TripAdvisor slaps warning on Thailand's 'Sea View Resort & Spa' review page

[Artisi]

11 hours ago, camble said:

The resort has raised it’s rates to make up for the lost revenue.

Normal, Thai marketing 101.....

[alyx]

6 hours ago, wensiensheng said:

I don’t understand how Trip advisor  can claim to be protecting its users by slapping a warning on this particular hotel. Surely the risk applies to all hotels in Thailand given that they are all entitled to file criminal  defamation charges.

to protect its clients Tripadvisor needs to warn them that any negative review of a Thai hotel could result in them going to jail. Slapping a warning on this hotel only is all about payback, nothing more, nothing less.

Surely you understand that the AYOR mention (At Your Own Risk) is there to warn about...a risk. It is not the case here, it is not about a risk but an actual fact: that particular hotel had one of its customer arrested. This hotel, not any other place: so it is normal that this applies to this hotel only it and not to the rest of Thailand. Now, if you are saying that TA should warn the people about that being a risk in Thailand...maybe but not their duty nor their responsibility. This site reports events... not probability

[alyx]

2 hours ago, Chopinbkk said:

Yes, Trip Adviser should give a general warning about Thailand, not only a single hotel.
A lawless / corrupt place under military rule, where the rule of law is wishful thinking.
Sure, this has only touched a few unlucky foreigners (well, we might look at the 'Hiltons' in this country - lol). However, a factual warning to all future tourists may not  be a bad idea ... 

I beg to disagree: Trip Advisor's role is to publish the comments of the guests based on their real experience, hopefully. TA is not here to warn travelers about possible legal issues....one of them raised by one hotel and unfortunately stains the hotel industry.

[mark131v]

Link containing all four reviews and the hotels statement from an earlier topic on this subject, the whole 'rampage' the complete 'smear campaign' aka storm in a teacup handbags at dawn...

 

The first one 'modern slavery' had already been removed by Trip Advisor and was only available when the Hotel released it in that statement

 

In case it hasn't been posted over the past 60 pages: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VZCwyULmkLpZ7y5nT5wsaX0mn8waPd4H/view

[alyx]

2 hours ago, darrendsd said:

I see this story has brought out the usual comments from the brain dead idiots that know nothing about the full story

 

A quote from the American who stayed there

 

after the American apologised for "repeatedly false and untrue statements... made to maliciously defame Sea View. These reviews were written out of anger and malice".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whatever the purpose...they remain comments and...you do not know what happened unless you witnessed the different events

[alyx]

2 hours ago, Nanaplaza666 said:

You are spot on , people should ban TripAdvisor instead of this resort . These days 100 people can write a good review of your hotel or restaurant but if 1 person goes on a rampage and even when proven wrong it seems like everybody only reads this persons review . This guy was a ???? and he was going on a rampage because didn't want to pay corkage fee , but every normal person knows this is kind of normal so he should just have paid and there would not be any problems . 

There are certainly more than 1 bad review on every hotel in the world. Some of them are lies or undeserved but they remain comments and the point of view of the poster. Unfortunately only one hotel took the decision to have one  of its guests arrested for a string of negative comments (justified or not)

[alyx]

1 hour ago, Tony Calderazzo said:

Hospitality venues have policies that guests need to comply with,  it is opportune prior to booking to check such policies or if in doubt to ask .

it seems that both parties went to extreme actions .

Social media and platforms such as Trip Advisor  are at times too freely abused by people lacking adequate knowledge ,

there are situations where establishments being at fault lack proper Customer care .

There is no need to splash a bad experience everywhere unless the intention is to damage the other party.

Any  such action causes a reaction that in this case is as excessive .

No need to bully each other and cause any disaffection between locals and farangs .

Fairness seems to be forgotten in this occasion . 

 .      

 

Really? trust me, when I have a bad experience I do advertise it as much as I do for positive experiences. I do not think either that is a case of foreigners against locals (where ever that could have taken place). Fairness would have been to talk to the guest and use the right to answer. You may not be aware of this but if I comment, the place can reply and...I am not allowed to answer back. So the system is more than fair

[Wake Up]

This is like a bad divorce or neighbor fight over a fence. Most hotels have a couple of “terrible” reviews and a bunch of “ everything was great” reviews. Throw those out and try to read the other reviews and you get a sense for the property. 
I don’t like the way the customer “angrily all out attack on the hotel” with words,  but the hotel putting him in jail went too far.  I am happy Travel Advisor posted the warning and applaud them for doing their job. The libel laws in Thailand are unbelievable if you come from western civilizations. Just like all the travel books warn you not to say anything about the monarc$$ in Thailand. Information I think international travelers need to know. 

[alyx]

1 hour ago, fceligoj said:

Hope Barnes has trouble traveling to Thailand again, if he ever does.  How can you write a draconian review about a hotel that charges one corkage.  Oh wait, the guy probably never ate or brought his own alcohol into a top shelf resort.  That is what it sounds like.  TripAdvisor should have stayed mute, or just notified all that a corkage fee would be charged if you brought your own alcohol into the establishment.  Barnes sounds like a real turd.

OMG but that has nothing to do with the details of the event but in what it resulted: the arrest of a guest following his comments. Why would you be happy if the guy had problems returning ( he has certainly been flagged by now anyway) when you do not know anything about the real events. One is free to write anything they like if they feel that way...it is the whole meaning of travel sites and our individual good sense to make a good judgment when it comes to going to one place rather than another

[alyx]

1 hour ago, Brollox said:

Yeah its amazing how people support a lie. I wonder now, if under Thai defamation law TripAdvisor executives themselves could be liable for arrest upon arriving in Thailand in the future? They are afterall now also defaming the business. Having had similar experiences with Trip Advisor I hope this malicious act backfires on them. They should say nothing or delist the hotel.

They are not defaming ...they are merely reporting the fact that one guest was arrested and threatened with jail sentence up to two years for comments he made. This is not allegedly...it is advertised by the hotel itself.

[mark131v]

This was the statement that was sent to Richard Barrow by the American fellow so you can get both sides of the story 

 

Edited November 12, 2020 by mark131v

[tonysilly]

Stupid Hotel and owner!!!!!

 

[Airalee]

1 hour ago, alyx said:

1) Have you ever been in a cell in Thailand or elsewhere?

2) How do you know how this person was made waiting ?

3) Jail in Thai: "COOK" for both the police station and the prison

as I said it is semantic: one is deprived of one's freedom 

That is all

 

So odd that someone would actually debate the meaning of “jail”.  
 

It’s almost like said poster assumes that the police provided him with a comfortable chair in the waiting room and served him hors-d’oeuvres.

[darrendsd]

12 minutes ago, mark131v said:

This was the statement that was sent to Richard Barrow by the American fellow so you can get both sides of the story 

 

 

But it's not both sides of the story - it's the Americans view of what happened - who is to say if he is or isn't telling all the truth?

[alyx]

Just now, Airalee said:

So odd that someone would actually debate the meaning of “jail”.  
 

It’s almost like said poster assumes that the police provided him with a comfortable chair in the waiting room and served him hors-d’oeuvres.

Thank you 

you are so right 

[mark131v]

3 minutes ago, darrendsd said:

 

But it's not both sides of the story - it's the Americans view of what happened - who is to say if he is or isn't telling all the truth?

 I already posted a link to all four of the reviews and the hotels statement but it's up to you to form an opinion

Edited November 12, 2020 by mark131v

[Redvic]

The yank was complete P***k the hotel went over the top for what they did. But hey i have been to koh chang many times would not dream of staying in this hotel it's a dump and way overpriced. 

[Robbie2618]

 I want to chime in and comment on a false view some have about posting on multiple review sites. It seems one point people are bringing up against him is he posted on several review sites. I'm going to tell you that's how its supposed to be and encouraged. In my promotional emails and other ads I always have links in the bottom to Google and other review sites. I want someone to post on as many sites as possible, of course I hope good reviews but a bad one creeps in now and then but no big deal. Someone who uses Trip Adviser might not use Yelp or go to Google, as a bussiness owner I want the word out, so why is it wrong if he does the same for a negative review?  The hotel would be happy as can be if someone posts on 5 different sites a good review, but somehow it's wrong to do the same with a negitive? 

 

 

I see some saying he didnt tell the truth in his reviews, I only saw one of his reviews that he posted and it didnt seem that bad so really cant comment on the others. But seeing the managment reaction I would tend to believe him over them, management sets the tone and workplace culture.

 

But anyways, the guy won. A few days in jail but his intent to hurt the hotel won out. They will loose custermers for years over this.

[kingstonkid]

12 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

The guy didnt write a honest review though , he wrote numerous false allegations because he got charged corkage on alcohol be bought into the hotel from outside .

   The American guy waged a campaign against the hotel because he got upset about not being allowed to bring in beer from 7/11 .

   Unfair on the hotel for Trip advisor to issue a warning , when the American guy wrote false reviews 

 I agree fully with you and understand what you are saying.  However, that being said precedence has been established where a Thai hotel did not like a review and won a decision in court.  Even if they had lost the decision that writer still had to spend time in jail.

 

I am quite sure that some time in the near future another hotel will try the same thing.

 

[alyx]

13 minutes ago, darrendsd said:

 

But it's not both sides of the story - it's the Americans view of what happened - who is to say if he is or isn't telling all the truth?

Exactly and the whole purpose of this circus is not to find the truth but debate on whether Trip Advisor is right to state the fact that one of the hotel's guest was arrested for commenting

[mark131v]

4 minutes ago, Robbie2618 said:

 I want to chime in and comment on a false view some have about posting on multiple review sites. It seems one point people are bringing up against him is he posted on several review sites. I'm going to tell you that's how its supposed to be and encouraged. In my promotional emails and other ads I always have links in the bottom to Google and other review sites. I want someone to post on as many sites as possible, of course I hope good reviews but a bad one creeps in now and then but no big deal. Someone who uses Trip Adviser might not use Yelp or go to Google, as a bussiness owner I want the word out, so why is it wrong if he does the same for a negative review?  The hotel would be happy as can be if someone posts on 5 different sites a good review, but somehow it's wrong to do the same with a negitive? 

 

 

I see some saying he didnt tell the truth in his reviews, I only saw one of his reviews that he posted and it didnt seem that bad so really cant comment on the others. But seeing the managment reaction I would tend to believe him over them, management sets the tone and workplace culture.

 

But anyways, the guy won. A few days in jail but his intent to hurt the hotel won out. They will loose custermers for years over this.

 

 

All of the reviews and the hotels statement are here:

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VZCwyULmkLpZ7y5nT5wsaX0mn8waPd4H/view

[Autonuaq]

if this is a fact then why does tripadvisor not remove the hotel? would be a more solution logic.

[phetphet]

7 minutes ago, kingstonkid said:

 I agree fully with you and understand what you are saying.  However, that being said precedence has been established where a Thai hotel did not like a review and won a decision in court.  Even if they had lost the decision that writer still had to spend time in jail.

 

I am quite sure that some time in the near future another hotel will try the same thing.

 

Yes, but if they do, they might also get the same treatment from TA, warning potential customers what might happen.

Any other hotels seeing what has now happened, might be likely to try and resolve a different way.

[talahtnut]

He can now write a review of the service in the Thai nick.

[Blumpie]

56 minutes ago, Redvic said:

The yank was complete P***k the hotel went over the top for what they did. But hey i have been to koh chang many times would not dream of staying in this hotel it's a dump and way overpriced. 

True.

And it doesn't matter if he was a tool.  And yes, to confirm, he was a complete tool.  You see lots of those pathetic reviews on trip advisor.  

However, one can easily see they are out to lunch.  

The problem is the hotel went ahead and had him charged.

This is on the news here, and several other news sources.  It's going viral!  And Thailand looks bad.  Real bad.  

[joecoolfrog]

13 hours ago, CorpusChristie said:

The guy didnt write a honest review though , he wrote numerous false allegations because he got charged corkage on alcohol be bought into the hotel from outside .

   The American guy waged a campaign against the hotel because he got upset about not being allowed to bring in beer from 7/11 .

   Unfair on the hotel for Trip advisor to issue a warning , when the American guy wrote false reviews 

I have to agree.

Thailands libel laws are archaic and draconian but that is not the fault of the hotel.

In general a lot of egotistical keyboard warriors do slander businesses in the knowledge that there is no comeback , perhaps now they will be more careful.

In this specific case the customer was clearly in the wrong , both during the initial incident and the aftermath , hope he has learned a lesson.

[renz]

trip advisor should do this more often as a lot more hotel and restaurant just swep customer complains under the rug

[Airalee]

4 minutes ago, joecoolfrog said:

Thailands libel laws are archaic and draconian but that is not the fault of the hotel.

That the hotel availed themselves of such an “archaic and draconian” law speaks volumes.

[CorpusChristie]

3 hours ago, mark131v said:

 

Blimey you are extremely pedantic aren't you, all that despite being shown umpteen times that you have been incorrect on many facets of this case!!!

 

Shall we meet in the middle?

 

Barnes was incarcerated and deprived of his freedom in a Thai cell for two nights and days on the word of the SeaView Hotel Koh Chang after they accused him of a crime, does that meet with your level of pedantry or not, just curious that's all

 

 

 

   He was incarcerated because he couldnt pay the bail money , he wasnt incarcerated because of what he posted .

  Had he paid the bail money, he wouldnt have spent any time behind bars 

[mark131v]

1 minute ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

   He was incarcerated because he couldnt pay the bail money , he wasnt incarcerated because of what he posted .

  Had he paid the bail money, he wouldnt have spent any time behind bars 

 

Ahh, so still not pedantic enough, never mind not going to play pigeon chess with you...