Guests report getting billed hundreds of dollars for smoking, based on the readings of an “algorithmic” smoke detector. The sensor manufacturer markets its product as a way for hotels to unlock new revenue streams.
I have never seen a more clear cut example of a perfect use case for a credit card chargeback.
Fun fact: You can’t dispute part of a charge. If you charge this back and win (you probably will) the hotel loses out on everything, for your entire stay. It also stacks up against them and raises their rates the more they get. An even vaguely concerted effort by people who have been ripped off by this would probably get the hotel in question booted from their credit card processor.
I imagine it’s damn difficult to run a hotel if you can’t accept credit cards. Just saying.
They disputed it with their bank, the bank sided with the hotel because of the sensor report. Just saying.
Sounds like they also need to find a new bank, then. Or more people need to file — Once banks get wise of a particular scam, they’ll start taking a more dim view of it.
STOP USING BANK CARDS TO PAY FOR SHIT… Credit cards are the way, they are SOOOOOO much easier to deal with than a bank. Also fuck banks.
Edit: a word
Simply put:
If something gets fucked up and you used a debit card, you’re the one screwed until it is sorted out (if it is sorted out). Also debit disputes can take 8+ weeks I’ve heard.
If something is screwed up and you used a credit card, then the bank is on the hook until it is sorted out. And typically they’ll credit you the amount until the investigation is complete and it is usually complete within 30 days. I’ve had chargebacks remain credited simply because the other party never responded.
The commenters are saying “bank” but the original article says she disputed with her credit card company so I don’t think that’s the case here.
I think without actually talking to the people in question we won’t know for sure. I still feel like they used a bank debit card personally but I guess it’s up in the air.
I see no reason to doubt the original reporter who did actually speak to her. The dispute was denied by her CC after the hotel provided the report. Is that really unbelievable to you?
How do you prove to the bank or in a court of law that you didn’t do something? The hotel is alleging that their algorithm detected smoking.
Besides setting up a camera which seems to be very invasive, how would you fight this?
The burden of proof that the sensors cannot provide false positives falls on the hotel chain, not the person getting charged. There is also the question of whether the sensors can be triggered by someone else, or an adjacent room.
You fight them by filing a lawsuit for fraudulently charging you.
Ah yes, the system keeping the poors in their place.
Most people can’t afford the time and money required for this, so they don’t bother. So corporations and corrupt people get away with all kinds of things.
This seems like a good point. That said, the bank is the failure point here. I don’t know if they are actually bound to any laws, or if it’s just the bank policy?
If I were them, I’d bitch the bank out and threaten to leave. This is such a clear case of fraud they aren’t fighting.
deleted by creator
But when she disputed the charge with her credit card company, they sided with the hotel after it provided the credit card company the same smoke report it sent her.
They tried that. If the credit card denies it you could have a lawyer send a letter threatening legal action but that’s all going to be at an extra cost unless you know an attorney or they think they could make enough to o do it on spec.
Unfortunately, at a certain point their “data” will just trump your affidavit that you didn’t smoke. You’d really have to press the issue to get beyond that, and pay to have expert testimony and technical reviews of the sensor.
A lawyer will send a demand letter, not an affidavit.
An affidavit is for sworn testimony given under oath by someone who is unwilling or unable to appear on the witness stand.
A demand letter is a formal written request for action or payment prior with a threat of legal action for noncompliance.
If they ignore the demand letter then the next step is a civil suit. Depending on the amount this might end up in small claims. Also, tort cases only require a preponderance of evidence.
A preponderance of evidence essentially means you only have to prove something is more likely than not which, in this case, would be pretty easy. The big issue is the expense of this process almost makes it not worth it.
The American legal system favors those with resources.
That’s what I’m saying though - it will come down to sworn testimony, and their data from the sensor will likely constitute a preponderance of evidence.
The burden is on the plaintiff, not the defendant. Whomever brings the suit needs to prove that it’s more likely than not that they’re were incorrectly fined.
Since these devices seem to basically be VOC sensors it wouldn’t be that hard to do this.
Since these devices seem to basically be VOC sensors it wouldn’t be that hard to do this.
To a non-technically literate judge/jury. Many people just trust “the data” or “the authority” or “the technology”.
I understand that, but bringing one of these sensors into the courtroom and turning on a Dyson air wrap, spraying hairspray, using baby powder etc. and then comparing the results would show the susceptibility of these to be wrong.
It’s a demonstrably flawed system so you just need to demonstrate the system in action.
Or you pay monthly for a law service. Those types of letters are exactly what those programs are intended to cover.
In two different cases where I’ve disputed part of a charge/order, the credit card company returned the money for the entire order like you said. I was surprised they did that, and didn’t realize that was the norm.
On the one hand, I never wanted anything I extra that I didn’t deserve. On the other hand, both times this has happened to me, the companies at fault really, really went out of their way to deserve it. Not necessarily scam level deserved it like this hotel’s smoke detector scam, but still.
Many credit card software providers also charge for the investigation of chargebacks, to the tune of hundreds of dollars, even if the chargeback is reversed.
Accumulating a history of chargebacks against you as a merchant, even if the consumer ultimately loses them, also counts against you and will raise your rates. The processors don’t like dealing with merchants that they perceive as excessively risky.
I have to deal with this in my business and the whole thing is really a pain in the ass.
That’s not where it ends though. They can send you to collections.
Happened to me from Verizon after I returned their modem and they said I didn’t.
Many different collectors called and wouldn’t the same track# and photos to show it was returned. It eventually went on my credit, which took a slight hit for all of 2 months.
This is why it’s great to belong to the 90% of the world without credit scores. Something similar happened to me, I just sent the company an email that told them that they bought bad credit after a washing machine manufacturer charged me for an in-warranty repair that they didn’t even perform.
Haven’t heard from them since.
Then they just threaten to take you to court.
Feel free, it has to be settled in a consumer protection arbitration court, who will by default side with me.
There is basically a “forced arbitration” law in effect, but not toward people who sue the company, but toward the company that would sue people.
It depends if you have the time and/or mental energy for that
lol fuck these people and these hotels. It’s not about not smoking, it’s about charging more money.
How is this a plus for guests wtff
Devils advocate, I guess the room won’t smell like shit
Another one to add to the list whenever I hear tech lobbyists shout about how unregulated capitalism breeds innovation.
I tend to huff arsenic trioxide when I stay at a hotel. Will the hotel smoke detectors fine me for that?
Wow. That is… that is some horseshit.
Sounds like an easy lawsuit. Record the entire stay, test different variables like a hair dryer, candle, fan, soldering smoke, medical equipment like nebulizer, steamer, etc. If they fine you, simply find a lawyer and request a $5M settlement fee. Boom, early retirement.
You can win actual damages and your lawyers fees in most instances. Because there is no meaningful payday in the offing you will have to spend ~100 in small claims or $5000-$50,000 in real big boy court and you will win for yourself… $500. Where on earth are you getting $5M. Large settlements are normally because lots and lots of people are damaged in small amounts, someone’s life was destroyed, or the case was uber complicated and ended up taking years of expensive lawyers.
In case 1 and 3 only the lawyers make out like bandits. In the second case you earn a bunch of money because your life is ruined.
also, who has the time and money to bail on work, pay upfront for hotel rooms and lawyers, and do this? I mean, someone - but probablynot enough people to make large corporations that worried about it, though I could be wrong about that.
revenue-generating scheme
Scam. I think the word is scam.
No no, it is the algorithm. There was nothing they could do. Hands were tied and you can’t blame them because the algorithm did it.
It’s the Hertz AI scam in a different sector. I suspect every major rental company will have a version of this soon, and that none of them will be auditable or appealable.
Yet another huge win for those who choose to never leave their basements.
I miss my basement.
Isn’t this a textbook candidate for a class action suit?
Some lucky lawyers will get rich off of this.
Don’t forget about the lucky customers that might get almost half the fee back.
Half? What kind of class action lawsuits have you been a part of?
Seems like mostly the consumer gets back some 2% or something. I have to assume they are intended to be punitive rather than to make the customer right.
Couldn’t that be interpreted as a confession that their air is at least as unsafe as staying with a heavy smoker the whole night, in terms of PM 2.5 and other hazards?
Yay! Fraud!
Sounds like a great way to abuse front desk staff by proxy.
That was a very annoying read. I could feel the tiktok plug even before it was posted. This sucks, but oh my god I hate the internet now.
This is the one time I’m gonna be that jagweed and say I liked it. I’ve never once been on TikTok and I never will. But I was happy to see it in logical and streamlined format. I didn’t feel the need to click on anything. Nothing got in the way… no oppressive popups, members-only, ads, etc. How sad is it that as much as you guys are complaining, and you have the right to your opinions, I found it to be one of the cleanest web pages I’ve seen in months.
I don’t visit any of those sites either, in part because the formatting makes telling a story so challenging.
Looking onto a page like this, it’s like one story was needlessly chopped up into little bits. Instead of several paragraphs formatted with the purpose of telling a smooth, coherent story, it’s cut into chunks whose only parameter is character length. Outside of modern microblog-style social media, that format doesn’t happen much. The result is scrolling and scrolling to read something that (I feel) could’ve been put into a few paragraphs in a single blog post.
Put altogether, it comes off as chunky and without any clear flow. Microblog formatting is not conductive to story-telling. It’s not a criticism of the writer (I assume they were doing their best within the limits imposed), but of the formatting that breaks the flow that story-telling relies on.
IDGAF about the topic the post is discussing, and I don’t need an article. I was more than fine with a quick, scannable version of what’s happening so I can forget all about it. I don’t know what you’re all triggered on. It’s a low-content low-effort highly-viral anti-AI anti-capitalism rage bait garbage post and it deserves no effort on the part of the writer or reader IMO.
The result is scrolling and scrolling to read something that (I feel) could’ve been put into a few paragraphs in a single blog post.
I was pretty much born into the microblog style (or at least not on the Internet during the popularity of regular blog style), and even then I agree that this sucked to read as a microblog rather than a single, more coherent post. I see someone drop a 🧵 and I immediately sigh internally. I don’t mind a thread post if it’s literally just someone reporting facts, but trying to tell a story (and like, in a exciting or suspenseful way) in threads that are like 2 sentences long sucks. Sometimes I wish people would just post on a blog/article/long post site and then just post ap link to the full text on their microblog.
Meh.
Once again though, this is a meaningless garbage article designed to rage bait people, it’s not something anybody’s going to talk about, we’ve already spent more time arguing about the web page than the content.
My thoughts exactly and while I hate making cliché comments, I’m surprised this isn’t being talked about more in this thread. Felt like I was missing an adblocker, and I was glad it was only 13 tweets.
always put a bag over the smoke alarm!
now THAT’S illegal
Yet another way your country fucks over it’s citizens
Anyone got a mirror of the article that is not geoblocked?
Do archive pages work for you? If so, give this a try: https://archive.ph/2uKUX
