A British couple is fuming after a hotel reportedly charged them an extra £100 for leaving a damning TripAdvisor review. Tony and Jan Jenkinson spent one night at the Broadway Hotel in stunning Blackpool, were distinctly unimpressed with the experience, and wrote about it on travel reviews website TripAdvisor. But they had …

COMMENTS

Post your comment

House rules Send corrections

Add to 'My topics'

Page:

Wednesday 19th November 2014 07:43 GMT IT Hack

Boohoo

Cry me a river. You don't want bad reviews? Don't go online to flog your wares. Or you know...reply to the bad review and explain why it had gone wrong, what you had done to fix it or plan to or to highlight unreasonable behaviour.

This is a perfect respose for example -

http://uproxx.com/webculture/2014/10/a-negative-yelp-review-led-to-this-hilarious-take-down-from-the-restaurants-owner/

38 1 Reply
1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:45 GMT goldcd
  
  This one's my favourite
  
  http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowUserReviews-g186370-d2440887-r161671908-Sotto_Sotto-Bath_Somerset_England.html#CHECK_RATES_CONT
  
  #1 Restaurant in Bath - and they put effort as much effort into their responses, as their food.
  
  25 0 Reply
  1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 10:03 GMT FartingHippo
    
    Re: This one's my favourite
    
    That's wonderful. Not difficult to guess which one of them is telling porkies.
    
    3 0 Reply
  2. Wednesday 19th November 2014 13:38 GMT Don Dumb
    
    Re: This one's my favourite
    
    @goldcd - +1 for Sotto Sotto, hadn't seen that review/response exchange but I'm very tempted to start a 'mini-viral' amongst my friends.
    
    I have had a birthday meal there and many friends consider it the best restaurant in Bath. I already had very high regard for this place (I can also validate the truth of their claims that they provide a birthday profiterole and complimentary Limoncello). But that response is so brilliant, it raises my esteem for them even higher.
    
    5 0 Reply
  3. Friday 21st November 2014 15:36 GMT Chris King
    
    Re: This one's my favourite
    
    Beautiful ! Just beautiful !
    
    It's nice to see someone stand up to the dolts who whine "I'll write you a bad review !" like it's an automatic entitlement to freebies and compensation.
    
    1 0 Reply
2. Wednesday 19th November 2014 10:33 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  Re: Boohoo
  
  Simpler than that - don't want bad reviews - provide better service?
  
  11 6 Reply
  1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 13:33 GMT Ragarath
    
    Re: Boohoo @AC
    
    Not that simple, human nature is weird. There are people that post bad things just because they can.
    
    16 1 Reply
    1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 15:08 GMT Billa Bong
      
      Re: Boohoo @ Ragarath
      
      I up-vote because I can, and because you deserve it for that observation.
      
      I think the reason is simply that we as a culture are so poor at rational, thoughtful complaint (not slander) direct to the appropriate party. We, as a nation, somehow feel "protected" by the anonymity of the internet, not having to deal direct with the person that has perceptively disadvantaged us.
      
      I wish that it was possible to prevent anyone posting a review online before at least trying to speak direct to the owner/manager about the issues. It might not stop you wanting to post a bad review, but will at least give them the opportunity to put things right or express their side of the tale, thus giving you more of an objective view (or confirming that the reason the establishment is so poor is bad management). Of course practically it's impossible to do this, so I guess keep calm and carry on...
      
      4 0 Reply
      1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 16:11 GMT Eddy Ito
        
        Re: Boohoo @ Ragarath
        
        Let's not forget that Yelp itself isn't known to be overly kind to businesses. There is a reason some businessestry turning the tables especially given we now know Yelp's practices aren't illegal.
        
        3 0 Reply
      2. Thursday 20th November 2014 13:25 GMT Agile
        
        Re: Boohoo @ Ragarath
        
        Unfortunately it is often the management policy which upsets visitors like not cleaning the toilets!
        
        Also a very few restaurants which are not licenced to sell wine but also refuse to let you bring your own when so many restaurants will.
        
        What the owner and staff choose to drink is their own personal choice, but equally I see it as my choice to drink wine with my dinner.
        
        0 2 Reply
    2. Thursday 20th November 2014 18:29 GMT chris lively
      
      Re: Boohoo @AC
      
      Down voting. Because I can and it costs me absolutely nothing. Which, ironically, is your point.
      
      1 0 Reply
3. Wednesday 19th November 2014 16:10 GMT ItsNotMe
  
  Re: Boohoo
  
  Must be something afoot with their reviews currently. Have they just managed to pull in £17,000 from unhappy reviewers?
  
  255 reviews from our community
  
  Traveler rating
  
  Excellent 17
  
  Very good 35
  
  Average 33
  
  Poor 24
  
  Terrible 146
  
  http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g186332-d554701-Reviews-Broadway_Hotel-Blackpool_Lancashire_England.html
  
  2 0 Reply
  1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 18:53 GMT JLV
    
    Re: Boohoo
    
    And, if you notice, unlike what the article states about trolls crawling out, many of those low reviews are more than 3 weeks old. This ain't just the interweb lynching a poor wretch for a clumsy (and stupid) attempt at muzzling undue criticism.
    
    Granted, the amount of upvotes to those poor ratings is probably motivated by their recent press coverage.
    
    Personally, unlike some other posters above, I don't particularly care for businesses giving out frequent explanations/rebuttals, even apologies to bad reviews. When you have a business which is constantly justifying itself, you get the impression that they spend more time doing PR than fixing their product.
    
    That's different when it's have a business which generally gets good reviews and feels like they ought to communicate with a few disgruntled customers.
    
    From a quick perusal of the older reviews, this hotel just seems to stink, period (and probably literally too).
    
    2 2 Reply
    1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 21:20 GMT IT Hack
      
      Re: Boohoo
      
      @ JLV
      
      Easy answer for the owners?
      
      Just state "what the hell do you expect for 35 quid a night? The fucking Ritz?"
      
      2 4 Reply
      1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 23:50 GMT Alan Brown
        
        Re: Boohoo
        
        > Just state "what the hell do you expect for 35 quid a night? The fucking Ritz?"
        
        The average Travelodge is about this price and they're generally (some exceptions) clean and quiet.
        
        Rising Damp was supposed to be a situation comedy, not a documentary.
        
        6 1 Reply
        
        Thursday 20th November 2014 07:54 GMT IT Hack
        
        Re: Boohoo
        
        @Alan Brown
        
        Yes. And Travelodge also have some 6,000 employees, generated something something like 300 million squids in revenue (2010 figures according to wiki)...unlike this little pokey hotel.
        
        Cheap one hotel operations charging low cost rooms are not going to match places like Travelodge...
        
        2 0 Reply
        
        Thursday 20th November 2014 09:31 GMT Matt 21
        
        Re: Boohoo
        
        While in this case it may be that the hotel is not a nice place to stay the whole principal of these reviews is at the very least unfair in my opinion. In fact I'd go as far to say that these kind of review sites are fast becoming useless.
        
        As a business you often have no come back (although some sites do allow it) and if you do reply it can look like you're making excuses. Some complaints aren't even from people who've used your product or service. Some people get their friends to post bad reviews for fun or for other reasons.
        
        Some examples I've seen:
        
        "I didn't like the colour of product X I bought". Well it's advertised as that colour so what did you expect?
        
        "The TV I bought doesn't fit in my room". Well it's advertised with its dimensions......
        
        etc. etc.
        
        Even positive reviews don't help because they often seem to be biased by devotees or reviews which sound suspiciously like they've been written by people working for the people providing the product or service.
        
        Spotting the genuine reviews among the dross is taking longer and longer to the point where sometimes I just give up.
        
        Of course there are some funny ones along the way, like Veet for men and the "big ships" ones.
        
        1 0 Reply
Wednesday 19th November 2014 07:44 GMT ratfox

Legal?

I'm pretty certain there are limits to what businesses can put in the fine print. Like, say, replace this £100 with £1'000'000, and it becomes obviously illegal.

I hope these practices are formally banned, though.

16 0 Reply
1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 07:47 GMT Cliff
  
  Re: Legal?
  
  Just needs some high publicity cases for the legal status of these bogus clauses to be clarified as unfair. This is popular in the US just now with shitty companies like Roca Labs - plenty about them on techdirt for anyone interested.
  
  3 0 Reply
  1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 10:37 GMT Proud Father
    
    Re: Legal?
    
    Extortion? Fraud? Definitely not legal IMO.
    
    3 0 Reply
2. Wednesday 19th November 2014 11:41 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  Re: Legal?
  
  As for unlawful Terms&Conditions that you've signed: There's typical EULAs inside software packaging about breaking the seal implying your agreement with all the paperwork -- every company using them didn't mean they had legal standing.
  
  I'm in a quite similar legal situation, being sued by a B&B as we speak. Their T&Cs say you have to pay 100% of the week's stay, whatever happens, and we felt we had to cancel... In a few months we'll know if such terms are legal or not; I'm not familiar with the relevant laws. It's going to cost on translations though, through the European Small Claims Procedure.
  
  So it's time for some choice reviews on multiple review sites in multiple languages, I guess. I don't think management will have much reply as the case is a matter of public record.
  
  [We never went to the B&B as they so impressively rude and difficult the day beforehand about getting the access key, over 10+ emails, so much so that we booked an alternative hotel on the morning itself: We were convinced they had double-booked (accidentally?) and were just stretching time to see if either wouldn't show up; it was a festive period and all good/convenient places were fully booked.]
  
  I guess there's still enough pensioners that don't use the internet that you can still fill a hotel/B&B for another decade or so, however terrible reviews are. For a more hip and hype-dependent venture like a schmancy restaurant (I'm thinking of Ramsay's unhappy host http://uproxx.com/tv/2013/05/amys-baking-company-began-its-grand-re-opening-week-tonight/ Amy's Bakery Comp here), I think it's a bit doomed.
  
  5 2 Reply
  1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 19:07 GMT JLV
    
    Re: Legal?
    
    >Their T&Cs say you have to pay 100% of the week's stay
    
    There are plenty of valid reasons why hotels have no-show policies that include billing you if you've caused them to lose business by reserving and then not showing up.
    
    I am NOT saying that you were not justified in giving those folks the boot. And a full week's stay seems a bit over the top too. I am saying that the facts need verification in your case, not just a blanket dismissal that such terms are contractually null and void in general.
    
    I would hate to lose the convenience of guaranteed reservations because honest business owners could not enforce reasonable terms.
    
    p.s. Why do I anticipate an impending name change for the Broadway Hotel? Not necessarily a change of management scumbags mind you, but a name change.
    
    2 0 Reply
3. Wednesday 19th November 2014 14:29 GMT Infernoz
  
  Re: Legal?
  
  No unlawful i.e. a null and void contract, because there are strict requirements for a contact to be lawful, and small print is a definite no no!
  
  0 0 Reply
4. Wednesday 19th November 2014 23:52 GMT Alan Brown
  
  Re: Legal?
  
  It's illegal anyway - unfair clauses in consumer contracts, etc.
  
  I see the local Trading Standards office has weighed in on it.
  
  I'd have loved to have been a fly on the wall for that conversation - and the one from Visa threatening to revoke their merchant account for making bogus charges (Visa and Mastercard both stomp bloody hard on merchants who try this sort of shit)
  
  1 0 Reply
  1. Thursday 20th November 2014 00:19 GMT Tapeador
    
    @ Alan Brown Re: Legal?
    
    Quite right. I'd be really interested to know actually what Visa's (or their merchant services provider, or whoever's) Ts & Cs say about use of merchant accounts for this kind of thing, some clause about "disreputable use" or so which just allows the provider discretion to say "this is crazy shit, we are pulling the plug dude".
    
    I'd also be interested to know what's the procedure for reporting this behaviour to the merchant services provider- is it just something that Visa or Mastercard do after they approve a chargeback (I don't think Visa or Mastercard are actually the MSP, that's going to be more like an org like RBOS or so).
    
    1 0 Reply
  2. Thursday 20th November 2014 11:00 GMT Mark 65
    
    Re: Legal?
    
    That's really why you need a one-time number linked to your credit card. It stops secondary charges being placed after the fact like this and it also prevents arsehole insurance companies from placing recurring annual charges on your card when you only signed up for one year's insurance and wasn't forewarned of their shady practises apart from in the finest print of the 30+ page disclosure statement sent after the first deduction was made.
    
    2 0 Reply
    1. Thursday 20th November 2014 23:38 GMT Ed_UK
      
      Re: Legal?
      
      Yes, yes, YES!
      
      "also prevents arsehole insurance companies from placing recurring annual charges on your card when you only signed up for one year's insurance "
      
      Just stay away from dishonest weasels like Budget Insurance. They'll promise not to try any of that auto-renewal crap again, don't worry, until eleven months later. Then you get the letter saying they're helping themselves to your money, so you write, email and 'phone them to say don't bloody dare. They acknowledge your request and THEN try to steal your money. With luck, your credit/debit card will have been re-issued by then, with a new number, thwarting them. Then, they'll be after you for an admin fee for messing them around. Avoid Budget!
      
      0 0 Reply
5. Thursday 20th November 2014 13:24 GMT No, I will not fix your computer
  
  Re: Legal?
  
  Contract law is simple(ish) - an unfair contract is not legal.
  
  Obviously, interpreting it as fair or unfair is a different matter, but taking away or penalising the right to complain seems to contravene basic consumer protection.
  
  0 1 Reply
6. Thursday 20th November 2014 18:32 GMT chris lively
  
  Re: Legal?
  
  You don't pay for your cell phone do you? Hidden crap like that all over the place.
  
  0 0 Reply
Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:06 GMT arctic_haze

Absolutely outrageous

I wonder if the clause would be enforceable if you booked with booking.com or similar company. After all you did not have the clause in your booking.com reservation so you may argue it was imposed on you after you chose the hotel (an most probably payed). Booking com encourages you to rate the hotel after you stay there and nowhere says you are financially liable for negative reviews.

Generally a clause saying you owe money to hotel you stayed in for things you did afterward is dubious and this is an understatement. Why not add another that if you marry within 10 years after the stay, you owe the hotel your first born son.

10 1 Reply
1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 14:12 GMT Nick Ryan
  
  Re: Absolutely outrageous
  
  You can put whatever you want into a contract (T's and C's) however there is a huge difference between a clause being listed and it being enforceable. The contract laws are surprisingly recognicient of the fact that most people won't understand or have the inclination to read small print on every occasion therefore unfair clauses are pretty easy to invalidate.
  
  However this doesn't stop the scumbags trying it on with their next victim who might not complain, or complain loudly enough.
  
  6 0 Reply
  1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 14:54 GMT Don Dumb
    
    Re: Absolutely outrageous
    
    @Nick Ryan - "The contract laws are surprisingly recognicient of the fact that most people won't understand or have the inclination to read small print on every occasion therefore unfair clauses are pretty easy to invalidate."
    
    There's a few principles in UK (part of which is EU) contract law which protect the common man from bad contracts. These seem to be the most relevant to this story:
    
    1: - Capacity - Anyone with competence may enter into a contract which is enforceable by law. This precludes minors (under 18), people with mental disorders and people who are incapacitated through alcohol/drugs. - This is the main protection, in that it protects those who can't understand contracts or clauses in them into being legally bound by them. The principle covers being incapacitated or a minor but it also enshrines the principle that the average person can't be expected to understand a complex legal document and therefore consumer contracts can't throw in clauses which the layman would not expect (like charges for bad reviews) or conditions which a court decides are unfair, regardless of whether they have been signed up to. A business signing up to a contract would not have the same protections, as they are expected to understand T&Cs.
    
    2: - Legality of Object - A contract is considered 'illegal' if the consideration or object (i.e. the item that's being purchased) either contravenes the provision of Statute or Common Law or is contrary to Public Policy. - So many businesses seem to try and 'forget' that they can't put a clause in their contracts which is illegal (i.e. a no refunds policy) or which commit to an illegal act (this is why all those who signed away their first borns in a Wifi login did not actually do that).
    
    3: - Mistake - A genuine error, unintentional deceit or misunderstanding might count as Mistake and the contract might become invalid, or voidable by one or more of the contracting parties. The legal concept of Mistake is complex. - But in this case the fact that they thought they were agreeing to stay in a hotel for a night and not signing a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA - which no one would expect to be signing) should count as a genuine misunderstanding.
    
    If the hotel wanted to prevent bad reviews it could get the customer to sign a NDA, however that would be a separate document (so as to make the fact that they are agreeing to an NDA not a room rate clear) but they would also still need to make sure the hotel isn't making the customer sign the NDA under under duress or undue influence (like saying "sign this NDA or we will make sure no hotels in the town give you a room"), which would also invalidate a contract.
    
    8 0 Reply
Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:11 GMT Ian Entwistle

Ranked #858 of 894 , you gotta wonder what the 36 that are considered worse are like then......

29 0 Reply
1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 13:22 GMT Kerry Hoskin
  
  that's what I thought! Read the lowest ranked one if you want a laugh
  
  2 0 Reply
2. Wednesday 19th November 2014 17:42 GMT Andrew Norton
  
  well, I did an event (Sci fi con) in the Imperial hotel in 2000 (in fact, 14 years ago this coming weekend)
  
  Not only were hte hotel rooms badly cleaned, their facility rooms were not set up - they hadn't bothered. they 'lost' some of our event reservations (so Dave [Vader] Prowse had to get a room at the hotel next door), and to cap it off, the hotel staff started stealing from the [locked] dealers room overnight.
  
  We even changed the A1 standee sign on an easle at the front door to say 'welcome to the Imperial Hotel, prepare to be robbed'.
  
  Oh and my old mate Mike Sheard (RIP mate) said 'did the staff all go to Grange Hill?' before turning to Dave and saying 'you should choke the Manager, he makes me look like a competent admiral'.
  
  No wonder it stopped being used for party conferences. (and I was doubly irritated at having to stay up the full 72 hours of the event, having JUST flown back from two weeks of 20 hour shifts filming BattleBots in Vegas for Comedy Central - just meaning driving to Blackpool from Gatwick stopping home in Liverpool just long enough to swap suitcases)
  
  2 0 Reply
  1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 20:52 GMT IglooDude
    
    Have an upvote, purely for the enjoyment you provided me in the form of being able to watch BattleBots.
    
    1 0 Reply
    1. Sunday 23rd November 2014 17:14 GMT Andrew Norton
      
      Ta, did a 15th anniversary panel with some of the builders (including Grant Imhara) back at the end of August, and it brought back a lot of memories.
      
      There should be a writeup of it at Servo, and a video on Youtube soon.
      
      0 0 Reply
Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:23 GMT Steve Davies 3

Striesand effect in 3...2...1....0

Guess what Mr Hotel Owner, you business may well suffer because of this.

I wonder what the 'Hotel Inspector' would make of this?

13 0 Reply
1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:29 GMT Hazmoid
  
  Re: Striesand effect in 3...2...1....0
  
  My thoughts exactly. Trying to enforce good reviews is just going to end badly, unless you are willing to work with the client to ensure that any issues are resolved to both party's satisfaction. At the end of the day, bad reviews will cost because most people want a worry free/ enjoyable holiday/stay and anyone that takes the time to charge for bad reviews is obviously only worried about the bottom line and not about their customer service.
  
  3 0 Reply
2. Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:47 GMT dan1980
  
  Re: Striesand effect in 3...2...1....0
  
  Absolutely - Broadway Hotel, meet Barbra.
  
  1 0 Reply
3. Wednesday 19th November 2014 09:04 GMT Gotno iShit Wantno iShit
  
  Re: Striesand effect in 3...2...1....0
  
  I wonder what the 'Hotel Inspector' would make of this?
  
  A shit TV program most likely.
  
  44 0 Reply
4. Wednesday 19th November 2014 11:58 GMT Rol
  
  Re: Striesand effect in 3...2...1....0
  
  This hotel will most probably continue unflinchingly.
  
  Why?
  
  Well a certain element that frequent Blackpool begin by booking into an hotel, but seem to prefer sleeping in the gutter, A&E or a police cell towards the end of the night.
  
  Those that do make it back to their room are seemingly oblivious to its orientation and manage to empty all orifices very effectively in the bed provided, before clambering toward the toilet for a good sleep.
  
  These discerning customers are looking for the cheapest shit hole available and most likely lack the attention span to read any review that doesn't mention topless, lap dancing or happy hour.
  
  All of which is quite sad, as Blackpool is a lot more than just unfettered hedonism.
  
  Oh and while we're in Blackpool. "What does a Blackpool donkey get for lunch?"
  
  "Half an hour, the same as everyone else"
  
  Yes, yes, I'll move along.
  
  16 1 Reply
Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:27 GMT Lush At The Bar

Sounds like a business plan

1. Set up a hotel / B'n'B

2. Charge low prices

3. Have tucked away clause stating negative feedback is chargeable at x2.5 the room rate

4. Never re-invest in the property or facilities

5. Get negative feedback (the cheap room is now suddenly £136)

6. Profit

The chap on the news said he tried the tactic of saying to the owners that he wanted his money back or he would leave another negative review. The owners replied by stating they would charge another £100 to the credit card if he did. He should have transferred and cancelled that card and then really gone for it!

There is the flip side of customers using the threat of leaving negative feedback unless they get a discount, so I must admit, this practice from both sides is a new one to me.

5 0 Reply
1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:55 GMT Sir Runcible Spoon
  
  Re: Sounds like a business plan
  
  Assuming (for a second) that the penalty is enforceable, does it say 'per bad review' ? If not then you could also report them to the Police for fraud/theft/whatever :)
  
  4 0 Reply
  1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 10:54 GMT Sir Runcible Spoon
    
    Re: Sounds like a business plan
    
    I read on another site that the clause did, in fact, state 'per review' - and it was against the organiser - so if you organised a pensioners outing for 10 to Blackpool and two of them posted a negative review, the organiser would be charged £200.
    
    There's no way this is legal.
    
    4 0 Reply
Wednesday 19th November 2014 08:33 GMT stu 4

Blackpool

Frankly, to anyone who's ever had the misfortune of having stayed in Blackpool, this can come as no surprise.... the place is full of utter shit holes (in the crap hole which is Blackpool itself).

I imagine it will make no difference to their business - 200 odd reviews on trip advisor already says it's a shit hole, but that'll make no difference to the bus loads of poor old dears that get shipped in daily thanks to the undoubted kickbacks they give to the tour operators.

I'd love to see people like these owners taken down a peg or two though.

22 3 Reply
1. Wednesday 19th November 2014 09:57 GMT DrXym
  
  Re: Blackpool
  
  I doubt it's so much "poor old dears" as "drunken fighty scumbags". Even so, Blackpool town council should be enforcing standards in hotels to protect / improve its reputation as a destination. If a hotel can't or won't improve, close it down.
  
  7 0 Reply
2. Thursday 20th November 2014 10:11 GMT hoola
  
  Re: Blackpool
  
  And there are regular reports of small businesses just like this one being crucified by reviews on Tripdvisor to the point that the risk going out of business.
  
  It is far too easy to post malicious reviews on these sorts of sites that are then taken as gospel. The business impacted often has no recourse to get the review(s) removed. Yes, some may be warranted but given the current fad for posting malicous content on social media and other sites, often anonymously, the likelihood is that much is just that, malicious.
  
  Too many people appear to absolve themselves of any responsibility when they post on these types of websites. As other comments have eluded to, go to a cheap hotel and get what you pay for but don't then give it a bad review because it was not a 5* suite. Sure, if there are cockroaches running around and the place is genuinely filthy then it is valid.
  
  0 1 Reply
  1. Thursday 20th November 2014 22:05 GMT Robin
    
    Re: Blackpool
    
    "And there are regular reports of small businesses just like this one being crucified by reviews on Tripdvisor to the point that the risk going out of business."
    
    Sure, there'll always be people who complain. But reading how management deal with negative comments is a good indicator of the quality of service you're likely to receive.
    
    0 0 Reply
3. Friday 21st November 2014 18:53 GMT Sarah Balfour
  
  Re: Blackpool
  
  One word: - Rebellion. Shame it's making a bitter irony of the core ideals for which punk once stood these days. When I first learnt of its existence my immediate reaction was "Who the fuck thought that BLACKPOOL would be an ideal location for a festival - punk or otherwise…?!"
  
  There are very few places which vie with Blackpool for the title of Shitesville-on-Sea, but Wrexham and Rhyl are worse - even Llandudno is going the same way. I had the misfortune to stay in a B&B im Rhyl a few years ago, and I had a peridot and amethyst pendant half-inched from my room whilst I was in the shower (the bathrooms were down the landing, none of the rooms were en-suite). It had no value, other than sentimental (it was my nan's) - but that's hardly the point. The cleaner insisted I was mistaken, and I'd not left it in my room, but in the bathroom and one of the other guests had taken it, and she made a great show of going round knocking on doors but, whilst she was doing this, I'd clocked the position of the CCTV camera, the perfect location for staff to see all rooms at once - and keycards make theft feckloads easier; pile of blanks - oh, look, Room 8's gone for a shower, program a card, go to room take what you like, chuck card.
  
  I didn't bother reporting it because I'd been robbed twice prior to that; once from a room in a homeless hostel (the landlord refused to fix the door, or move me) and the second time I was mugged. In both instances, *I* was charged with falsifying a crime and wasting plod time - why…? I'm autistic and was very vague on details because my brain isn't wired like that and, I've found that, to many (NHS, plod, social services…) autistic = attention-seeking liar. I've been accused of faking crime, feigning illness - I HATE cop shops and A&Es - they TERRIFY me; I've been confined to bed for over 3 YEARS because I refuse to deal with the NHS, I simply don't trust it anymore. To be perfectly honest, I don't get humanity - I'm convinced I can't be human because I can't relate to anyone else. I won't regale you with the time GMP decided to kick me swede in at the royal infirmary in Manchester (I think it's a tale I've told at least once before, anyway). I have now decided I'd have to be dead before darkening the doors of either again!
  
  1 0 Reply