Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hotel Charges Guests $500 For Bad Online Reviews

Posted by timothy on from the may-require-substantial-deposit dept.

njnnja (2833511) writes In an incredibly misguided attempt to reduce the quantity of bad reviews (such as these), the Union Street Guest House, a hotel about 2 hours outside of New York City, had instituted a policy to charge groups such as wedding parties $500 for each bad review posted online. The policy has been removed from their webpage but the wayback machine has archived the policy. "If you have booked the Inn for a wedding or other type of event anywhere in the region and given us a deposit of any kind for guests to stay at USGH there will be a $500 fine that will be deducted from your deposit for every negative review of USGH placed on any internet site by anyone in your party and/or attending your wedding or event If you stay here to attend a wedding anywhere in the area and leave us a negative review on any internet site you agree to a $500. fine for each negative review."

183 comments

  1. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate negative reviews as much as anyone!

    1. Re:Good by OakDragon · · Score: 2

      I hated paying the $500, but it was totally to BURN them with my review!

      --
      Dark Reflection
    2. Re:Good by tchdab1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      A good review can be just as effective: "I really loved the cold soup, the dirty sheets, and the rude staff attitude - it made me feel just like home."

    3. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      I hereby notify all B&Bs and motels: I charge $500 for a good review.

    4. Re:Good by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

      I'm on my way to yelp to post a review of them right now.

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    5. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Have you ever considered a new wife?

      (Posting anonymously because some stuck up people think women are some kind of sacred beings and sexist jokes on them are some kind of blasphemy.)

    6. Re:Good by brantondaveperson · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      No - have you ever considered being a better husband?

    7. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think he's married? He could be referring to those living on the floors above the basement (Posting anonymously just for the hell of it)

    8. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So in a world where men who make terrible husbands exist, and women who make terrible wives exist, you're just going to put all your money down on one side of the table all the time, every time, when you know nothing of either side in any given particular case.

      You're sexist.

      Gotcha.

    9. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh for crying out loud mom... Stop messing up my life by telling my friends all my deepest darkest secretes. I PROMISE I'll move out of the basement just as soon as I get a job..

    10. Re:Good by infolation · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Don't worry, according to the website they were just 'joking'.

      Ah yes. The good old 'We were just joking' defence. AKA 'The smiley at the end of the insult'.

      Dear guests of Union Street Guest House,

      Yesterday Union Street Guest House went viral for all the wrong reasons. News articles, blog posts and social media posts were published about our policy to charge wedding parties a $500 fee for every negative review.

      Quite frankly, I’m embarrassed. This indeed was a policy of the Union Street Guest House. It was originally intended as a joke and never something I told employees to enforce. However, since it was listed on our website it did represent an official policy. I now realize this joke was made in poor taste and not at all funny. This is no longer a policy of Union Street Guest House and we have taken it off of our website.

      I’ve also read the reviews from guests saying we tried to enforce the negative reviews policy on them and for that I apologize. It was never my intention for anyone to pay this fine. The instances where an attempt was made to collect the fees were a breakdown in communication between my staff and me, and for that I accept full responsibility.

      Including the fine for negative reviews as part of our policy was a mistake. That’s not the type of business that we run. It was a case of a joke gone very, very bad. The internet, social media and review sites are very powerful platforms and this situation has taught me valuable lessons about them. Feedback from our guests is very important to us. I admit that at times it can be tough to see a negative review and I could do a better job of taking that criticism in stride. We value each and every one of you and want to hear about your experience with Union Street Guest House, even if it’s a negative experience. Your reviews give us an opportunity to improve our service and make the Union Street Guest House experience better for everyone.

      I’m a novice when it comes to the internet and digital communication. My background is in music and hospitality. That’s by no means an excuse, but a realization that I need to learn and continually educate myself on technologies that affect my business. I vow to do that moving forward to avoid mistakes like this in the future.

      All of the team here at Union Street Guest House invites you to come visit us in Hudson, New York, and give us a chance to show you who we really are – a group dedicated to making your stay in the beautiful Hudson area a positive and memorable one.

      Please also accept my offer of a 10% discount on a visit to Union Street Guest House within the next three months as further apology. Just mention this letter. And I encourage you to leave a review about your experience (positive or negative) after your stay.

      I hope we see you in Hudson in the future.

      Best,
      Chris Wagoner
      Owner
      Union Street Guest House

    11. Re:Good by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Please also accept my offer of a 10% discount on a visit to Union Street Guest House within the next three months as further apology. Just mention this letter. And I encourage you to leave a review about your experience (positive or negative) after your stay.

      Not what I want to see. After all... if it's so bad you had to have a 'fine for negative review policy', why the heck would I want to stay there in response to this?

      The only way you will win me over is if you show that YOU RETURNED any fines you collected from any guests or past guests under this policy, PLUS a 100% bonus for their troubles.

    12. Re:Good by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Getting bad reviews should not be a business model.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    13. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I really loved the COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT they have committed by stealing the images they use on their web site. See here:

      Their site and the source

    14. Re:Good by St.Creed · · Score: 1

      Could have been worse. He could have said "Oh, who shall rid me of those troublesome negative reviewers!" :)

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    15. Re:Good by Stargoat · · Score: 1

      Well, yeah. Didn't you know that women are always right and men are always wrong? Heck, all men are rapists anyways. We'd be better off without that entire gender. But until then, we'll tolerate men at best.

      And if you do not believe this, you are a neanderthal savage.

      --
      Hoist Number One and Number Six.
    16. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just had the Comcast install porn blockers for the Internet connection. Now that you don't have any reason to stay in the basement, go take a shower which is long overdue, get out and get a job like you said you would.

      Love, mom.

    17. Re:Good by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up please. If a lawyer gets involved it could get interesting/funny/streisandy.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    18. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever considered a new wife?

      (Posting anonymously because some stuck up people think women are some kind of sacred beings and sexist jokes on them are some kind of blasphemy.)

      No, Because if I get married my parents will make me move out of the basement.

    19. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see any mention of the other policies which are draconian enough to keep me away. Cancel for any reason and they keep the whole deposit/reservation amount? No way. Too many variables in traveling. There was a review left that someone tried canceling during Hurricane Irene and they said, "Nope sorry." No thanks.

    20. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bu-but the GP said the same thing...

      I'm confused...

    21. Re:Good by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Could have been worse. He could have said "Oh, who shall rid me of those troublesome negative reviewers!" :)

      If the owner was a senior hitman for the (New York?) Mafia, you may have had a poi &£$£%$&%* < NO CARRIER >

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. So... in addition to the bad reviews... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Informative

    How much will the class action lawsuit cost them, when they're brought to court for deceitful contracts?

    1. Re:So... in addition to the bad reviews... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      How much will the class action lawsuit cost them, when they're brought to court for deceitful contracts?

      Probably legal, just stupid. e.g. look here for a 1A specialist's take on it:

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/08/04/volokh-conspiracy-marketing-genius-award-goes-to-the-union-street-guest-house-hudson-new-york/

      Apparently if you are aware of them, entering into a "non-disparagement" agreement isn't all that rare and is usually enforceable. Mind you, still an epic PR move in this particular case.

    2. Re:So... in addition to the bad reviews... by magarity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Isn't the sticking point here not that the person contracting for service agrees to a non-disparagement clause but that person agrees on behalf of everyone in their entire group? Is that realistic?

    3. Re:So... in addition to the bad reviews... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Read the link. It looks like you are agreeing if any of your guests posts a review, you will be fined. You won't be fined if you convince them to take down the negative review. Crappy idea and awful PR? Sure. Enforceable if you enter into it willingly? Presumably

    4. Re:So... in addition to the bad reviews... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In the US I think it probably is enforceable in Canada and Western Europe I think it would be deemed illegal. In the US the government is limited by the constitution meaning the government can not deny you certain rights but in Canada the government is bound by the constitution to ensure you have certain rights (notwithstanding blah blah blah) so such a policy would likely be deemed an unreasonable restriction on a person's right to free speech (while in Canada we do consider laws against hate speech to be a reasonable restriction) and not legally binding.

    5. Re:So... in addition to the bad reviews... by bbsalem · · Score: 1

      Good run-on sentence. Do you write legalese? Please redraft as separate sentences. This will make your argument much easier to follow.

    6. Re:So... in addition to the bad reviews... by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      They could take it down a notch, though; I notice many of the contracts I sign for home improvement contractors, etc. insist that any disputes be settled by arbitration, rather than lawsuit. If that's legal, then I'd guess signing an agreement that any disputes be settled by arbitration rather than negative online reviews could be. At least arguably enough that anybody who decides to risk it is him/herself at risk of ending up in court for contract violation. You don't have to win, you just to have a plausible enough case to force the other guy into court, and that's enough to make any sane person give up.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  3. I wonder if Barbra Streisand has ever stayed there by NotDrWho · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe she could have warned them what happens when you try to bury the truth.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  4. Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Come on, cunts. Tell us why freedom of contract means this sort of term ought to be respected. Explain carefully that it's their own fault for not reading the smallprint, and that "the market" will solve this by simply reducing the quantity of customers rather than merely limiting to uninformed customers or customers who have something better to do than to believe they're serious.

    1. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It looks like "the market" is going to take care of these jokers. You should probably find a better example to make your point.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a business makes a claim and you don't take it seriously then you really are an idiot. Aside from this, it's unenforceable unless you deal with them directly. I see a good window of opportunity to make a real show of this on the part of any trolls or wanna-be Anonymous types who just want to stir up the waters.

    3. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The market is solving this. On top of that, read the contract and cross out what you don't like. Your marked out sections are your counter offer. If they don't accept them do business somewhere else.

    4. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by TheCarp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      well.... I don't like to get into the label game of whether I am or am not a libertarian, I do have many such symptahies though.

      That said.... there is respected....and there is respected.

      On its face, it is hard to argue with such terms without also arguing with other kinds of NDAs which, while I tend to not be a fan of, I am not really dead set against either. In fact, I can only find one reason split that hair, but I do think its a decent reason.... bad reviews are a form of consumer protection and so they are actually asking you to cover up their quality so as to reduce other people's ability to make an informed decision. As such, I would generally be ok with saying.

      That said, I should also point out that one has generally already paid by the time one writes a bad review. If they wanted to charge you, they would have to do it after the fact.

      As such, I would say, I am ok with them having this policy and not ok with the force of the state being used to enforce its terms. So feel free to charge me $500, I am not going to pay, and i will never come to your establishment again, you can grow old and die thinking I owe you $500 for all I care. Enjoy your policy.

      Hows that for libertarian?

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    5. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "...t ok with the force of the state being used to enforce its terms."

      as long as you are ok with the state not enforcing me to pay.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    6. Re: Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you blind? What a poor example to attack libertarians with. This has happened multiple times and rarely ends well for the business. Recently a company lost its amazon seller account for the negative PR generated. A think geek clone also faced the wrath of the internet. In the cases I have seen, negative reviews multiply 1000 fold. And many potential buyers consult reviews.

    7. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The state can go ahead and force me to pay, my credit card company however is going to ream them if they try to charge me. I'm sure they'd like to be able to continue to accept major credit cards.

    8. Re: Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They take the $500 from your refundable deposit. They don't invoice you for the $500.

    9. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by DM9290 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      well.... I don't like to get into the label game of whether I am or am not a libertarian, I do have many such symptahies though.

      That said.... there is respected....and there is respected.

      On its face, it is hard to argue with such terms without also arguing with other kinds of NDAs which, while I tend to not be a fan of, I am not really dead set against either.

      ...

      As such, I would say, I am ok with them having this policy and not ok with the force of the state being used to enforce its terms. So feel free to charge me $500, I am not going to pay, and i will never come to your establishment again, you can grow old and die thinking I owe you $500 for all I care. Enjoy your policy.

      Hows that for libertarian?

      so you would agree to such terms, and then screw over your contract partner after the fact by refusing to comply with the terms you just agreed to and have no problem with?

      Sounds just like a Libertarian to me.

      --
      No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
    10. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Arker · · Score: 2

      I cant see any compelling reason you should not be able to agree to a non-disparagement clause, assuming it's clearly presented ahead of time and you knowingly agreed to it in return for compensation. Devils advocate, of course, is to point out that it's not really clear that this was the case - the 'policy' may not have been clearly presented ahead of time and knowingly agreed to by guests and I saw no mention of compensation. So if it ever went to court there would be room for invalidation.

      Regardless, it looks like the market is taking care of it fine, without even needing a court to review the 'contract' - the very fact that this business tried to impose such a policy is set to cost them a pretty good slice of profits, and the public nature of the reaction is helping to discourage any other businesses that might try the same thing.

      You were saying?

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    11. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Informative

      Contracts that you voluntarily enter into to keep your yapper shit meet Supreme Court approval. Normally it would be "don't badmouth our mutual financial endeavor", not over a product purchase.

      The wisdom of such in a situation like this is something else. Other uses of free speech to lambaste them seem to be working fine.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    12. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Contracts that you voluntarily enter into to keep your yapper shit meet Supreme Court approval..

      Perhaps. However, signing a contract on someone else's behalf is questionable at best, and that seems to be the case here - the hotel is putting the contract signers on the hook for the actions of people who did not sign said contract.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    13. Re: Libertarians, discuss! by rjstanford · · Score: 1

      So don't post the review until you've received your deposit back. Problem solved.

      Of course you can also argue that a "bad" review is different from a "fair" review, even if the fair review described goods and service that other people may not want to pay for.

      --
      You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
    14. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by darkwing_bmf · · Score: 2

      But that makes my monitor harder to clean!

    15. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by OakDragon · · Score: 1

      Take it easy there, Hit Girl!

      --
      Dark Reflection
    16. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, pretty sure those wouldn't hold up.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    17. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      >so you would agree to such terms, and then screw over your contract partner after the fact by refusing to comply with the terms you just agreed to and have no problem with?

      Yes. You clearly don't understand libertarianism one iota, do you?

      It's based on the idea of reputation. If you have a reputation for screwing people over on contracts, you'll gain a bad name for yourself. Of course, if those you screw over are known to be douchebags, then such screwings will be ignored.

      Thus if you're known to screw over places with ridiculous terms, douchebags will avoid making contracts with you. Which sounds like a double-win to me.

    18. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Noah+Haders · · Score: 3, Informative

      you're not signing a contract on someone else's behalf - if a bad review is posted then you (the party to the contract) will be fined, not a third party. The only thing here that's a twist is you could be fined based on the actions of someone else in your group. This makes sense when you hold an event there that may involve urinating etc, but normally, once everybody has gone home the liability stops in the butt.

    19. Re: Libertarians, discuss! by Noah+Haders · · Score: 2

      if you read more Ts and Cs on their site it says that they have lots of flexibility in when to return your deposit, because they need to wait for any damages to be inspected, any checks to clear, any chargebacks to occur, and all sorts of nonsene. I could see them holding on to people's deposits for years and years and years.

    20. Re: Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Unfortunately that doesn't sound that bad. If you rent a car and your friend trashes it, you're still on the line for the actions of your friend...

      This hotel is stupid and they deserve what they're getting, but it's not signing a contract on someone else's behalf, it's signing a contract saying you are responsible for what they do. In many circumstances that's perfectly reasonable.

    21. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "As such, I would say, I am ok with them having this policy and not ok with the force of the state being used to enforce its terms. So feel free to charge me $500, I am not going to pay..."

      Two quick things:

      1. From the TFA, the policy seemed to apply to those who had put down a deposit with them that they were saying the fee would be deducted from (for larger parties, think a wedding). eg, various sized groups going for say a wedding etc. in order to have that group of rooms there'll be a security deposit and such.

      2. Don't know what happens if they charge your card and you've signed the agreement.

    22. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not signing on someone else's behalf. Your guests won't be fined, you will be. Agreeing to take responsibility for someone else's action is common.

      Heck, hasn't our crony capitalist in chief just explained at length how, with the ACA, we should be legally and morally required to pay for the bad actions of others? Why don't you pay attention to him! And in that case, it isn't even voluntary. Frankly, I prefer having at least a choice in the matter.

    23. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by mysidia · · Score: 2

      Perhaps. However, signing a contract on someone else's behalf is questionable at best, and that seems to be the case here - the hotel is putting the contract signers on the hook for the actions of people who did not sign said contract.

      This happens all the time. Companies sign non-disclosure agreements. If an employee violates the terms of the NDA, then the company is liable.

      To help protect themselves, the company's lawyers draft their own NDA and make the employee sign it, so if an employee discloses information that the company's NDA says cannot be disclosed, then the Company is still liable, but the Employee is liable to indemnify the company from all the liability.

      Similarly.... you can sign a contract where you will be liable if a 3rd party doesn't do something. Before you sign that contract, you better make sure you get that 3rd party to sign a contract with you to indemnify you in case they do that thing, otherwise you will still bear all the liability!

    24. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pompous half baked logic. Seems like classic libertarian to me.

    25. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      This makes sense when you hold an event there that may involve urinating etc, but normally, once everybody has gone home the liability stops in the butt.

      As long as it doesn't happen in his mouth...

    26. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Libertardians don't discuss, they grunt, moan, want weed legal, and Ron Paul for president!

    27. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand how liability works...

    28. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Liability for what? A bad instead of salty taste?

    29. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      liability for one of your guests writing a bad review! the only bad part of the contract is the undefined length of the contract. otherwise it's like pissing in a bucket then dumping it into the wind. get it?

    30. Re: Libertarians, discuss! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Sounds like an excellent reason not to go there.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    31. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by bbsalem · · Score: 1

      Hey, this has the same run-on form as the last posting by AC. Could it be the same guy? Interesting how some people leave a rhetorical signature.

    32. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sounds like you don't understand it either tbh

    33. Re:Libertarians, discuss! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      > 2. Don't know what happens if they charge your card and you've signed the agreement.

      I call them up and let them know that if they don't remove the charge they are going to find out just how effective this policy is at getting them notoriety. Pretty sure I have a lot less to lose in the court of public opinion than they do.

      I mean, depending on how you want to call it, you may or may not call the customer a victim in this scenario but...the real victim is the public who are being denied honest opinions; I have no qualms about letting the public know what one group of scammers is trying to pull over on them.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  5. Is it a bad review to mention they charge for one? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How stupid can places get?

  6. so, in essence... by thieh · · Score: 2

    "In an effort to reduce the amount of people to enjoy our service, we will start charging extra when you don't want others to come enjoy our service". Well played.

  7. What if the complaint is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that they charge me 500$ if I complain.

    1. Re:What if the complaint is by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      that they charge me 500$ if I complain.

      I would suggest that you make sure you get your money's worth.

    2. Re:What if the complaint is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that they charge me 500$ if I complain.

      I would suggest that you make sure you get your money's worth.

      Or get your deposit back before you complain.... Then just don't pay the bill for $500 if they choose to send one.

  8. Sensational headline is sensational... by mythosaz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Except, they didn't actually charge anyone, they just threatened it.

    As usual, a good breakdown at Fatwallet:
    http://www.fatwallet.com/forum...

    They've been spammed with bad reviews, Streisand effect and all...

    1. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They did more than threaten. They actually withheld money from wedding parties and then buckled after people got pissed and kicked up a serious fuss. As for the spamming, it's what they deserve.

    2. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by AnOnyxMouseCoward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except, if you actually read all the TripAdvisor reviews (I had a lot of time to waste yesterday), you do notice a few things:

      1. The owners seem incredibly snarky.
      2. There's multiple cases of people getting charged even though they tried cancelling half a year in advance
      3. They seem to suffer from low staff and debatable accounting practices
      4. There's a of positive reviews from people with 1 review, and he accuses negative reviewers of being liars when they have a few reviews on their account

      Whether or not they actually charge $500 for bad online reviews is debatable, but they sure seem like dicks and charge for everything else, and have bad business practices.

    3. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like they need some negative reviews over here. They're still at 4.1/5.

    4. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like they need some negative reviews over here. They're still at 4.1/5.

    5. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but they sure seem like dicks and charge for everything else
      Ah so your typical 'high end' hotel. The worst I saw was 12 dollars for bottle of aquafina water. We were all sitting around joking about the water and someone said 'I drank that' 'why would you do that?' 'i was thirsty'. More like 'its not your money and good luck getting your boss to approve it now that we made fun of it'.

    6. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a repeat of Amy's Baking Company

    7. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by beltsbear · · Score: 3, Informative

      I am not defending their stupidity but there is ZERO evidence that they have actually done this. They said it was a 'joke' and that they have never used that clause. Whether or not it is a 'joke', there is no real examples of people being charged for bad reviews.

    8. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      Maybe they were just threatening not to return the money at some indeterminate point in the future unless they took it down :)

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    9. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by Noah+Haders · · Score: 2

      it doesn't matter, it's a clause in a contract so I don't see how it's a joke. it's more of a threat. and for that I think they should be forced by the state to only host wedding for barnyard animals.

    10. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      The word 'debatable' does not mean what you think it means.

      From other comments, they threatened and backed down. But that's not the point either. Just having it in your policy is bad enough, that's not on any side of the word "debatable". Actually withholding money is likewise not "debatable", even if they cave.

      We could debate, but it would serve no purpose.

    11. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The letter is posted earlier. It apologizes for employees who didn't realize it was a joke and tried to collect. Given that the letter was a lame attempt to disclaim all intention and label it a joke go wrong, I can't see it apologizing for things that didn't happen.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    12. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by AnOnyxMouseCoward · · Score: 1

      Yay internet vocabulary fight! :)

      Debatable (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/debatable):
      1. open to question; in dispute; doubtful: Whether or not he is qualified for the job is debatable.
      2. capable of being debated.

      Synonyms
      1. questionable, dubious, arguable, disputable.

      Perhaps "questionable" or "dubious" would have been a better choice, but it's "debatable" because I'm unsure whether or not they charge that $500. Their policy says they do; their response to this scandal is they don't. We can debate whether they're being truthful or not. You're right though, it serves no purpose. :) And if it can be proven, using something else than the response of the management, that they never charged this penalty, then there's nothing to debate anymore. :)

    13. Re:Sensational headline is sensational... by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      On the one hand, it sure got them a lot of bad publicity. On the other hand, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  9. yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    When I looked last night there were more than 700 reviews. When I look now, there are only 100.

    The real story here is Yelp deleting negative reviews for this crappy hotel.

    1. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by mythosaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's no-win for Yelp.

      Leave hundreds of fake angry reviews or clean them up?

      Neither bodes well for them.

    2. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      You can't stop the signal, Mal.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    3. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by HornWumpus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Does anybody believe yelp and angieslist are anything other then paid advertising sites anymore?

      It's common knowledge that they extort business' to hide the bad reviews. Not trustworthy, simple as that.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    4. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      Thats because the fine people at Reddit decided to post fake reviews without having been a customer, which jacks the system up for everyone.

    5. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by TangoMargarine · · Score: 2

      Or maybe they started out with good intentions but got corrupted like everything else in this world.

      Or stay uncorrupted and then get stomped on by all the people who went to the Dark Side I suppose.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    6. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by houghi · · Score: 1

      That is not a story. That is a well known fact.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    7. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by silfen · · Score: 1

      Simple solution:

      "This hotel has been removed from our system. Here are some nearby hotels you may want to consider: ..."

      Avoids any debates about who said what and who did what. The user can draw their own conclusions.

    8. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I don't think Yelp started with good intentions, from my perspective, unless they were really naive.

    9. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      That's Yelp's entire business model: pay to remove bad reviews. They win the more bad reviews they collect.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    10. Re:yelp is deleting negative reviews?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny thing is they're removing positive reviews as well.

  10. Already been retracted. by qmetaball · · Score: 1

    They'd actually retracted this policy before this post even went live, likely a ploy for publicity.

    --
    Everything is porn to somebody.
    1. Re:Already been retracted. by cdrudge · · Score: 1

      Microsoft has the same idea for Windows 9, as well as GM for next year's model numbers. Get as much bad press as possible with the current product, and people will flock to you when the next one comes out.

      That sound about right?

    2. Re:Already been retracted. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it makes people want to go there if they're known as the hotel that stinks so bad they have to blackmail you so you don't write badly about them.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Contract binding third parties by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know that you can enter into a contract with a company essentially saying "I won't post a negative review online." That would be sleazy but legal. How legal would it be, however, to have a person sign a contract that binds a third party into not posting a negative review under penalty of the signing party (not the bad review posting party) being fined? I don't know about you, but if I throw an event, I'm not usually in total control of my guests once they leave the event. If a guest leaves the party/wedding/ete, goes home, and posts a negative review of the hotel, how would that be under the control of the person who hosted the event/signed the contract?

    I wonder if they ever tried implementing this policy and, if so, how many lawyers fired off letters warning the hotel to back down or else.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Contract binding third parties by mythosaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      I sign those contracts all the time.

      Sometimes my contract says that I believe a group of people will perform better than another group of people, and if my chosen group of people perform badly, I have to pay a penalty to the other party.

      The other party is my bookie.

    2. Re:Contract binding third parties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? When you placed a bet with your "bookie," you signed a contract? I highly doubt it.

    3. Re:Contract binding third parties by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      People agree to pay for things outside of their control all the time. Consider the contract you have with your auto insurance company, for example, in which they agree to pay in the event that you get into an accident. If you agree to the terms of your own free will, in the absence of fraud or duress, you should assume that they're binding, at least morally if not legally. The real problem would be if they were trying to fine the people posting negative reviews directly, when they weren't a party to the contract.

      I see no reason why this contract shouldn't be considered binding—which is not to say that I think it's a good idea. I find it a bit surprising that they still have any customers after pulling a stunt like this, which was a clear sign of desperation in its own right. One doesn''t go to such lengths to suppress negative reviews unless one has something to hide.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    4. Re:Contract binding third parties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever back out on paying a bookie? Contractual penalties are far more ... ahem ... humane

    5. Re:Contract binding third parties by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      It's an enforceable oral contract.

    6. Re:Contract binding third parties by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://www.bbb.org/upstate-new...

      Just looking through the BBB complaints from years before this whole ordeal began, it's pretty apparent that the business has very little regard for its customers and does everything it can to leverage its policies so that it can keep the money. One quick example from the BBB complaints:

      I made a reservation that I then had to cancel. They advised [ed. note: in the policy] it would take up to 60 days to processes the cancellation less a $25 cancellation fee. I contacted them 9 months in advance of the reservation. I have not heard back. I have emailed the cancellation email address twice as well as the general information email and have received no response. On Yelp, you can see there are others who have had this issue where they do not return funds if the reservation is cancelled. They charged me the full value of the reservation up front, even when they say that they are only going to charge half at the time of the reservation and half at the time of the stay. The full price that they charged me was $812.00

      All she asked the BBB to help with was to get them to honor their policy and refund her the $812, less the $25 cancellation fee, which she figured was still reasonable, since at that point they were still 5 months before the reservation date. The business responded to the BBB by claiming that it never received the e-mails from the customer...and that was it. They didn't offer to go ahead and honor the cancellation request. So, since they had claimed they never received the request (and apparently the BBB complaint didn't count as a request either), she posted timestamped logs of all of the e-mails she had sent. Their response to that was:

      Once again. This person is not reading our "Cancel at your own Risk" policy despite the fact that she has cut and pasted it. It can be found again at:

      http://unionstreetguesthouse.c... [ed. note: the policy has obviously changed since then]

      After having the chance to read it she agreed to it by clicking the box and agreeing to a contract with us. That said if said cancelation was made AND accepted by us there would have been a refund.

      The customer pointed out that their policy doesn't mention anything about the cancellation needing to be "accepted" by them and that she perfectly followed the policy, giving them months of advance notice and contacting them via the one-and-only means that they make available. She repeated her request that they simply honor their own policy.

      The business never responded again and the BBB had to close it as an issue that the business failed to resolve. The business has since changed its cancellation policy to include that they need to accept the cancellation, which is utterly ludicrous, which is nearly as bad as having a no-cancellations-allowed policy for rooms booked for more than three days at a time, regardless of when you try to cancel them.

    7. Re:Contract binding third parties by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      Sign?

      Betting is legal a lot of places where you suspect it might be. In my state (not Nevada or Jersey), any two private parties can be on pretty much anything they want (provided no 3rd party takes a cut), and the results of those bets are enforceable.

      Much like many of the contracts we enter into regularly -- they're rarely written.

    8. Re:Contract binding third parties by profplump · · Score: 1

      Insurance, though, is strongly regulated, precisely because of the sort of difficulties discussed here. You can't form an arbitrary insurance contract; the insurer must be licensed and the contract must conform to a whole slew of extra rules not applicable to contracts in general.

    9. Re:Contract binding third parties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? When you placed a bet with your "bookie," you signed a contract? I highly doubt it.

      I signed a contract with Scottrade, before they let me trade stock options...

    10. Re:Contract binding third parties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't bind the third party to do anything; they can do whatever they want, and the hotel has no legal recourse against them.

      The hotel does have legal recourse against you: you agree to be financially liable for the actions of a third party. You're already financially liable for any damage your wedding guests do, so this really isn't much different legally.

    11. Re:Contract binding third parties by silfen · · Score: 1

      Auto insurance is regulated to ensure coverage and ability to pay. You can buy unregulated insurance for your car, it will simply not satisfy the requirements you need for driving it.

      I'm not aware of general legal restrictions on insurance contracts.

      Insurance-type contracts are extremely common in business. Every time you contract with a business that says "deliver X on date Y or pay penalty Z", it's a form of insurance contract, and usually involves many factors outside that business' control.

    12. Re:Contract binding third parties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Ontario you must sign your lottery ticket for it to be valid. Ontario also sells lottery tickets based on sports scores.

      So, in a word: Yes.

    13. Re:Contract binding third parties by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      "Contract" covers a lot more under the law than a signed piece of paper

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  12. Damn them with faint praise by SJester · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd be so tempted to write a positive review that damns them with faint praise. "I was delighted to discover that the toilets on the first floor do flush adequately, and that the water stops rising eventually and goes back down!" Or "the cheap fake strawberry air freshener reminds me of my best year in college."

    1. Re:Damn them with faint praise by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Funny

      John J. on Yelp beat you to it:

      Apparently we are not allowed to write negative reviews, so I will write a positive one.

      I very much enjoyed my stay at the Union Street Guest House, which met or exceeded every expectation! Everything felt authentic and vintage, like the bathroom, which did not have working toilets. ("Just like olden times," noted the concierge.) Similarly, the beds were very uncomfortable, just like in the days of yore, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that they had taken the trouble to obtain several hundred bedbugs to place in the bed, for the sake of authenticity.

      The food in the dining room was similarly amazing -- totally inedible! One bite of the cold porridge and my wife said, "Wow, this stuff is unbelievable!" So true.

      I can't recommend this place enough. It is by far my favorite plague-infested parasite haven in Hudson, NY.

      Please don't fine me $500; I spent all my money getting rid of the bedbugs I brought back with me.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:Damn them with faint praise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another $500 for stolen bedbugs!

    3. Re:Damn them with faint praise by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Many Bothans died to bring us this infestation!

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  13. Thats the biggest...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats the biggest a$$-hat thing i've read in a while. DNRTA. So if you had given a legit bad review for what ever reason you will get slapped twice, once for the experience and two for the "fine".

  14. Don't they realize... by ZorinLynx · · Score: 1

    Don't they realize that a policy like this is more likely to SCARE potential customers away than to help their reputation?

    Do these idiots think this through at all before coming up with crap like this?

    1. Re:Don't they realize... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess you have to be already very desperate to attempt something like that. I doubt they'd even consider doing something like that if they didn't already drown in negative reviews. It's more a "we're going under anyway, can as well try something desperate" thing, I'd say.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  15. plus minus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the net is a bunch of whiners.
    imagine if they had said "we'll give a $500 credit to anyone who posts a good or middling review".

    of course, the worse is when whine enthusiasts show up to add comments like "this is such an attack on freedom of speech!"

    1. Re:plus minus by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Either is despicable, paying for good reviews as well as intimidating those that want to leave bad ones.

      Earn your good reviews and deal with the bad ones. Welcome to the free market. For a change, the demand side finally can fulfill its duty in a free market: Make an informed decision.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  16. There are ways of posting bad reviews by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Funny

    without posting anything bad. For instance:

    - This hotel definitely has 8 rooms, and all of them have beds.
    - The hotel's owner is very dedicated to ensuring your bill is correct when you leave.
    - Checkout time is strictly enforced, so you're sure to find your room empty when you arrive.
    - Staying at this hotel is much better than camping on a landfill.
    - This hotel is much less expensive than the George V, and much more comfortable than a Texas motel.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:There are ways of posting bad reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How are first three reviews bad even in the sense of the word you're going for here?

    2. Re:There are ways of posting bad reviews by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      Because the subjects of the review (the number of rooms and presence of bed, the owner being a stickler for correct bills) are peripheral to what normal would-be visitors expect to read, and that's usually enough of a clue to tip them off.

      It's used all the time: when you want to tell people your business is under an NSA gag order, to clue in a potential employer they should not to hire one of your former employees who's incompetent... without saying so explicitely because you can't.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    3. Re:There are ways of posting bad reviews by neminem · · Score: 2

      i.e. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmw...

      Which works, though I would have had more fun going the other direction, being like "This was a FANTASTIC HOTEL. Its food was DEFINITELY NOT TERRIBLE, and when I went to check in, the guy at the front desk definitely did NOT spend half an hour ignoring me to instead post pictures on facebook. There was NOT a roach problem, and the toilet in the bathroom definitely did NOT stop up a bunch of times."

    4. Re:There are ways of posting bad reviews by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      Or how about "staying in this hotel reminds me of a Song from a French Broadway Play"

      the song in question of course being Master Of the House from Les Mis

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    5. Re:There are ways of posting bad reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just copy-pasta the terms of your contract gagging you into the review, add "I shall now fulfill my contract terms by reviewing any and all positives this hotel has to offer, withholding any and all negative statements: The room contained furniture. 5 stars. I apologize that per my contract, this is the only detail I may legally leave in my heavily edited review."

  17. Re:Is it a bad review to mention they charge for o by thieh · · Score: 3, Funny

    How stupid can places get?

    Zeroth Law of Stupidity: There is no upper bound on the amount of stupidity that can exist within any particular individual. First Law of Stupidity: We always underestimate the number of stupid people, even after the First Law of Stupidity is applied/accounted for. Does that answer your question?

  18. Christ Alive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A quick Google of USGH will bring you countless negative reviews.

    The Yelp reviews are entertaining.

  19. Consumerist covered it as well by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    I saw it on Consumerist first: NY Hotel Fines Brides And Grooms $500 For Each Negative Review Posted By Their Wedding Guests by Ashlee Kieler

  20. The internet has spoken: very funny reviews by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 2

    Yelp reviews

    1. Re:The internet has spoken: very funny reviews by digitalPhant0m · · Score: 1

      Holy Streisand_effect. The reviews on yelp are priceless.

  21. Wll they bill me ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... if I don't stay there?

    1. Re:Wll they bill me ... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      C'mon, they're maybe bad but they're not the RIAA, they can't make you pay even if you don't need their service.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  22. No one posted this yet? On Slashdot?? by Moppusan · · Score: 1

    Union Street Guest House SUCKS!! You're welcome.

    --
    You can dance if you want to.
  23. Palmer vs Kleargear (geeky website) by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 2

    This is the suit where Kleargear fined a couple $3,500 for leaving a bad review and ruined their credit etc etc. Looks like they (Kleargear) didnt even show up to court. Wonder why.

    Palmer vs Kleargear

    1. Re:Palmer vs Kleargear (geeky website) by russotto · · Score: 1

      Kleargear was even worse. They charged the "fine" when
      1) The person who posted the review was not the person who agreed the the contract (the contract, unlike USGHs, did not say anything about third party reviews)

      2) They'd already breached the contract by not delivering the item.

      3) They'd actually added the language to the contract AFTER the person who ordered it did so.

      USGH seems to be a bunch of reasonably honest dirtbags, at least; they do indeed mention that the fine applies for other people's reviews, and they don't fine people for bad reviews if they don't stay at the hotel. 5 stars.

  24. Yes they've charged someone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    This guy posted on Yelp last year that the hotel fined his friends for his review:

    http://www.yelp.com/biz/union-street-guest-house-hudson?hrid=_p-R59VY-c19Nmxt4r9X9w

    1. Re:Yes they've charged someone by caseih · · Score: 1

      Ahh well, that's that then. If it's posted on the internet, it is definitely true.

    2. Re:Yes they've charged someone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out the photos =D

    3. Re:Yes they've charged someone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the contract clause is fake? I knew there wasn't no such thing as a Sanity Clause...

  25. How much do they charge for good reviews? by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    $500 for a bad review is pretty terrible until you learn that good reviews are $200 each.

  26. Re:I wonder if Barbra Streisand has ever stayed th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should just impose the right to be forgotten on all these bad reviews.

  27. The real issue by aaronb1138 · · Score: 2

    The real issue is people putting ridiculous amounts of stock into online reviews that are easily manipulated both by the vendor of a given service or a minority of disgruntled and hyper-critical customers. With groups like Yelp or Angie's List, it gets especially messy, because they don't use a verification system for reviewers and on both sides there are paid armies of the people who can't hack it as (lame sack of shite) SEO consultants trying to grift a buck manipulating reviews positive for their clients and negative for nearby competitors.

    This gets even worse when we consider the nasty culture of anti-confrontation where people instead of bringing an issue appropriately to management and getting it fixed, just spout vitriol and become oversensitive over minutia.

    Sure, lots of bad service exists in the various service and product industries. The simple fix is to clearly ask for what you want and then not pay (demand a credit / refund) when things are not made right. Too bad the majority of people willing to go to such lengths are usually the self-absorbed assholes who have unreasonable requests and expectations.

    1. Re:The real issue by aaronb1138 · · Score: 1

      Just looked at the Yelp reviews... Yep lots of people who have never come close to the place spouting off just so someone thinks their voice is important and try to make some false attempt at social commentary.

      I guess the same charge could be leveled at /. posters...

  28. My Review of the Union Street Guest House by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I had my wedding reception catered at the Union Street Guest House last Saturday.

    The Union Street Guest House required me to sign an agreement stating that I would forfeit a $500 fine to them if I post a negative review of their establishment.

    Rather than lose $500, let me just say that I had my wedding reception catered at the Union Street Guest House last Saturday.

    1. Re:My Review of the Union Street Guest House by Kittenman · · Score: 1

      I had my wedding reception catered at the Union Street Guest House last Saturday.

      The Union Street Guest House required me to sign an agreement stating that I would forfeit a $500 fine to them if I post a negative review of their establishment.

      Rather than lose $500, let me just say that I had my wedding reception catered at the Union Street Guest House last Saturday.

      Why would you sign such an agreement? Wouldn't this wording have tipped you off that the place was a bit dodgy?

      And, of course, all the best to you and partner.

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    2. Re:My Review of the Union Street Guest House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, Swave An deBwoner didn't actually get married last Saturday...

  29. Give us a good review, or else. by alzoron · · Score: 1

    So if you don't leave a positive review they keep your money. That's extortion, and very very illegal.

    1. Re:Give us a good review, or else. by TMYates · · Score: 1

      Your alternative under the agreement would be to not post anything. I would hardly call that extortion when you have an option like that. I would never stay at such a place anyway and will start to look at any agreements I sign for such verbiage.

    2. Re:Give us a good review, or else. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to defend the hotel or this insane policy, but there's a big difference between "give us a good review or else" and "don't give us a bad review or else".

  30. Know how to work with this one... by MiniMike · · Score: 2

    Say you had a legit bad experience there- so you wait the week or so until they return your deposit to unleash your torrent of critical reviews, or start burning through the deposit while you're still there.

    If your experience there was so bad that you can't wait a week to post the review you should probably be talking to a lawyer first anyway.

    1. Re:Know how to work with this one... by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 2

      Uh oh, you didn't read their policy at the Wayback Machine archive:

      The deposit will not be refunded until we feel that everything is 100% resolved (we reserve the right to refund at any time).

      You might have to wait a looooonng time for your refund. Ha ha.

    2. Re:Know how to work with this one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said "wait until they return your deposit". Are you trying to suggest that they will never return any one's deposit on the off chance that when they do a bad review will appear? Perhaps you just have a bad case of head-up-rectum?

    3. Re:Know how to work with this one... by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 1

      He wrote: "so you wait the week or so until they return your deposit"

      But their policy states "we reserve the right to refund at any time"

      It is mathematically possible for "at any time" to be a period longer than one week, possibly much longer if they know that the customer has been royally stiffed. "Never" is a long time, but weeks, months, years -- those are possibilities that have been left open by their policy.

      Perhaps you are the owner/manager of this "fine" establishment? Why not introduce yourself to the rest of the group here? Consider it free advertising.

  31. Don't know who to side with by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

    A business trying to restrict users' free speech, or users empowering the various review sites out there that seek to become "gatekeepers of reputation."

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  32. group discount? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they at least give you a group discount if there is a large volume of bad reviews from your party? $5,000 seems a bit steep if say 10 people from my wedding party were to complain :/

  33. So... by Greyfox · · Score: 1, Funny

    If you've never stayed there, you can post a bad review for free? Because I have a special review I've been saving for years for just such an occasion!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better, you can pretend to be a guest of a wedding party and cost them a lot of money.

  34. Re:Is it a bad review to mention they charge for o by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

    Second Law: We're apparently counting in zero-indexed binary so this law doesn't exist.

    --
    Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  35. Speaking of Yelp by justthinkit · · Score: 2

    Yelp automagically pulls (hides behind the curtain) reviews it deems are not representative. Supposedly the extremes like "5 star" and "1 star" reviews. But not for the cases I've looked at.

    And Yelp doesn't allow you to down-mod reviews. Just 3 versions of "I got high reading that review".

    Odds that Yelp goes under in 2014? 2015?

    --
    I come here for the love
    1. Re:Speaking of Yelp by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      Odds that Yelp goes under in 2014? 2015?

      considering that all of the internet will self-implode on May 6 2015 I would say it is quite likely that yelp will go under next year. Unless they make good money on selling those little stickers.

    2. Re:Speaking of Yelp by mysidia · · Score: 2

      Yelp automagically pulls (hides behind the curtain) reviews it deems are not representative.

      How about we join some reviewers whose reviews were suppressed with some guests who had a bad experience in a lawsuit against Yelp over review suppression and some FTC complaints. We can claim that their suppression of negative reviews was deceptive and resulted in us staying there and not getting the experience we paid for and believed we would be getting according to the biased selection of reviews that Yelp chose to present and suppress.

    3. Re:Speaking of Yelp by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Why will Bruce Hornsby playing in New York destroy the Internet? http://www.brucehornsby.com/ca...

    4. Re: Speaking of Yelp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From everything I've heard about Yelp as a company, I really do feel that they deserve to go under/bankrupt.

    5. Re:Speaking of Yelp by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      In a way it is a difficult problem for Yelp. Almost all of those recent reviews were from people who had never stayed there and were just responding to the stories about the $500 fine. In other words, useless noise. So they very much should "suppress" them since hundreds of people posting variations of "I never stayed here but I am upset about this news story" adds no value for users of Yelp.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    6. Re:Speaking of Yelp by mysidia · · Score: 1

      In a way it is a difficult problem for Yelp. Almost all of those recent reviews were from people who had never stayed there and were just responding to the stories about the $500 fine. In other words, useless noise.

      They should provide simply a system of "locking" the listing after the media attention, and prompt users to complete "proof" of having been a guest there, before getting to enter their review.

    7. Re:Speaking of Yelp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, there is value. It makes people aware of the potential $500 fine

  36. burn the building down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    kill the owners and their spawn. cleans the earth of any trace of this happening.
    problem solved.

  37. Free time at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's okay. I can leave negative reviews for your hotel without having ever booked a room there.

  38. My penalty for a $500 penalty is arson by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Burn the fucking place to the ground.

    1. Re:My penalty for a $500 penalty is arson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's the only logical solution

  39. How so? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    they'll be a little bit of laughs and chatter, but it doesn't sound like the Hotel's hurting for business, and by tomorrow /. will have forgotten all this. Heck, can you name me the hotel without scrolling up to the summary and reading (no fair if you've got a 4k monitor and don't need to scroll)?

    If anything they probably backed down because they'd just find themselves getting a tonne of credit card disputes, which you're allowed to do because of a Gov't imposed requirement written into a law...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:How so? by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Naw, go look at their Yelp page. Hell, just Google them. This will sting.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  40. Next steps for Union Street by truthseeker18 · · Score: 2

    How does Union Street get itself out of this PR nightmare? I recommend they invest in a real-time mobile feedback system so that they can react to and ideally fix any guest complaints on the spot before the guests leave and go squawking on social media. There are a couple of good feedback platforms out there such as Osurv (http://osurv.com/). Successful hotels understand that it’s ultimately cheaper to please your current customers than to pay the high acquisition costs of acquiring new ones.

    1. Re:Next steps for Union Street by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm thinking they just actually provide the excellent service they give lip service to. It's far more effective than any other campaign, and sadly, rarely duplicated.

  41. Post your thoughts on the policy to their Yelp sit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.yelp.com/biz/union-street-guest-house-hudson

  42. First Amendment by RandomUsername99 · · Score: 1

    My favorite thing about this is how many of the yelp reviewers think that yelp removing their reviews is a violation of their first amendment rights.

  43. It even gets worse... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 2

    We can only take people's word for what wedding they are attending, therefore we are not responsible for guests booking under different names or choosing to attend another event. We will not question guests about their intentions after a reservation is made.

    So, even if a person not in your wedding party leaves a bad review, you may get dinged for it if that person was mean enough to say he belonged to you when he checked in...

  44. My Review of the Union Street Guest House by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had my wedding reception catered at the Union Street Guest House last Saturday.

    The Union Street Guest House required me to sign an agreement stating that I would forfeit a $500 fine to them if I post a negative review of their establishment.

    Rather than lose $500, let me just say that I had my wedding reception catered at the Union Street Guest House last Saturday.

    Can't you just update the review after getting your deposit back?

  45. FTFY! Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you ever considered a new wife?

    Have you ever considered moving out of your mom's basement?

  46. Post from Starbucks by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    Then you don't have to worry about anything.

  47. Post from Starbucks... by ayesnymous · · Score: 1

    Then you don't have to worry about anything...

  48. This story needs to be updated by mrBlaQ · · Score: 1

    News more recent than this has suggested the $500 fee was a "joke" and that there are many fictitious reviews from non-visiting people. I am not affiliated with this hotel in any way. Just want to state this article is now biased based on current information.