Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

To expect wedding guests to book a room at the hotel we've booked for exclusive use not the hotel down the road

423 replies

maggiethemagpie · 25/02/2016 19:04

So we're getting married.... we have booked an exclusive use hotel which means we will be charged for all rooms that are not filled. The wedding is on a Sunday so quite a few guests are going home on the Sunday night and not staying over. That I don't have a problem with. But one couple have booked two nights in the sister hotel to our hotel (so similar prices) as they could not book a room on the Saturday (as it is being used for another wedding). Despite knowing we will have to pay for all the rooms in 'our' hotel they are refusing to move hotels as they don't want the inconvenience.

I probably am BU as I know it was our choice to take the risk of an exclusive, and they can stay wherever they want, but as we will likely not fill more than half of the rooms we are facing a massive bill now (like 1.5k) and it just seems a bit unfair if they're staying in the sister hotel down the road just because they can't /don't want to move on the morning of the wedding.

Really wish I had not booked an exclusive venue now, especially on a Sunday night.

OP posts:
LaurieMarlow · 25/02/2016 19:33

This has to be a reverse, right?Confused

expatinscotland · 25/02/2016 19:34

YABU and YABVU is this is another fucking reverse.

icanteven · 25/02/2016 19:34

When we got married, we booked our venue exclusively (there was no choice with that venue) and paid for all our guests' accommodation. Small wedding, so only maybe 18 rooms.

But yeah - if you're dictating where they stay, then you're paying, IMO.

TestingTestingWonTooFree · 25/02/2016 19:34

Yabu. Please say you haven't badgered them about it? Even if you could sort out the check out/check in times, it's too late to offer it now, they'll feel harassed.

TypicallyEnglishMustard · 25/02/2016 19:37

Why on earth did you book an "exclusive" use of a hotel? I've never heard of this before. Is it so other members of the public aren't around your wedding reception?

I'm afraid YABU. Like you said, really, people can stay where they like. FWIW, I'm getting married next year, and the lodge we've booked includes rooms for up to 24 people to stay in overnight for two nights. We were asked if we wanted to recoup the costs of the rooms from our guests who are travelling from abroad/across country, to help with our small budget. Our response was Hmm because we'd rather help our friends to be able to be there for our day. Travelling for weddings is v expensive. I'd feel kind of bad if I were to ask them to travel and then tell them where to pay to stay, on the other hand.

Wombatinabathhat · 25/02/2016 19:43

cornish a reverse is where someone post a thread giving a point of view (i.e. pretending to be the bride in this case asking if the guest is unreasonable) but is actually the guest wondering if the bride is being unreasonable

OP yabvvu. It's bad enough that guests should have to spend money to stay over at your wedding, but you also want to dictate that they stay someone one night, then check out and stay where you want the second night. Hmm

Wombatinabathhat · 25/02/2016 19:44

*somewhere

LeaLeander · 25/02/2016 19:45

If you're paying, for their accommodations, OP, you can dictate the venue. If you expect them to shell out, where they stay is up to them.

If you'll be stuck with the tab anyway maybe you can offer guests a discounted rate - i.e. you pay half of their room cost. That might lure some and at least you'd recoup a bit. But in future best not to spend other people's money for them.

Original poster
maggiethemagpie · 25/02/2016 19:48

OP back here. OK. I thought I was being U. No need to jump down my throat about it though.

It was actually the hotel itself who suggested we have people stay at their sister hotel on the saturday and then transfer to the hotel where the wedding is on the sunday. So I think there would be a bit of flexibility around check in/out times (and the hotels are so near they're practically next door to each other like one street apart).

We've had some other guests book at different hotels due to cost and I don't see that as an issue at all so I'm not dictating to my guests where they should stay. Just this one seemed a bit ironic that the hotel is effectively being paid twice for the same guests once at the sister hotel and then again at the main venue by us for their unused room.

OK i won't hassle them. In retrospect I should not have booked exclusive it's been no end of hassle. Hopefully there won't be a 'next time'!

OP posts:
Original poster
maggiethemagpie · 25/02/2016 19:50

Some posters on here are saying it's bad that people are paying to attend my wedding in the first place..

Eh?

Does that mean that if anyone gets married, and it's not in the guests home town, they should pay for their travel/accomodation as well as the food/drink/wedding itself?

Fair enough to say I should not dictate where they stay and I can agree on that, but to say it's bad enough that they're paying to come anyway implies that I should be paying all their costs as they're doing me a favour by coming.

Well if it's that much of a favour they don't need to attend at all!

OP posts:
BabyGanoush · 25/02/2016 19:51

I think the hotel advised you badly.

They tricked you into booking exlusive completely at your risk and expense when they KNOW on a Sunday it is all unlikely to be booked. Especially with a sister hotel down the road.

Can you re-negotiate with them? They have taken you for a ride.

Floggingmolly · 25/02/2016 19:52

Was there something in it for you, booking the entire hotel for exclusive use, op? Confused Unless you were going to actually finance it for your guests, it's incredibly controlling to tell people which hotel to book.
Serves you good and proper if you're stuck with the bill, to be honest...

Original poster
maggiethemagpie · 25/02/2016 19:53

I don't think so at this late stage Baby I signed a contract ages ago. Ah well at least we may save a bit on evening buffet as loads of people are buggering off early.

I really thought more people would stay over and take the monday off

OP posts:
IoraRua · 25/02/2016 19:55

Yabvu. But you know that already. As a guest I certainly wouldnt want the hassle of swapping from one hotel to another.

Original poster
maggiethemagpie · 25/02/2016 19:55

Flogging, the hotel is tiny, so it is only available for exclusive use hire for weddings.

It was very much positioned by the venue as something where we could recharge rooms back to our guests, obviously they said that to make the cost appear more palatable.

We havent told people which hotel to book but simply said it would be great if people could stay over. If you read the whole thread you'll see I said some guests could not stay there due to cost and I was fine with that.

OP posts:
namechange7711 · 25/02/2016 19:55

If you're going to have to pay for the empty rooms anyway, how about offering them for free to your guests...or at a very,very discounted rate to encourage people to at least make use of them? It seems a shame to have lots of empty rooms.

PurpleDaisies · 25/02/2016 19:55

I really thought more people would stay over and take the monday off.

I think that was a mistake. That's the problem with weddings not on a Saturday. It's absolutely fine to choose a different day but it's not fair to assume people will take time off work to come.

MNHQ
PresidentOliviaMumsnet · 25/02/2016 19:55

Disclaimer: Haven't readily RTFT Blush but one thing I would say is that we stayed at the hotel that the B&G stayed in once
It rather ruined the magic of an utterly beautiful day the day before, having seen both B&G in all their glory on the day - she had a magnificent dress - it was a big "do" and then to see her in M&S jeans at brekkie the next morning and him in his shorts and flips flops made the memory of all the sparkle the day before fade rather.
Also meant there was an ELONGATED period of chitchat and small talk with people you sort of knew you weren't going to see much of again
DH and I decided it's best to stay away from the wedding party after that.
Maybe these guests felt like we do (i.e. nothing personal, just a preference)

APlaceOnTheCouch · 25/02/2016 19:55

I agree with BabyGanoush I'd go back to the hotel and renegotiate because they have advised you badly, particularly in relation to guests changing between hotels. I understand what you mean about them effectively being paid twice and since it was highly likely that would happen, they shouldn't have advised you to put guests in the sister hotel for the Sat (although otoh where would the guests stay on the Sat?!}

LeaLeander · 25/02/2016 19:56

If I were going away for two days no way would I want to get up, pack my things, move to another hotel, unpack and rearrange my clothing and cosmetics in a new room, etc. before showering and dressing for the wedding,. etc. - I cannot believe anyone thought that would be a reasonable thing to ask guests to do, in the first place!

They're not "extras" in a movie cast who can be shuffled around for the convenience of the bride and groom, and whose only big moment is to serve as spectators at the ceremony and reception. When people go out of town for an event like this, they like to turn it into a mini-vacation for themselves too, and it's hardly relaxing to have to spring out of bed and suck up a couple of hours packing, traveling to other hotel, waiting to register, getting situated in room, etc. when one could by lying in, or having a leisurely brunch, or walking around the village, or taking a long bath, or whatever. Using up people's free time for something that in no way, shape or form is of benefit to them, is even worse than using up their money.

IoraRua · 25/02/2016 19:58

And it's ridiculous to expect a lot of guests will want to sacrifice a days leave on a wedding - many would like that for a personal holiday!
Ah well. You live and learn op.

icelollycraving · 25/02/2016 19:58

Would it not have been better to consider a subsidised rate so you pay for 25% or something towards the room rate? That way,more people might stay & you aren't paying for empty rooms.
Yabu about the friend but you realise that.

Northernlurker · 25/02/2016 20:00

I think the mistake you've made is getting married on a Sunday. Why did you do that btw?

Because it's cheaper? Well - this is the result.

unimaginativename13 · 25/02/2016 20:00

You should have subsidised the rooms then off you you wanted people to stay!

Also getting married on a Sunday probably didn't help your master plan!

Sunshine87 · 25/02/2016 20:01

Its fair enough to offer the choice that the venue you have has the facilities for accomdation but people should have the opportunity to stay where they want at the budget they want..you should of determined if people were wanting the use of the rooms or not prior to making that commiting to the venue that you would require the use of the room.