Chongqing hotel refund

I think the hotel is too much. If the wedding banquet is cancelled due to force majeure, the deposit shall be refunded. The normalization of epidemic prevention and control has gradually integrated into people's lives, and everyone has begun to have a certain understanding of epidemic prevention and control. However, the hotel refused to refund the deposit for a wedding banquet cancelled by a Chongqing man due to the epidemic, which caused great concern on the Internet.

Due to the cancellation of the wedding banquet due to the epidemic, the hotel said that it would not refund the deposit regardless of whether it was done or not. It happened in Nan 'an District of Chongqing. Mr. Chen was supposed to hold a wedding for his son, but the wedding had to be cancelled because of the epidemic. Because the wedding banquet was to be cancelled, Mr. Chen was going to negotiate with the hotel to refund the deposit, but the hotel refused to refund the deposit on the grounds of Mr. Chen's own reasons, and said that it would not refund the deposit regardless of whether the wedding banquet was held or not.

Mr. Chen expressed dissatisfaction with the reply given by the hotel, arguing that this was compulsory consumption by the hotel and the market supervision department had been involved in the investigation. After the incident was exposed on the Internet, it caused a heated discussion among netizens. Most people are dissatisfied with the hotel's behavior, but a few people understand it.

I think the two sides can solve it through consultation, but the deposit is not refundable, and the hotel is really too much. First of all, as far as the cancellation of the wedding is concerned, I don't think Mr. Chen's family wants to see this result, but the epidemic is irresistible and Mr. Chen has no other way. This incident may cause some losses to the hotel. The loss may come from the preparation of dishes, the salary of staff, and reluctance to refund the deposit. I personally understand.

In fact, this is something that both sides can solve through consultation. I don't think it is reasonable if the losses caused by force majeure are borne by the hotel alone. But it is not reasonable if it is all borne by consumers.

Personally, I think it is too much for the hotel to refuse to refund all the deposits. After the market supervision department intervened in the investigation, there was no room for both sides to sit down and negotiate. The next encounter with this hotel may not only be a refund of the deposit, but also some punishment.

This is actually not what everyone wants to see, just because the operation of the hotel is too unacceptable, so the consequences may only be borne by the hotel.

In fact, there are not a few wedding banquets cancelled due to the epidemic, but most hotels will communicate and negotiate with consumers to solve the problem in a way that both parties bear the losses. For hotels with non-refundable deposits, the loss of word-of-mouth will make it more difficult to operate under the epidemic.

No one wants to bear the loss, but this is no reason to pass the loss on to others!