The Disputed Folio and the Left-Behind Laptop
A 12-room inn is in a state where an innkeeper's lien permits retention of guest property for unpaid room charges, but only after written notice within 10 days and storage for 60 days. A guest checked out three days ago owing $1,712: five nights at $360 plus 9% tax, less a $250 incidental hold already captured. The guest also caused $480 in smoking remediation, which was not disclosed in the registration agreement. The inn charged the $1,712 balance to the card on file; the guest disputed the entire amount as unauthorized. The guest left a suitcase, a laptop, and prescription medication. The front desk manager wants to sell the suitcase and laptop to recover the debt and to refuse any future reservation. The inn's written policy says damages are charged at actual cost with photos, but the registration card does not mention smoking fees.
1. How should the inn respond to the chargeback, and what should it do about the $480 smoking charge?
Read the worked answer
Issue: The inn must prove the room and tax charges were authorized and must decide whether the undisclosed smoking fee is supportable.
Reasoning: A chargeback is won with evidence of authorization and delivery, not with a narrative. The inn should submit the signed registration card, the folio showing the five nightly room charges and 9% tax, the pre-authorization or hold record for $250, proof of check-in and check-out, and the itemized receipt. The $1,712 balance is the contracted room charge plus tax minus the disclosed hold; if the card was authorized at check-in, that portion is defensible. The $480 smoking charge is weaker because the registration agreement did not disclose it. A damages policy that exists only in an internal manual is not enough notice for a guest. The inn should not include the $480 in the chargeback response as if it were authorized; instead, it should document photos, remediation invoices, and housekeeping notes, then send a separate demand letter.
Conclusion: Defend the $1,712 with a clean documentary packet, drop the $480 from the card dispute, and pursue it separately only if the inn can show the guest had notice of the fee. Add a clear smoking-remediation clause and initial line to the registration card.
2. May the inn sell the suitcase and laptop under the stated lien rule, and how should it handle the medication?
Read the worked answer
Issue: The inn has a lien right, but the right to retain property is not automatically a right to sell it.
Reasoning: The stated rule allows retention after unpaid charges, but only if the inn gives written notice within 10 days and stores the property for 60 days. Selling before those steps would convert a lawful lien into a potential conversion claim. The inn should send written notice to the guest's last known address and email, identify the property, state the amount claimed, explain the 60-day storage period, and state the date after which disposition will occur if the debt remains unpaid. The suitcase and laptop should be inventoried, photographed, and stored securely. The medication is different: it is health-related, may be urgently needed, and should not be sold. The inn should contact the guest promptly and arrange return or, if the guest cannot be reached, follow local health or abandoned-property instructions for medication.
Conclusion: The inn may retain the suitcase and laptop for now, but it may not sell them until the notice and 60-day periods are satisfied. Medication should be returned or handled separately and never sold.
3. Should the inn refuse the guest's future reservation? Explain the risk and a better policy.
Read the worked answer
Issue: The inn wants to bar a guest who disputed a charge and left property behind.
Reasoning: Innkeepers generally may refuse service for legitimate business reasons, but refusals carry risk if they look like retaliation, are based on a protected characteristic, or are applied inconsistently. This guest has an active billing dispute and has not yet been shown to have acted fraudulently. A blanket refusal could escalate the dispute and create a discrimination or retaliation allegation if the guest belongs to a protected class or if the inn cannot show a neutral reason. The better approach is a written policy that applies to all guests: future stays require prepayment in full, a higher incidental authorization, and signed acceptance of the damage and smoking terms. The inn can also require direct communication about the outstanding balance and return of the medication.
Conclusion: Do not refuse on the spot. Apply a neutral prepayment and deposit policy, document the reason, and reserve refusal for cases involving threats, violence, fraud findings, or repeated nonpayment after review.