Complaint: 12179899
I am rejecting this response because: The response from the company owner seeks to distract from the point by making false and defamatory statements about the conduct of my group. We were nothing but polite to the bangtel representative and plumber. We accommodated their intrusion into our stay because we knew they had work to do. Plus, we were assured by the bangtel representative Noel that w would be properly compensated for the inconvenience. She expressed deep appreciation for our understanding and taking everything so well. Again, however, the primary issue remains: we were without any working shower for the first full 24 hours of our stay from Friday to Sunday. Midway through Saturday, one shower remained unfixable. So we had one shower for the entire group of 10. This is a basic hygiene and safety issue that was not resolved. Whether bangtel incurred expense to fix the issue is not relevant to the discussion here. We did not cause the problem, yet bangtel seems to want to make us responsible for it. We again request a refund for the first night where we had not a single working shower. Lastly, property owner's claim that there were four beds in the home are false. There were only three beds and one futon or set of stacked cushions in the master bedroom that was covered in a sheet to look like a bed. I know because I slept on it, and it was very painful. I woke up very sore and stiff.Again, despite these other inconveniences the real issue is the health and safety matter caused by the lack of working showers. Bangtel's proposed solution is neither acceptable nor fair. A credit for a future stay is not a fair solution because we are seeking reimbursement, not to spend more money in the future on bangtel, particularly considering their treatment of us. It is unfortunate that they seem to care more about not reimbursing us for the injury they caused than maintaining a positive brand.
Sincerely,
Leila [redacted]
Complaint: 12179899
I am rejecting this response because: The response from the company owner seeks to distract from the point by making false and defamatory statements about the conduct of my group. We were nothing but polite to the bangtel representative and plumber. We accommodated their intrusion into our stay because we knew they had work to do. Plus, we were assured by the bangtel representative Noel that w would be properly compensated for the inconvenience. She expressed deep appreciation for our understanding and taking everything so well. Again, however, the primary issue remains: we were without any working shower for the first full 24 hours of our stay from Friday to Sunday. Midway through Saturday, one shower remained unfixable. So we had one shower for the entire group of 10. This is a basic hygiene and safety issue that was not resolved. Whether bangtel incurred expense to fix the issue is not relevant to the discussion here. We did not cause the problem, yet bangtel seems to want to make us responsible for it. We again request a refund for the first night where we had not a single working shower. Lastly, property owner's claim that there were four beds in the home are false. There were only three beds and one futon or set of stacked cushions in the master bedroom that was covered in a sheet to look like a bed. I know because I slept on it, and it was very painful. I woke up very sore and stiff.Again, despite these other inconveniences the real issue is the health and safety matter caused by the lack of working showers. Bangtel's proposed solution is neither acceptable nor fair. A credit for a future stay is not a fair solution because we are seeking reimbursement, not to spend more money in the future on bangtel, particularly considering their treatment of us. It is unfortunate that they seem to care more about not reimbursing us for the injury they caused than maintaining a positive brand.
Sincerely,
Leila [redacted]