Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

m.bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 167 posts

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#81

Post by adwf »

DanBC wrote: post #16
adwf wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It probably isn't, but it's in that annoyingly small fee zone where it costs more to take them to court than it does to just accept the fine. I think in this case, they'll probably get the money back from their CC company though.

In England they could go through small claims. An online claim for £100 would cost £25 initially and costs can be recovered. https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-for-money/overview They could get free legal advice from Citizen's Advice. http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/law_w/law_legal_system_e... But just reclaiming the money via credit card companies is probably easier. I'm curious about why the people leaving one…

I knew about small claims court, but didn't realise it was as simple as an online filing. That's really handy to know! I had a similar issue with some £50 concert tickets that I'd bought earlier this year; cancelled the night before the gig and the promoter was being difficult about refunds. I probably still wouldn't have filed, but at least the threat would've prompted them to cough up quicker.

These kind of petty fines really annoy me, far more than a lot of major crimes, because people know exactly what they're doing when they pick a low amount - and they expect to get away with it. You see them all over the place, eg. change your ISP and they'll fine you £50 for not returning a £10 junk router that you have to return, instead of them picking it up.

The money is in an annoying zone where you are put off filing a claim because of the potential cost, not just in money but in time as well. You might still need to go to court over your small claim, which will take up a day and a lot of hassle, etc.

It's one of the reasons that parking tickets are only £30. You could contest them, but it's costing more in terms of your time than you'll recover monetarily, even if you prove the ticket invalid. Likewise with automated speeding tickets from cameras - you could contest it, but it's just too difficult for most people to be worth the risk. Whereas in countries like Switzerland or Finland, where they can have huge fines, I imagine they have a lot more court cases...

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#82

Post by barking »

DanBC wrote: post #4

The trip advisor page. http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Hotel_Review-g186332-d554701-Re... There were 147 bad reviews before the story broke and these bad reviews are the majority. I'm curious about the dupe detector not spotting duplicates. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8629113 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8629117 Edit: this link is to the mobile site; one links to .com and the third links to .co.uk

Clearly the experience has belatedly led to their discovery of trip advisor.

Blackpool is a classic example of a seaside resort that's been badly hit by cheap package holidays to the sun.

As such you can expect it to be full of hotels hanging on by their fingernails.

Also it's known to have lots of social welfare bed and breakfast establishments.

You'd need to be living under a rock in England not to know that.

If you're just going from A to B and want a stopover you're better off going with one of the chains. I actually like premier Inns.

One of the travelodges I stayed in though was as depressing a dump as I've experienced.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#83

Post by netcan »

icebraining wrote: post #72
netcan wrote: post #47

I think this is an example of contracts being broken, often online but elsewhere too. You can't rent a hotel room without a credit card which helps hotels avoid you running off without paying for minibar peanuts or rock star damage to a room. OTOH, the fact that you can't update your iphone, rent a hotel room or do a lot of other things without agreeing to a "contract" or policy so long that it's impractical to read…

As others said, clauses like these are already considered null & void and the charge fraudulent, so I don't see this as a particularly good example of why laws must be changed. With regards to very long contracts, and without meaning to defending all instances of them (since some are clearly just meant to obfuscate), how do you separate a contract "designed to not be read" from one that honestly tries to cover all ed…

One test could be proportionality. If the contract is in regards to a loan, major purchase or similar spending time and money understanding the implications of the policy is reasonable.

With Siri, I don't propose anything. I am simply stating the obvious. As an owner of an ipad, I have not really agreed to anything with Apple. They are pretending like we have an agreement, but we don't. If people really needed to read and understand the terms and conditions, 99% of people would not have updated the OS and Apple would have to change the way they do things.

Maybe they just need to make the information available and not get my consent. Maybe some feature require consent and so can't be pushed to my phone without an action on my part. I don't know what the alternative is.

I do know that this agreement between me and Apple is much more like an agreement between Apple and a 6 year old then the one between me an my employer. In the real world, it is not a contact. My click does not really denote agreement.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#84

Post by moron4hire »

netcan wrote: post #47

I think this is an example of contracts being broken, often online but elsewhere too. You can't rent a hotel room without a credit card which helps hotels avoid you running off without paying for minibar peanuts or rock star damage to a room. OTOH, the fact that you can't update your iphone, rent a hotel room or do a lot of other things without agreeing to a "contract" or policy so long that it's impractical to read…

Statements like "we need new laws" are problematic, because they boil down to "we need completely new people". Laws are written by people--specific, finite, real people. If you tossed out every law book today, you would end up with the same laws tomorrow.

And that isn't an endictment of congress critters and judges. They are of us, selected by us. To say, "we need a new legislature" is to say "we need completely new people." They are the way they are because we have made and allowed them to be that way.

Now, I agree that the laws we have and the legislature we have are objectively bad. But I have come to admit it is because we have a bad culture. We live in a world trapped in a Prisoner's Dilemma over pillaging our neighbors.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#85

Post by Shivetya »

ajuc wrote: post #39
mpweiher wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dunno about the UK, but in Germany "surprising" clauses in everyday contracts such as this with consumers are generally illegal. End of story. If this got as far as a court, case would be over in seconds. Read opening statements, have laugh, verdict, good day. Also don't know which way the EU swings on this, my guess would be towards the German position.

Yup. The alternative is - expect all the clients to read small print on everyday contracts and interpret it correctly. That would be dumb and would slow economy considerably. Imagine hotel making the contract 200 pages long. Staying for a night at hotel shouldn't require you to hire a lawyer.

What if you declare it up front, in big print. Really. I wonder how many people would still stay. Just put it right above the dotted line on the front page.

By signing this receipt and accepting the key to your room you agree you not place a negative review of this facility on any public accessible site.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#87

Post by netcan »

moron4hire wrote: post #84
netcan wrote: post #47

I think this is an example of contracts being broken, often online but elsewhere too. You can't rent a hotel room without a credit card which helps hotels avoid you running off without paying for minibar peanuts or rock star damage to a room. OTOH, the fact that you can't update your iphone, rent a hotel room or do a lot of other things without agreeing to a "contract" or policy so long that it's impractical to read…

Statements like "we need new laws" are problematic, because they boil down to "we need completely new people". Laws are written by people--specific, finite, real people. If you tossed out every law book today, you would end up with the same laws tomorrow. And that isn't an endictment of congress critters and judges. They are of us, selected by us. To say, "we need a new legislature" is to say "we need completely new…

I disagree, if you tossed out the law books you would get a very different set of laws. Laws have a long tradition inherited over thousands of years. Contracts is one of those traditions. It's a good tradition. It's just taken a bad turn, being applied badly to the wrong kinds of things.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#88

Post by toyg »

Shivetya wrote: post #85
ajuc wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. The alternative is - expect all the clients to read small print on everyday contracts and interpret it correctly. That would be dumb and would slow economy considerably. Imagine hotel making the contract 200 pages long. Staying for a night at hotel shouldn't require you to hire a lawyer.

What if you declare it up front, in big print. Really. I wonder how many people would still stay. Just put it right above the dotted line on the front page. By signing this receipt and accepting the key to your room you agree you not place a negative review of this facility on any public accessible site.

The fact that most people would only look at the bottom line (i.e. price) doesn't mean that this wouldn't be a gross infringement of freedom of speech, and unfair trading to boot. Trading involves the possibility of goods not being up to par, and hence the customer complaining to a third party. As long as complaints are not libellous, there is no reason why they could be forcefully restricted.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#89

Post by spacecowboy_lon »

solaris152000 wrote: post #10

I think this is the place I stayed when I went to see Bob Dylan play in Blackpool 2013. It wasn't too bad, Blackpool is a sh*tehole anyway what do you expect. Dylan was great though, best night of my life.

It's sad that they did not get that mega Casino - I stayed there a coupel of years ago and 15+ years ago Blockpools decline is shocking.

No wonder the political parities no longer hold their conferences (conventions) at the winter gardens.

Post reply on HN