Motel guest charged $50 for writing 'defamatory' online review and given 24 hours to remove it
A motel on the New South Wales South Coast has charged a guest $50 for writing what it described as a "defamatory" review.
Key points:
- A NSW motel has demanded a guest take down a middling review she left on a booking website
- The guest had an additional $50 billed to her credit card, along with a note on her invoice demanding the review be taken down
The Accommodations Association of Australia says motels can take action against unfair or misleading reviews, but says it's not "best practice"
Sharon Graham spent two nights at the Mollymook Ocean View Motel last week, and gave the motel a score of six out of 10 on the website Booking.com.
Ms Graham said the location was good but a bit noisy, and that she was unsure whether the motel offered daily room service.
"I thought it was quite a fair review," Ms Graham said.
"It was how I felt about my stay there, and isn't that what a review is about?"
'Not even close to average'
Ms Graham was shocked when, having checked out, she received a second invoice which listed a $50 credit card fee for leaving a "false review" online.
The motel said the $50 will be refunded when the review is taken down.
"Social media bookings false review will be refunded if removed within 24 hours," the invoice read.
"If not it will go towards legal proceedings."
Motel management claimed the review was misleading and harmed the business's public image.
"The score is not even close to the average rating," the motel said.
"If you wanted daily housekeeping, put the sign out.
"There is no daily housekeeping included in your rate, only weekly.
"You received a discount accepting no housekeeping of $10 to $25 per day.
"According to the Australian Competition Consumer Commission (ACCC) it should reflect your genuine experience and false reviews will be reported to the regulatory authorities.
"Remove this review as the comment is defamatory — that is, it will damage the business's reputation in the eyes of the public; these are false allegations."
'I don't want to crucify them'
Ms Graham said there was no mention of a discounted rate for no daily housekeeping when she made her booking and could not find a housekeeping sign in the room during her stay.
She said there was no reference to the housekeeping discount on the first invoice she received, but the second contained an itemised deduction of $10 that said "discount no daily housekeeping".
"The first invoice I received didn't have that on it and when I booked through Booking.com it didn't come up as that," Ms Graham said.
"It came up as a discount that the motel was running at the time — it said nothing about housekeeping."
Ms Graham said she had cancelled the credit card she used to make the booking and contacted Booking.com who agreed to refund the $50 charge.
Ms Graham said she was reluctant to come forward with her story as she did not want to turn people off returning to the bushfire-ravaged towns on the South Coast.
"I was reluctant to take this to the media," she said.
"Because I don't want to crucify these businesses."
'Damage bond' immediately refunded
Mollymook Ocean View Motel management, which has been contacted by the ABC for comment, told the Illawarra Mercury that the $50 was a damage charge because the review damaged their reputation.
"That money is a damage bond," the motel manager said.
"I can charge for damage to our motel, and for administration."
Management said the $50 was immediately refunded at the request of Booking.com.
They added that the room was booked at a discounted rate without housekeeping, but Ms Graham said she was not informed that this was the reason behind the discount.
'Far from best practice'
Accommodations Association of Australia (AAA) chief executive Dean Long said businesses had the right to challenge online reviews.
"The accommodation provider does have the right to take action against reviews they think are unfair or misleading," Mr Long said.
"Peer reviews are a critical avenue for consumers when making decisions."
But in this case Mr Long suggested management may have been better off reaching out to Ms Graham to resolve her concerns.
"This is far from best practice and it isn't the policy we recommend our members follow," he said.
"We make it very clear that the best practice example when someone has written an online review is to contact them and find out why that experience wasn't right."