Think twice before staying alone in a Travelodge

I stayed in one in Peterborough once for a work trip.

Worst hotel I ever stayed in. In a dodgy area, street lights all out so pitch black. Had to use a buzzer to get in as they lock the entrance door for "safety".

When checking in, they told me they only had one key for my room, so to make sure not to lose it (made me feel uneasy - was the other one simply lost?!)

No chain for the door once inside. Had to put a chair under the handle. Window was open on arriving, and it was a ground floor room where someone could easily climb in if they so wished. This was promptly shut after I checked the room and bathroom.

Restless sleep. Couldn't wait to leave the place, then refused to stay there again for work visits.

What gets to me is that she is a woman.

Room security is of course of concern to all hotel guests but surely we all know that as women we are at bigger risk of sexual predators.

That she simply does not care is a massive issue. And suggests that she never actually stays in her shitty hotels.

The Travelodge CEO met with MPs on Monday but failed to turn up to a follow-up meeting yesterday.

You'd think they'd be doing everything possible to show they're really taking this seriously now, but apparently not.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgkg85k245o

They should have changed the policy at the time/before the court case if they wanted to be taken seriously. Changing it now just shows the contempt they hold women in. This does not change anything and I will not be using travellodge again!

Paestum is wonderful.

I really hope you manage to go.

exactly - @Londonnight posted the response she got from the chief exec (post at 08/03/2026 06:41) and at that point they were only "carrying out a review of our room security procedures." So any of said changes have only been made in the last few days.

Which supports the 'immediately after becoming aware of quite how badly we fucked up, four years afterwards,' rather than 'immediately after becoming aware of the incident.'

Premier Inn also have a policy of not putting lone female travellers, or female travellers with children, on ground floors, near stairwells, or at either end of the corridor.

I stayed in one with DC who is 15 so had to be booked on as an adult. When we arrived and they realised that DC was actually still a child, they told me that they needed to change my allocated room (ground floor, first room on the corridor) to a different one and explicitly said that it was due to their safety policy. Room key was also given to me face down and the room number was not said out loud.

I also stayed in one with DH and we arrived too late for the restaurant so ordered UberEats. DH went down to collect it from outside the hotel and, as he came across the lobby to head back to the lift, was actively challenged by staff who asked to see his key card. He didn't have it because I was in the room so they rang the room to check he was known to me. 10/10 for safety but my chips did get cold.

I was disgusted when I saw this today.

As has already been said, its only when there was enough of us emailing and protesting about their lack of action that they actually did anything!

Doesnt make any difference to me, I wouldnt give them my money now with a gun to my head, which could well happen given their utterly shit security.

Exactly. It’s only ever the bottom line of profit n loss that matters to companies.

Yeah the attack happened in December 2022 and it’s only now they are changing things? That’s insulting to the victim.
No reply from my MP yet

Fixed it for them..
" We changed our policy immediately upon discovering that it was going to affect our bottom line through reputational damage and reduced bookings once everyone realised we weren't fussed about keeping them safe"

Indeed - the article says Travelodge claim they made "immediate changes". The incident was almost FOUR years ago!

It's disgraceful that given it's been over three years since the attack and Travelodge are only just taking action. I'm sure nothing would have changed without the court case publicity and the two MPs not letting it go.

I've been thinking about the victim too, having this hanging over her for over three years. Not sure what the right word is, but I hope she can feel some sort of 'justice' is finally being served and knows so many people are angry about this.

I mean a day late and a dollar short.

They still don't get it do they? He could have killed her. And the most worrying aspect it they just don't seem to have considered this at all.

It all seems like an arse covering exercise now. I stand by my personal boycott.

I wouldn't mind betting the only thing that pushed them to take this seriously was lost bookings. Absolutely appalling that it's apparently taken them this long to act.

I’ve also emailed my MP. Bit of a useless twat who is never seen near the constituency (no not Nigel) but let’s see what happens.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2026/mar/09/consumer-champions-travelodge-turned-away-vulnerable-women-late-at-night
unsure how to add a link, but Travelodge article today on The Guardian. Why is it that companies are unable to explain their actions in a way that makes sense?

Not here but I was on holiday last year and the hotel muddled the bookings. They gave me a key to an already occupied room and then when I went down to tell them the person on reception came with me to another room which was also occupied! I put bags in front of my door that night.

I think women ARE alert to the dangers. One thing we shouldn't have to be alert to are the dangers of having a hotel give out extra keys to your room to rapists.

And on This Morning an MP talked about it at length. This will help alert people to the dangers of being alone in a hotel.
I have always thought the long, empty corridors are potentially dangerous too, and they should all have CCTV.

On BBC news now. Glad it has gained traction.

TBH I think it's a red herring. If one person books a room nobody should be given a key, no matter how well they know the person
Oh, I know, I don't disagree. I meant I find that exceedingly thin as a justification, not that other justifications are fine.