I recently stayed at a hotel, on the bill upon checking out I noticed 
"Miscellaneous (Vatable) £100.00 -> Smoking in room".

It turns out it was a penalty occured for smoking in the non smoking room 
(they have to "de-oderise" the room).

Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and therefore 
refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a penalty for breaking a 
contract (like the recent media hype about the banks charging penalties). 
Surely that would fall under this? Part of the terms for staying in the room 
are a no smoking rule, you break that rule you get charged this penalty. So 
my question is, would it be legal?

> Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and therefore
> refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a penalty for
> breaking a contract (like the recent media hype about the banks
> charging penalties). Surely that would fall under this? Part of the
> terms for staying in the room are a no smoking rule, you break that
> rule you get charged this penalty. So my question is, would it be
> legal?

Do you have the precise terms and conditions on which you took the room? 
I ask because what I met recently in the USA were contracts which stated 
upfront (at check-in) that a charge of $100 or whatever would be added 
to the bill if we smoked in a non-smoking room.  It seems to me that 
would be valid there and here as it is not a penalty for breaking a 
contract but a charge for exercising the right (?) to smoke in the room.

-- 
Robin

In message <chbbk.20334$E41.18925@text.news.virginmedia.com>, neverwas 
 writes
>> Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and therefore
>> refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a penalty for
>> breaking a contract (like the recent media hype about the banks
>> charging penalties). Surely that would fall under this? Part of the
>> terms for staying in the room are a no smoking rule, you break that
>> rule you get charged this penalty. So my question is, would it be
>> legal?
>
>Do you have the precise terms and conditions on which you took the room?
>I ask because what I met recently in the USA were contracts which stated
>upfront (at check-in) that a charge of $100 or whatever would be added
>to the bill if we smoked in a non-smoking room.  It seems to me that
>would be valid there and here as it is not a penalty for breaking a
>contract but a charge for exercising the right (?) to smoke in the room.
>

That is certainly a possible argument.

The other issue is that a "liquidated damages clause", in other words 
putting a fixed price on the compensation charged for a particular 
breach, is lawful *if* the amount represents a reasonable estimate of 
the loss caused. So if the charge bears some genuine relationship to the 
cost of deodorising the room, it would be lawful, whereas if the cost 
including all staff time was only £20, putting a figure of £100 on it 
would be an unlawful penalty.
-- 
Richard Miller

Richard Miller wrote:

> In message <chbbk.20334$E41.18925@text.news.virginmedia.com>,
> neverwas  writes
> > > Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and
> > > therefore refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a
> > > penalty for breaking a contract (like the recent media hype about
> > > the banks charging penalties). Surely that would fall under this?
> > > Part of the terms for staying in the room are a no smoking rule,
> > > you break that rule you get charged this penalty. So my question
> > > is, would it be legal?
> > 
> > Do you have the precise terms and conditions on which you took the
> > room?  I ask because what I met recently in the USA were contracts
> > which stated upfront (at check-in) that a charge of $100 or
> > whatever would be added to the bill if we smoked in a non-smoking
> > room.  It seems to me that would be valid there and here as it is
> > not a penalty for breaking a contract but a charge for exercising
> > the right (?) to smoke in the room.
> > 
> 
> That is certainly a possible argument.
> 
> The other issue is that a "liquidated damages clause", in other words
> putting a fixed price on the compensation charged for a particular
> breach, is lawful if the amount represents a reasonable estimate of
> the loss caused. So if the charge bears some genuine relationship to
> the cost of deodorising the room, it would be lawful, whereas if the
> cost including all staff time was only £20, putting a figure of £100
> on it would be an unlawful penalty.



From my experiences with various hotels  deoderizing the room is very
difficult , often unless the room is deep cleaned (carpet shampood ,
walls washed down, curtains laundered ) then the deoderising sprays
only mask the smell .

Someone that doesnt smoke will pick this up reasonably quickly and
complain , i do , on several occasions i have either moved rooms or had
my stay refunded  if i cant swap rooms


--

Andrew wrote:
> I recently stayed at a hotel, on the bill upon checking out I noticed 
> "Miscellaneous (Vatable) £100.00 -> Smoking in room".
> 
> It turns out it was a penalty occured for smoking in the non smoking room 
> (they have to "de-oderise" the room).
> 
> Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and therefore 
> refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a penalty for breaking a 
> contract (like the recent media hype about the banks charging penalties). 
> Surely that would fall under this? Part of the terms for staying in the room 
> are a no smoking rule, you break that rule you get charged this penalty. So 
> my question is, would it be legal? 

Maybe they could argue that the full charge for the room was the cost 
that included the £100 but that you got a discount of £100 if you didn't 
smoke in the room (although that would have to form part of the contract 
to be tenable).

That would get around the need to demonstrate the cost of cleaning or 
the allegation of penalty charges (which of course they could add to the 
contract if they wanted).

On Fri,  4 Jul 2008 07:15:05 퍝, Dave  wrote:

>Andrew wrote:
>> I recently stayed at a hotel, on the bill upon checking out I noticed 
>> "Miscellaneous (Vatable) £100.00 -> Smoking in room".
>> 
>> It turns out it was a penalty occured for smoking in the non smoking room 
>> (they have to "de-oderise" the room).
>> 
>> Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and therefore 
>> refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a penalty for breaking a 
>> contract (like the recent media hype about the banks charging penalties). 
>> Surely that would fall under this? Part of the terms for staying in the room 
>> are a no smoking rule, you break that rule you get charged this penalty. So 
>> my question is, would it be legal? 
>
>Maybe they could argue that the full charge for the room was the cost 
>that included the £100 but that you got a discount of £100 if you didn't 
>smoke in the room (although that would have to form part of the contract 
>to be tenable).
>
>That would get around the need to demonstrate the cost of cleaning or 
>the allegation of penalty charges (which of course they could add to the 
>contract if they wanted).

Is it legal to smoke at all in a hotel room nowadays?

-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

"steve robinson"  wrote in message 
news:xn0fs95a03e1ctp004@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk...
Richard Miller wrote:

> In message <chbbk.20334$E41.18925@text.news.virginmedia.com>,
> neverwas  writes
> > > Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and
> > > therefore refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a
> > > penalty for breaking a contract (like the recent media hype about
> > > the banks charging penalties). Surely that would fall under this?
> > > Part of the terms for staying in the room are a no smoking rule,
> > > you break that rule you get charged this penalty. So my question
> > > is, would it be legal?
> >
> > Do you have the precise terms and conditions on which you took the
> > room?  I ask because what I met recently in the USA were contracts
> > which stated upfront (at check-in) that a charge of $100 or
> > whatever would be added to the bill if we smoked in a non-smoking
> > room.  It seems to me that would be valid there and here as it is
> > not a penalty for breaking a contract but a charge for exercising
> > the right (?) to smoke in the room.
> >
>
> That is certainly a possible argument.
>
> The other issue is that a "liquidated damages clause", in other words
> putting a fixed price on the compensation charged for a particular
> breach, is lawful if the amount represents a reasonable estimate of
> the loss caused. So if the charge bears some genuine relationship to
> the cost of deodorising the room, it would be lawful, whereas if the
> cost including all staff time was only £20, putting a figure of £100
> on it would be an unlawful penalty.



From my experiences with various hotels  deoderizing the room is very
difficult , often unless the room is deep cleaned (carpet shampood ,
walls washed down, curtains laundered ) then the deoderising sprays
only mask the smell .

Someone that doesnt smoke will pick this up reasonably quickly and
complain , i do , on several occasions i have either moved rooms or had
my stay refunded  if i cant swap rooms


--

Mark wrote:
> On Fri,  4 Jul 2008 07:15:05 퍝, Dave  wrote:
> 
>> Andrew wrote:
>>> I recently stayed at a hotel, on the bill upon checking out I noticed 
>>> "Miscellaneous (Vatable) £100.00 -> Smoking in room".
>>>
>>> It turns out it was a penalty occured for smoking in the non smoking room 
>>> (they have to "de-oderise" the room).
>>>
>>> Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and therefore 
>>> refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a penalty for breaking a 
>>> contract (like the recent media hype about the banks charging penalties). 
>>> Surely that would fall under this? Part of the terms for staying in the room 
>>> are a no smoking rule, you break that rule you get charged this penalty. So 
>>> my question is, would it be legal? 
>> Maybe they could argue that the full charge for the room was the cost 
>> that included the £100 but that you got a discount of £100 if you didn't 
>> smoke in the room (although that would have to form part of the contract 
>> to be tenable).
>>
>> That would get around the need to demonstrate the cost of cleaning or 
>> the allegation of penalty charges (which of course they could add to the 
>> contract if they wanted).
> 
> Is it legal to smoke at all in a hotel room nowadays?
> 

You can still get smoking rooms.

On Fri,  4 Jul 2008 11:05:05 +0100, Mark 
wrote:

> Is it legal to smoke at all in a hotel room nowadays?

Yes.  http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20070765_en_1

Tony

Andrew  wrote:

> I recently stayed at a hotel, on the bill upon checking out I noticed
> "Miscellaneous (Vatable) £100.00 -> Smoking in room".
> 
> It turns out it was a penalty occured for smoking in the non smoking room
> (they have to "de-oderise" the room).

It's not a penalty it's a charge for a service. If someone smokes in a
room then it has to be deep cleaned to remove the stench. Given the
amount of work this involves, £100 seems like a reasonable fee.

It's rather like having a laundry bill for soiling the sheets or a
cleaning charge for throwing up in the back of a taxi. It's not a
"penalty".

On Thu,  3 Jul 2008 21:20:10 +0100, "Andrew"
 wrote:

>I recently stayed at a hotel, on the bill upon checking out I noticed 
>"Miscellaneous (Vatable) £100.00 -> Smoking in room".
>
>It turns out it was a penalty occured for smoking in the non smoking room 
>(they have to "de-oderise" the room).
>
>Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and therefore 
>refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a penalty for breaking a 
>contract (like the recent media hype about the banks charging penalties). 
>Surely that would fall under this? Part of the terms for staying in the room 
>are a no smoking rule, you break that rule you get charged this penalty. So 
>my question is, would it be legal? 
>
>

You can charge a penalty for breach of contract.

But that penalty may not be more than a "reasonable estimate" of the
costs incurred as a direct result of the breach (or actual costs if
those can be ascertained).
-- 
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Fact is solidified opinion
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

On Sat,  5 Jul 2008 00:10:05 +0100, Alex Heney 
wrote:

>On Thu,  3 Jul 2008 21:20:10 +0100, "Andrew"
> wrote:
>
>>I recently stayed at a hotel, on the bill upon checking out I noticed 
>>"Miscellaneous (Vatable) £100.00 -> Smoking in room".
>>
>>It turns out it was a penalty occured for smoking in the non smoking room 
>>(they have to "de-oderise" the room).
>>
>>Turns out that it was a mistake put on the wrong room and therefore 
>>refunded. However, I thought you couldn't charge a penalty for breaking a 
>>contract (like the recent media hype about the banks charging penalties). 
>>Surely that would fall under this? Part of the terms for staying in the room 
>>are a no smoking rule, you break that rule you get charged this penalty. So 
>>my question is, would it be legal? 
>
>You can charge a penalty for breach of contract.
>
>But that penalty may not be more than a "reasonable estimate" of the
>costs incurred as a direct result of the breach (or actual costs if
>those can be ascertained).

The frequently encountered statement that peanalties are illegal
arises from a difference in terminology. The traditional usage in
contract law is that it is not a penalty unless it is illegal for the
reason you state. A reasonable estimate is described as "liquidated
damages", and is not called a penalty, even though most people would
think of it as one.

-- 
Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"