Wedding hotel overbooked - could I have handled this better?

[Outdoor Girl]

OP, I would have avoided telling the bride or groom about the issue with the hotel because, in my mind, they have enough stress with the wedding and don't need more.  And for me, it wouldn't be a big deal to be walked since I could hang around for some after party stuff and leave when I wanted to go to sleep.

[SPuck]

In our case, I would have been very angry at the hotel, but also irritated at the guest, for two reasons: One, they declined the "afterparty" just to save money on their room. That is their right, so I'd really be more hurt than angry at that one. Second, though, they allowed the hotel to give a room which I had specifically blocked for our wedding party, to a stranger. I don't think that would be their right, since I had arranged to block the rooms.

I think being angry at someone for not attending an unplanned after party held after a wedding is baggage someone should not even consider giving to a guest. As for the hotel aspect, it depends on when the hotel asked. I know that in my brother's case the blocked rooms at his wedding became fair game for anyone after a certain date. Just because you block ten to twenty rooms does not mean all of them will be filled.

[kareng57]

I think a lot depends on what kind of wedding reception it was going to be. At the weddings in my family, we've tended to reserve a block of hotel rooms (even though we mostly live in town), and continue the party at the hotel after the reception. I did that for our wedding. Our reception was over at 11 PM, but we all stayed up and just hung out together until the wee hours of the morning.

Also, as a pp said.. usually when a block of rooms is reserved, they're close together. For ours, we had one whole wing (about 10 rooms) of a really small hotel. It was really nice, because everyone in that wing was part of our wedding party so we didn't have to worry about noise too much, or encountering strangers in the hallway.. actually we mostly left our hotel room doors open and just wandered from room to room.

In our case, I would have been very angry at the hotel, but also irritated at the guest, for two reasons: One, they declined the "afterparty" just to save money on their room. That is their right, so I'd really be more hurt than angry at that one. Second, though, they allowed the hotel to give a room which I had specifically blocked for our wedding party, to a stranger. I don't think that would be their right, since I had arranged to block the rooms.

I'm going against the grain here, I do think that you should have checked with the HC before agreeing to give up your room.

Would you therefore also be angry at a guest who was staying the reception hotel but did not attend the afterparty, simply because he/she wanted to go to bed?

[PastryGoddess]

Is it possible that by being walked, the OP's non-occupancy of the block room reduced or negated any block rate/discount previously offered to the groom or whoever booked the hotel?

ETA: OP, you did nothing wrong. A free room is a free room.

No being walked does not negate any discount especially if it is a courtesy block with no contract signed. 

However, for contracted clients, their occupancy level is directly tied whether or not they have to pay any penalties to the hotel.  So even 1 or 2 people being walked and not being counted can drop occupancy levels below an acceptable amount.

Not sure what the bolded means.  I negotiated a block of discounted rooms with a local Marriott for my wedding (normal rate $179 per night, for my guests $139) and while I didn't have to fulfill any guarantee or anything, I did have to sign a contract.

A courtesy block is much more restricted hence the reason there is no need to sign a contract.  Typically the date by which you need to have a certain number of rooms booked is further from the date of the event and you may not be able to block as many rooms as you would like. 

Because you signed a contract, the hotel felt much more secure and probably gave you better terms then they would have given a courtesy block with no contract. 

I don't want to derail the thread any further, but I be happy to chat with you via PM

[Twik]

Is it possible that by being walked, the OP's non-occupancy of the block room reduced or negated any block rate/discount previously offered to the groom or whoever booked the hotel?

ETA: OP, you did nothing wrong. A free room is a free room.

No being walked does not negate any discount especially if it is a courtesy block with no contract signed. 

However, for contracted clients, their occupancy level is directly tied whether or not they have to pay any penalties to the hotel.  So even 1 or 2 people being walked and not being counted can drop occupancy levels below an acceptable amount.

Not sure what the bolded means.

I presume it means "If the hotel tells you they want you to go elsewhere, they cannot then say that the discount doesn't apply because the party is one short."

[PastryGoddess]

Is it possible that by being walked, the OP's non-occupancy of the block room reduced or negated any block rate/discount previously offered to the groom or whoever booked the hotel?

ETA: OP, you did nothing wrong. A free room is a free room.

No being walked does not negate any discount especially if it is a courtesy block with no contract signed. 

However, for contracted clients, their occupancy level is directly tied whether or not they have to pay any penalties to the hotel.  So even 1 or 2 people being walked and not being counted can drop occupancy levels below an acceptable amount.

Not sure what the bolded means.

I presume it means "If the hotel tells you they want you to go elsewhere, they cannot then say that the discount doesn't apply because the party is one short."

Yes to this

[rigs32]

I HIGHLY doubt a non-block guest would be put in the now available room - the hotel would just shift the rooms in the block over one.  They are so rarely assigned ahead of time.

Also, if you as a bride got mad at me for wanting to save some money, I think that is an extremely SS way to view this.  Would you be angry with those who chose to stay at a cheaper hotel?

And since when does the after party run all night long?  I see that as a newer trend.  Maybe because couples are living together before getting married, but do they no longer want alone time on their wedding night?

[PastryGoddess]

I HIGHLY doubt a non-block guest would be put in the now available room - the hotel would just shift the rooms in the block over one.  They are so rarely assigned ahead of time.

Also, if you as a bride got mad at me for wanting to save some money, I think that is an extremely SS way to view this.  Would you be angry with those who chose to stay at a cheaper hotel?

And since when does the after party run all night long?  I see that as a newer trend.  Maybe because couples are living together before getting married, but do they no longer want alone time on their wedding night?

It depends on the hotel.  Often rooms are assigned to the block ahead of time.  However, if this hotel was so overbooked that they are calling people and asking them to switch hotels, they probably didn't care where they put people, as long as it was in an open room.  And that room may be in the middle of the wedding guests

[msulinski]

I think a lot depends on what kind of wedding reception it was going to be. At the weddings in my family, we've tended to reserve a block of hotel rooms (even though we mostly live in town), and continue the party at the hotel after the reception. I did that for our wedding. Our reception was over at 11 PM, but we all stayed up and just hung out together until the wee hours of the morning.

Also, as a pp said.. usually when a block of rooms is reserved, they're close together. For ours, we had one whole wing (about 10 rooms) of a really small hotel. It was really nice, because everyone in that wing was part of our wedding party so we didn't have to worry about noise too much, or encountering strangers in the hallway.. actually we mostly left our hotel room doors open and just wandered from room to room.

In our case, I would have been very angry at the hotel, but also irritated at the guest, for two reasons: One, they declined the "afterparty" just to save money on their room. That is their right, so I'd really be more hurt than angry at that one. Second, though, they allowed the hotel to give a room which I had specifically blocked for our wedding party, to a stranger. I don't think that would be their right, since I had arranged to block the rooms.

I'm going against the grain here, I do think that you should have checked with the HC before agreeing to give up your room.

Why couldn't the guests still attend the after-party and then proceed back to their room at the other hotel?

Also, I am not sure why you would be upset about having a stranger in a room near yours. You are staying in a hotel, not in your home. Running into strangers should be expected.

[amylouky]

I think a lot depends on what kind of wedding reception it was going to be. At the weddings in my family, we've tended to reserve a block of hotel rooms (even though we mostly live in town), and continue the party at the hotel after the reception. I did that for our wedding. Our reception was over at 11 PM, but we all stayed up and just hung out together until the wee hours of the morning.

Also, as a pp said.. usually when a block of rooms is reserved, they're close together. For ours, we had one whole wing (about 10 rooms) of a really small hotel. It was really nice, because everyone in that wing was part of our wedding party so we didn't have to worry about noise too much, or encountering strangers in the hallway.. actually we mostly left our hotel room doors open and just wandered from room to room.

In our case, I would have been very angry at the hotel, but also irritated at the guest, for two reasons: One, they declined the "afterparty" just to save money on their room. That is their right, so I'd really be more hurt than angry at that one. Second, though, they allowed the hotel to give a room which I had specifically blocked for our wedding party, to a stranger. I don't think that would be their right, since I had arranged to block the rooms.

I'm going against the grain here, I do think that you should have checked with the HC before agreeing to give up your room.

Would you therefore also be angry at a guest who was staying the reception hotel but did not attend the afterparty, simply because he/she wanted to go to bed?

No, I wouldn't.. and I wouldn't say anything if someone chose to stay at another hotel and not hang out afterward so that they could save money. I fully realize that's their right, and I also realize that it would be a bit SS of me  to get my feelings hurt, but I probably would. Just being honest.

[iridaceae]

I'm with those that say the hotel was in the wrong...but not the OP.

I don't blame the groom for being angry.  If I blocked rooms for guests, I'd expect that all my guests, who reserved the rooms within the time allotted, would be protected from being asked to move.  For the hotel to call several guests of the wedding and asking them to move seems like poor management.  It makes more sense to ask the "single" party rooms to move first.

Between thewedding and the conference there maynot have been any non group blocked rooms. And the conference rooms would have their own block.

[kudeebee]

The weddings we have attended where we reserved a room from the "blocK" or "special rate" have never had all of the rooms together.  They have been spread out throughout the hotel.  A few might be together, but never all of them.  Same with conferences that I have been to.

[kareng57]

The weddings we have attended where we reserved a room from the "blocK" or "special rate" have never had all of the rooms together.  They have been spread out throughout the hotel.  A few might be together, but never all of them.  Same with conferences that I have been to.

That's generally been my experience as well - a "block" indicates the special group-rate only, not proximity with the other event guests.  If this was a very small hotel it might have been different, but I don't think that it's typical.  Most large hotels have a particular setup per floor - perhaps the four corner-units are 2-bedroom suites and the eight other units are standard one-bedrooms.  If there are 12 guest-units for a particular block-event, it wouldn't make economic sense to give four of them the two-bedroom suites simply to keep them all on the same floor.

[sparksals]

This is a process called walking.  You should have contacted the bridal party.  The hotel should have never contacted anyone in the block without getting the Ok from your cousin.  In fact, most room blocks are protected from walking since there is obviously a reason they want to all be in the same hotel.  A quick call or chat from the groom or whomever, would have stopped it in its tracks and you would have been in the same hotel as the rest of the wedding guests and there would have been no stress.

I think the groom was so furious because you agreed to move and the hotel already made the other reservation for you and gave your room to someone else, so there was no way to get you back in the hotel at that point

Just like an invitation is not a summons, a room  block is not mandatory.  It is actually none of the groom's business where any of the guests stay.  We frequently don't stay at a block hotel.  We have our preferred hotel chain.   

I would be quite miffed if  the hotel contacted someone else other than MYSELF the paying customer.   No one has the right to make a decision where I stay or don't, but me. 

[sparksals]

The weddings we have attended where we reserved a room from the "blocK" or "special rate" have never had all of the rooms together.  They have been spread out throughout the hotel.  A few might be together, but never all of them.  Same with conferences that I have been to.

That's generally been my experience as well - a "block" indicates the special group-rate only, not proximity with the other event guests.  If this was a very small hotel it might have been different, but I don't think that it's typical.  Most large hotels have a particular setup per floor - perhaps the four corner-units are 2-bedroom suites and the eight other units are standard one-bedrooms.  If there are 12 guest-units for a particular block-event, it wouldn't make economic sense to give four of them the two-bedroom suites simply to keep them all on the same floor.

I totally agree.   I have never heard of a block to mean 'all on the same floor or wing'.  I don't know how a hotel can do that when people check in and out for differing amount of days. 

To add to this, if guests are also members of the hotel, they may be entitled to stay on different floors with access to the Executive Lounge or free bar for members.  I personally prefer staying in a room a bit away from everyone else.  Just because we are there for a wedding, doesn't mean we aren't entitled to privacy.    I would be a bit miffed to be put on a floor with everyone else.