Why hit us with such a big bill? Youths get $1,400 damage bill after night of fun
in hotel room THEY checked into a hotel room to celebrate
Christmas Eve. 02 January
2009
THEY checked into a hotel room to celebrate Christmas Eve.
But a group of friends ended up getting an unexpected 'present'
on Christmas day - a huge bill for their night of fun.
The hotel presented a bill of about $1,350 for damage to items
in the room and loss of income as a result of their drunken
antics.
This is more than four times the $300 they paid for a club
executive room.
Mr Dudley Duclos, 22, and four friends had booked the room at
Pan Pacific Orchard Hotel at the special Christmas rate given to
Mindef employees.
The full-time National Serviceman said they just wanted to have
a small get-together and have drinks with friends.
'We didn't plan to get so drunk, we just wanted to get high and
have some fun,' he said.
But things took a dramatic turn at around midnight.
There were more than five people in the room and at least half a
bottle of alcohol had been consumed, he said.
The hotel said there were more than 10 guests in the room after
midnight.
It also said guests in the other rooms had complained about the
noise in the room and security personnel had to go to the room to
inform them about the rules.
Asked whether they knew they had broken the rules, Mr Duclos
said: 'We didn't know at first but we tried to move people out
after.'
But by then, the damage had been done.
A pillow case accidentally placed on top of a lampshade was
damaged after the bulb heated up.
Said Mr Duclos: 'I'm not sure how it happened.'
Another guest had too much to drink and vomited on the
carpet.
'My friend tried to clear up the mess with the bed runner. There
was a visible stain on the carpet and runner,' he said.
His friend, who wanted to be named only as Mr Pang, said water
had also seeped into a hotel torchlight.
The next morning, they realised they had caused damage to the
room and were willing to compensate the hotel.
Mr Duclos had an invoice that showed they were billed $650.56
for damages to the bed runner, lampshade, torchlight and pillow
case.
The hotel also charged them $700 for the loss of two nights' use
of the room.
Although the costs were not itemised, Mr Duclos said they were
told the runner costs about $500, and the lampshade and torchlight
about $50 each.
Though they paid up, the friends were not happy with the amount
charged and the lack of transparency on each item's cost.
Said Mr Pang, 21, a student: 'We did cause damage and felt
compelled to pay. But it was out of goodwill (that we paid) first
without demanding verification of the prices.'
When they tried to verify the specific price of each item, they
were told it could not be done because the items were purchased in
bulk.
Mr Pang said: 'The person-in-charge took us to the room with a
checklist of the items in it.
'After that, they gave us this invoice without even listing the
specific cost of each item.'
They also questioned the hotel's replacement of the bed runner
without even trying to get rid of the stain.
'I think vomit is soluble enough to be washed away. It wasn't
red wine. Why replace
it so (readily)?' Mr Duclos asked.
Mr Duclos and Mr Pang were also unhappy with the $700
charge, which they were told was to cover the loss of revenue, as
the room had to be aired to get rid of the stench and the carpets
needed cleaning.
They tried in vain to negotiate with the hotel to use
the room for those two days to get their money's
worth.
The two friends felt that the stench from the vomit was
bearable.
'Although there was a lingering smell, we managed to sleep
through the night after cleaning it up,' said Mr Duclos.
They said the hotel had yet to give them the invoice for the
$700 despite them contacting the hotel several times.
Mr Duclos and his friends are discussing how to split the
bill.
Most of them are still studying or serving national service and
don't want to get their parents involved.
Hotel said it didn't charge full damages
PAN Pacific Orchard Hotel security had to tell Mr
Dudley Duclos and friends to keep it down three times that night
after complaints about the noise in their room.
It noted that there were more than 10 people inside and they
were having a party of some sort.
Its marketing and communications manager, Mr Lim Kin Seng, 31,
said in an e-mail reply to The New Paper that the room was booked
only for single occupancy.
Based on hotel policy, it should only be occupied by the
registered guests.
As for the damage bill, he said: 'We can assure you that
any damages charged and collected are well within scope of the loss
of business, or costs incurred by the hotel, and are, in the
interest of fairness, understated.'
Mr Lim said the bed runner and lampshade are made-to-order
designer items which were previously purchased in bulk.
The runner is made using a special colour tone which adheres to
the hotel's corporate identity. It could not be dry-cleaned because
of the vomit, and using alternative cleaning methods to remove the
stains would drastically alter its colour.
Mr Lim said replacements for the bed runner and lampshade had to
be purchased on an ad-hoc basis.
Hence, the costs incurred would be higher than the $500 and $50
charged for the runner and lampshade respectively.
Mr Lim also noted the vomit smell was strong and the room needed
a couple of days of airing before being made available to
guests.
He said the guests had a verbal agreement with the hotel to pay
for the additional two nights' stay.
The hotel also spent $800 on carpet
cleaning but due to the abovementioned agreement, it
decided not to charge the guests for this.
He said there were also burn marks on the pillow
case and lampshade in the non-smoking room.
He could not verify whether any smoking or fire was involved,
but said that this was a dangerous act which put the safety of
hotel guests and hotel property at risk.
Tan Su Vien, newsroom intern
They damaged the room and made conditions inhabitable for other
guests. Yet, they behave as if they should not bear the costs of
those damages. They have no experience running a hotel or have any
inkling on the operation costs, yet they say it the fixtures and
cleaning costs are not costly in Singapore. They behave
irresponsibly and knew that they had to bear the damages. I would
not expect such people to be cheapskates as well.
