Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not up on my Civil Rights law, but I suspect a hotel can't keep this policy.
GL, mD
I'm not sure how this would be a civil rights violation? They weren't refusing to rent to someone because of their race, religion, national origin or some other factor that would be considered a protected class.
Wasn't try to arm chair lawyer the story...no arm wrestle, but they are refusing service simply based on one's legal domicile address.
Digging around, I see that several Ashville hotels have the same policy, per Trip Advisor, and anecdotally, Gatlinburg does the same.
I guess I won't be making any 'spend the night in Asheville' trips, not that the hotels would care.
Very odd.
If one's house burns down, does the family get in their car and drive to Greenville or Knoxville, or?
I've stayed 'within 75 miles of my house' dozens of times when I worked, or for weddings, etc., but that was NY.
Sure, it's a legitimate question and concern. Apparently, some of the motels (particularly in the budget category which seemed to apply to all the motels in the news story) have problems with local people renting the rooms to party, trash the rooms, partake in drug activity, etc. and locals tend to be the problem people who may have even gotten evicted from their permanent residence (though that's certainly not always the case and locals can have very legitimate reasons for needing to rent a room). The motels that have become more "rent by the week" places for transient locals can quickly turn into hotspots for criminal activity (the link below summarizes it pretty well).
I understand it's a hassle and doesn't seem fair to the local who has a legitimate reason for staying, but this is why some motels are wary of renting to locals.
And how much discretion is used on a case by case basis (i.e. for an overnight getaway, staying due to needing to "cool off" from a domestic issue, house is being repaired, etc.) is really up to the hotel management discretion. I'm sure those hotels who are able to use discretion rather than not budging on the policy will take some business from those that take a harder line in enforcing this with no exceptions.
The 75 miles does seem a bit much, though, since that's a pretty good distance for a business traveler, for example, who has an important engagement early in the morning and doesn't want to fight unpredictable traffic and worry about getting somewhere just under 75 miles from home. 25 or even 50 seems a little more reasonable.
The fact that this is even "a thing" now is the big concern. It is concerning because it shows how disgusting the persnickety nature of society has become.
Many local hotels have been doing this as long as I can remember. It helps prevent teenage parties that disturb guests from getting a good nights rest and causing lots of room damage, and it helps cut down on johns bringing their druggie hos there.
That someone would now scream "discrimination" because they were inconvenienced into drinking in moderation instead of getting dangerously drunk then going driving by hotel policies that have been in place for 30+ years is reprehensible.
I'm not sure how this would be a civil rights violation? They weren't refusing to rent to someone because of their race, religion, national origin or some other factor that would be considered a protected class.
That would be the 1968 Fair Housing Act (Title VIII), which is one part of the Civil Rights Act. Drunk, lewd, lascivious and other 'conditions' of behavior are not covered. There is a fine line there, however.
Some families rent a hotel room for birthday parties. The kids all swim in the pool, partake of the breakfast buffet, have a slumber party and leave the room a mess.
I can see where hotels would want to limit the party business.
The fact that this is even "a thing" now is the big concern. It is concerning because it shows how disgusting the persnickety nature of society has become.
Many local hotels have been doing this as long as I can remember. It helps prevent teenage parties that disturb guests from getting a good nights rest and causing lots of room damage, and it helps cut down on johns bringing their druggie hos there.
That someone would now scream "discrimination" because they were inconvenienced into drinking in moderation instead of getting dangerously drunk then going driving by hotel policies that have been in place for 30+ years is reprehensible.
I must be living on a different planet...
Did you watch the TV snippet?
The man said they simply had booked a room for a date night out, seeing an act at the Orange Peel, having dinner/couple drinks and wanted to walk back to their room, vs driving home to Waynesville. That couple weren't drunk when they made the rez, didn't 'get drunk', and simply wanted a sleeping venue to allow for them to walk around, dine, enjoy Asheville.
I can think of a dozen reasons why I might want to stay at an Asheville hotel, vs driving home, especially driving 75+ miles to 'home', after visiting.
Actually, I can think of a dozen reasons why I occasionally cooped in a motel/hotel when I worked, even though 'home' was less than 75 miles away.
Skip the politics or bs; my point is this 'policy' of many hotels in A'ville or other areas seems to be feckless and ridiculous and very hollow 'policy', that simply puts the onus on a hotel 'guest' to either lie or have some pre approved sob story that a hotel mgr might accept in an arbitrary decision situation.
Asheville does not seem to me to be Spring Break Center, or the Leonia, NJ Rt 4 section coming west from the GW Bridge, with its plethora of 'short stay' motels...
To my mind this draconian 'policy' is an absurd barrier to a 'problem' that may/might exist in a very few instances.
Meanwhile, if my wife and I want to do an Asheville Weekend, I guess it requires 'commuting', even if we lived 75 miles away from Asheville. I suppose biz is booming, so the motels don't care. It is ridiculous, imo.
This is not just a policy of some Asheville motels, but is a fairly common practice in many US areas. I've run into this when making reservations either by phone or by dropping in while on a distant road trip, met with the question "Are you local?" What would be helpful would be to have someone in the media, John Boyle?, conduct a survey as to where we can rent a room as locals, since we may all want to plan a local anniversary get-away. I haven't checked but I suspect that the higher end motels and even more likely upper scale downtown hotels don't have a "no locals" policy.
Last edited by Imhere now; 07-28-2015 at 02:23 PM..
Unfortunately the policy was caused by necessity -- due to past experiences by that hotel chain and others, whether it's here in Asheville or East Petunia.
It is always the bad apples that causes these rules to be made, and ruins it for those who are conscientious; that is the shame of it. It would be interesting to learn what the actual mileage limit is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
