Take it from a menopausal woman that a small tabletop fan is a very necessary travel item.
Did you, y’know, ASK if you could lower the temp? And I thought you stayed in high-end places with all the perks?
You were arrogant and screwed up, accept it and pay the fine.
I agree with the hotel having a penalty for thermostat tampering (and a sign above the thermostat should state that)—but $250? That feels less like energy management and more like gouging. A fairer approach would be to base the fee on the average actual cost incurred: a modest bump in the electric bill, maybe 10–15 minutes of maintenance time to reset the controls, plus a small penalty to reflect the environmental impact of cranking the AC into penguin paradise mode.
Let’s say that totals $40–50 max. Tack on a $10 “climate penalty,” and now you’ve got a fine that reflects reality and sends a signal about sustainability.
Also, require that hotels donate the environmental penalty portion to green charities—like carbon offset programs. That way: the hotel is made whole but still deters rule-breaking, society gets a little help fighting climate change, and the guest, while still paying, feels like they weren’t just mugged, encouraging them to return and not trash the hotel on social media.
Hotels are in the hospitality business, not the retribution business. If your goal is loyalty, a little fairness and transparency go a long way.
Nailed it. OP is right; hotel is wrong. Dispute the charge. But … Expect to be declared a non-guest at that hotel for life. Maybe even that hotel chain. Plan accordingly.
It is becoming increasingly common for hotels to have these limitations on thermostats. It is nigh universal in the airline biz to know the cheat codes to override that. Because getting a comfortable might’s sleep is essential when you’re sleeping half the nights of your life in hotels. Some folks like 65. Some like 80. If they’re selling a service to the public they sorta need to accommodate that range.
@MW_Degen_Gamblr: Next time be smart enough to reset the 'stat back to the setting you found it at before you check out.
Managements can ultimately win this war via non-overridable 'stats if it gets heated (heh) enough. Don’t hand them unnecessary ammunition. And save yourself $250.
I’m not so sure that the cost to the hotel is so minimal (although I certainly wouldn’t assume that hotel management is unwilling to stoop to price gouging, either). According to this article,
I wouldn’t be surprised if a single visit by an HVAC technician to confirm that the thermostat hack had done no damage (and thus not voided insurance coverage or similar) could eat up most of the OP’s $250 fine all on its own.
If an HVAC technician is actually required to reset the thermostat, then I’d agree that a charge approaching $250 could be justified (plus an environmental impact fee)—but it should be clearly disclosed in advance with a sign right above the thermostat saying: “Tampering with these controls may result in a $250 fee to reset the system. HVAC technician required.”
Let me know when you figure out how to jailbreak hotel room televisions that don’t let you turn off motion smoothing.
If the OP was clever enough to jailbreak the thermostat, I’m willing to believe them when they state in their OP that they checked the terms of service (which are inevitably “fine print” in the reservation or check-in forms).
What a massive dick move. You deserved the fine.
It is unclear to me how “hacking” a thermostat could possibly damage it.
That works out quite nicely, then, since the hotel only ‘sort of’ billed you for two-hundred fifty bucks.
Maybe I’m just getting to be an old man but 68 ought to be cold enough for anyone…
Oddly I read your post to to the tune of Alanis Morrisettes You oughta know
And the OP got busted because he didn’t put the thermostat back the way he found it? Rookie mistake.
The hotel can’t post warnings about everything they don’t want guests to do.
I would think that if they have the thermostat set up so that you have to jailbreak the damn thing to go outside their selected temperature range, most people would take the hint that they don’t want anyone going outside that range. They would certainly be doing this due to the energy costs, which seems reasonable.
So you get what you get (and you don’t throw a fit, as my mother-in-law used to say), and if you don’t like it, stay somewhere else next time.
Do raise a stink about it, though, and I say that un-sarcastically. Maybe it’ll prod their lawyers into making them put a sticker on the units giving guests a heads-up about an extra charge for tampering.
68 degrees is in no way “hot as hell”. If the room was 68 degrees, then that should have been plenty of respite from the heat outside. And if the room was warmer than 68 degrees because the air conditioning couldn’t keep up with the outside heat, then it’d still be warmer than 68 degrees no matter what you set it to.
I presume the invocation of the Lake of Fire had to do with the outside temp, not the indoor room temp.
That is odd, considering it also works to the tune of “Ironic.”
I’m of a few different minds about this.
First, I think that posting a sign near the thermostat stating “Don’t Tamper with This Unit to Make It Operate Out of Preprogrammed Parameters” would be an invitation to guests to Google exactly how to tamper with it. Probably self-defeating.
Second, I’m not in the HVAC or hotel business, but I would guess that the property owner has an interest in not having HVAC units operate beyond a certain range, either to reduce wear and tear or to extend maintenance intervals. And they certainly want to save electricity if they can.
Third, what if I tampered with the smoke alarms, or with the electronic door lock? I don’t recall ever seeing signs telling me not to. (OTOH, I’ve been in hotels where the windows are screwed shut and there’s been a sign telling me not to open them.)
But $250 seems like a dick amount. That’s what they usually charge for cleaning up a room (ha!) after you smoke in it.
The amount is fine.
A small, token charge is a fee, not a meaningful disincentive.
Fines are not to recompense the victim, otherwise there would be no speeding tickets. Fines are in place to penalize breaking the rules.
Well said.
If the fine were say $5, would people be incentivized to not break the rules?
It is in the T&C or state law that you cannot vandalize the hotel room. Clearly the hotel feels hacking the AC is a form of vandalism. Or are you claiming that if it is not specifically mentioned in the paperwork, you could repaint the hotel room a calming blue?
Agreed. If you charge just $10-$20 people will just take that as an invitation. If I get caught, I just pay a nominal fee. Big deal. You need a disincentive.
I love hacking things, but if I got caught in the OP’s scenario, fair enough. I knew what I was doing was likely naughty, and I got caught. I don’t give a shit if there’s videos on YouTube how to do it or the airline industry does it all the time. (And, clearly, with the latter they’ve caught on to them.) I’d pay up and be on my way.