict with anything else that Hyatt agrees to. Same goes for anything else Hyatt says.
The specifically stated as part of the deal that the customer would get points. Hyatt can try and argue that isn't enforceable but I double a court would be inclined to agree.
It is exactly how it works because if parties could promise one thing as part of a contract and then refuse to deliver no one would be able to depend upon what's written in a contract.
If Hyatt hadn't promised point as part of the reservation, then obviously they could point to the language you refer to to deny them. But when they put the offer into this specific agreement, for these rooms, on these dates, at this hotel, for this price that's what sets the deal.
Of course as you point out, I'm not the one who'll be judging this case but I suspect if this goes to court that's what the decision will be because there is hundreds of years and probably hundreds of thousands lawsuits that set the case law. Courts look to the governing document and the one that is closest to the transaction is the reservation in which Hyatt, voluntarily, offered points.
Obviously there is a conflict in what Hyatt said what I'm trying to make clear is that when this happens, and it happens all the time, this is how courts look at the situation because to do otherwise would make agreements between parties impossible since neither would know if what was agreed up on in the contract was enforceable.
Think long and hard about what that would mean and see if it gets you to reconsider your position that Hyatt can write whatever they want somewhere and it overrides what they offer as part of their contract with you.
Not clarifying it. They promised the points. So that governs.
If this went to court Hyatt would take the position you are. The customer would take the position I am. If you want to try and figure out who's likely to prevail then go read up on contract law. I think you will find that in this case the explicit offer of points will dispositive.
There is definitely someone, somewhere, with the systems and security level access to make this happen by writing a few lines of code. How accessible that person is… who knows… but that person does exist.
There seems to be an interesting continuum in the hospitality space. The bigger a hotel chain is, the worse they treat their customers. For the longest time, Marriott and Hilton were everywhere, every country, etc but they were the first to destroy brand loyalty by giving hotel owners leverage to devalue loyalty.
Hyatt saw themselves as the "David" (versus the Goliath) and so they differentiated themselves by being better for customers. Billions of dollars of brand acquisitions later and many, many more properties, Hyatt is now comfortable enough to say "meh" when things go sideways.
These days:
- Did we provide good phone customer service? Offshore that!
- Did we run attractive global promotions? Not anymore!
- Did we give top tier elite free breakfast? It's for properties to decide!
- Did we resolve customer complaints? The terms now say "you get what you get and you don't get upset."
The sick thing is - many people (esp Americans) will stick with these brands long after they treat you like a grease stain. I guess that's the magic: get people addicted to points and disproportionate value, and customers won't notice if you slowly take it away. The fact that we don't steer business away from these brands is why they continue with their annual rite of deflation, as well as the rest of this. 🙁
Reminds me of the time I had an issue with AT&T that everyone I talked to admitted was the carrier’s fault, but no one could fix the problem, and it was going to cost me $800. After filing a well-documented request to initiate arbitration, I got a call the next day from the Executive Office of the President magically solving my problem and giving me a free iPhone.
Reminds me of the time I had an issue with AT&T that everyone I talked to admitted was the carrier’s fault, but no one could fix the problem, and it was going to cost me $800. After filing a well-documented request to initiate arbitration, I got a call the next day from the Executive Office of the President magically solving my problem and giving me a free iPhone.
Reminds me of the time I had an issue with AT&T that everyone I talked to admitted was the carrier’s fault, but no one could fix the problem, and it was going to cost me $800. After filing a well-documented request to initiate arbitration, I got a call the next day from the Executive Office of the President magically solving my problem and giving me a free iPhone.
Reminds me of the time I had an issue with AT&T that everyone I talked to admitted was the carrier’s fault, but no one could fix the problem, and it was going to cost me $800. After filing a well-documented request to initiate arbitration, I got a call the next day from the Executive Office of the President magically solving my problem and giving me a free iPhone.
Reminds me of the time I had an issue with AT&T that everyone I talked to admitted was the carrier’s fault, but no one could fix the problem, and it was going to cost me $800. After filing a well-documented request to initiate arbitration, I got a call the next day from the Executive Office of the President magically solving my problem and giving me a free iPhone.
Wait... what?! Am I now required to consult Reddit when making an online purchase?? Come on, you gotta walk that back if you are implying the customer is at fault here.
Any system can be changed & overridden. Now, the effort and cost may be prohibitive but it's not impossible.
I am an accountant & have worked with multiple billing & reservation systems for over 30 years and you can always create a booking at another eligible property, mark the stay as completed, issue the eligible nights credit to the customer account and then discount the reservation 100% to clear your accounts receivable. It becomes a wash on the books becauseyou both credit & debit revenue and A/R . I do this sort of accounting magic routinely to fix problems.
Yes, but I am Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Globalist & Bonvoy Lifetime Gold and I rarely pay much attention to the front desk clerk robotic blatherings. Or I check-in on app with mobile key and never stop by front desk.
No, it's a public blast on X, Insta, TickTock, etc that usually works the quickest with maximum impact.
Probably because he’s not already a Globalist. The above and beyond treatment usually applies when one is already a Globalist.
There is recourse. It’s called small claim courts. And companies don’t automatically win all lawsuits because “in our sole and absolute discretion” is written in the terms.
Taken to the extreme, do you believe if a customer buys Hyatt points (legitimately, so no stolen credit cards, glitches or any of that shenanigan), then Hyatt can take their money and just shut their account down, pocketing the entire sum and not lose a lawsuit promptly filed against them?
Because they’ve outsourced their customer service, and if you’ve dealt with one of these Indian call centres, it would be no mystery why they are incompetent and untruthful.
Does anyone know if there is language excluding this brand from AA status challenge?
The issue is that the booking confirmation comes after the booking. So, it can’t be an inducement. It can the contractual terms of the booking though, where the website is parole evidence only necessary if the contract is ambiguous, which it isn’t. My concern would be that the ACTUAL WOH Terms probably spelled out that the hotel wasn’t eligible,
Straight from the T&C:
Hyatt reserves the right to modify these Terms from time-to-time, with reasonable notice to Members as described in this section. Hyatt will notify you of changes to the Terms by posting them to the Program Site and may also notify you by email or mail to the address then associated with your account. The updated Terms will be effective as of the time of posting, or upon such later date or by such other method as specified by Hyatt. Unless otherwise stated, the updated Terms will apply to your participation in the Program beginning as of their effective date. These Terms may only be modified in accordance with this section. Otherwise, no employee, agent, or other representative of Hyatt or any Hyatt Party (defined in Section V below) has the right or authority to modify any of these Terms.
All decisions of Hyatt related to the earning, transference, and use of points, awards, benefits, or other aspects of your membership account, to the Program, or to these Terms, including any decision to deduct points from an account or deny awards or benefits, are final and binding upon you and you agree to abide by all such decisions.
I don't know about that I'm a first time Globalist having a minor issue that is taking weeks to resolve. I haven't been impressed with the responses thus far.
Depends on the state. My state has excellent consumer protection. A letter from the attorney to the company asking them to respond to the complaint normally results in reasonable resolution of the matter. Very seldom does a company tell the attorney general to pound sand.
The purpose of a call centre is to keep that person protected...from the public, which is us.
I have confidence that when the guy sues Hyatt International in the United States of America over witheld elite nights at a foreign hotel and presents emails and screengrabs as his only evidence, I'll be proved wrong.
Ben,
Again, you've gotten to the heart of the matter. He isn't debating in good faith.
He's decided that the notice on the website was there and overrides everything else. Nothing anyone says is going to shake his belief in that.
A partly can write anything they want in a contract but that that doesn't mean it's enforceable in court.
In addition there is long history of judges taking a dim view of lopsided agreements imposed by one party on the other (you can look up the case law). But regardless when examining the merits of a case the key is to examine what was agreed to and in this one Hyatt willingly offered points. That's the contract. The customer has the right to depend upon the contract.
Hyatt would have to convince a judge that the customers shouldn't have done so, which is an extremely difficult thing to do and for very good reason. Parties should be able to depend upon what's written in the agreements particularly (and this is key) when the agreement is written by one party and imposed upon the other.
Just imagine the consequences if they couldn't and you understand why courts take this position.
I firmly believe that hotels are cutting their own throats with bad elite/status policies and requirements. And the banks are right there to undercut them because they are far better at the game, and have far more options.
I agree this seems like a case of Hyatt being unwilling to actually make it right. It may be true that if they just credit his account with 11 elite nights it won't trigger the Globalist status, since I'd think its the case in the system that it only grants Globalist in conjunction with elite nights to to stay(s). That doesn't also mean they couldn't give him complimentary Globalist status for whatever timeframe he was supposed to earn though, and it would be surprising if nobody had the power to manually grant a status for X amount of time.
Are you A) a Hyatt employee, B) just trying to be argumentative, C) thick or D) simply unwilling to admit you wrong. Why should a customer do additional due diligence when the issue of whether it qualifies is expressly addressed in a confirmation.
Please don't bother answering. That is a rhetorical question.
Not just disheartening, downright stupid senior management position. You get generally one chance to get it right; you failed.
In general I’m more and more disappointed in Hyatt. I have the credit card and status and am probably going be Globalist this year but I find the general experience I’ve had at Hyatt this year to be sub par. I stay in London a lot and of the four Hyatt properties I’ve stayed in, including the Andaz, none of them seem to understand loyalty or are particularly well run. If anything corporate hotel chains should be consistent . Last week the Blackfriars was charging 600 USD a night and for what? And the perks - free nights at hotels that Id never stay at? Not a perk.
Customer service decisions never, ever come down to a system. They just don't. From the pizza restaurant to the global hotel brand. They always start and end at the individual and their judgment. There is always the opportunity to make things right, to override wrongs. This is a case of a stubborn CS employee who needs re-training in escalation avoidance.
I've thankfully never had to escalate things like this but one of my most vivid memories in life is my uncle (a wildcatter turned reclusive oil speculator) checking us all into the Omni in Atlanta when I was a kid. There was some problem and he asked for a manager and the desk agent deferred. He put his beefy, suited arm with his $50,000 Rolex up on the ledge. The clunk and his insistence that a manager be summoned said it all.
I wouldn't touch Hyatt in London proper. But the Hyatt Place LHR is a wonderful property. Room service, laundry, great breakfasts. Just have to contend with taking the bus to Hounslow for the tube or cabbing it into town.
Just because he booked through Hyatt does not mean he will earn the points and nights for the stay if the brand is newly acquired. Look at other famous examples of industry acquisitions and how long it took for even the loyalty programs to be honored although for a while they maintained separate programs. Ritz and Marriott for example. Hawaiian and Alaska for example ... etc. As you said the company has a timeline for the integration. Also, consider there are options on Marriott you can reserve that is just branded or that does not fully participate in the program (e.g. certain hotel groups or Ritz cruises) and no complaints for expectations there - is the same kind of thing. With so many loyalty members now many of the big groups do not need to care.
Hyatt doesn't do the right thing more often than we know. They do it, for one, most people won't follow it up and say forget it.
For the few that try, they come on strong. That is not good for a hospitality company. Kindergarten economics.
Their reputation is growing that way thru the grapevine, as not everyone comes online. GOOD WILL goes a very long way in loyality.
They seem to be a corporation with a main interest of expansion, forgetting the people who put the dough in the pockets to allow them to expand.
Its kindergarten economics.
I’ve been to most of the Hyatts in London, the Park Hyatt and the Great Scotland Yard have been superb - as a Globalist, I have zero complaints.
Small Claims Courts, at least in California, lack the power to impose injunctive relief. So while the aggrieved person here may get a monetary judgment against Hyatt for breach of contract, there is not much the Court can do in terms of getting him the night credits. Also, deciding what the correct monetary damage amount is quite challenging, and frankly, most judges do not know how to do that. I should know, I have served in that capacity for years.
I had the same situation at the Rio in Las Vegas. Hyatt had taken the property over and I booked through Hyatt. I got the presidential suite for two nights and it was over 1200 dollars. I received no nights or points whatsoever. They told me they were very sorry but nothing they could do and I am a Globalist.