The 5,000-Yen Limit at 11:40 p.m.
Hotel Granvia Sakae is a 212-room business hotel in Nagoya. From 9:00 a.m. on Monday, the building next door begins three weeks of demolition, approved by the city and disclosed on the hotel's own website two months in advance. On Tuesday at 11:40 p.m., Mr. Sugiyama, a repeat guest on his fourteenth stay and a top loyalty tier member, calls the front desk from room 806. He says the room has vibrated since morning, he has a client presentation at 8:00 a.m., and he demands a full refund of the ¥18,400 room charge, adding that he will post photos online. Occupancy is 96%. Two rooms remain: 312, facing the street and closer to the site, and 1208, a smoking room on the opposite side. The night manager, a 24-year-old contract employee, may waive up to ¥5,000 or move any guest, but rate refunds above that require the duty manager, who is at home asleep. Earplugs and odour-neutralising spray are in stock.
1. Set out the night manager's first four actions in order, and explain why the refund conversation should not come first.
Read the worked answer
First fix the guest's actual problem - sleep - before discussing money. Order: (1) acknowledge the disturbance, apologise for the experience without admitting negligence, and state what can be done tonight; (2) offer room 1208 with a full linen change and odour treatment, and be honest that it is a smoking room so the guest can choose; 312 is not a real option because street noise would reproduce the complaint an hour later; (3) send earplugs up immediately so he has something while housekeeping prepares the room; (4) only then record the complaint and explain that the rate decision rests with the duty manager, who will respond by 9:00 a.m.
Opening with money at 11:40 p.m. prolongs the call, pushes a young staffer into negotiating above his authority, and delays the only outcome the guest actually needs. Equally, he must never say 「we will refund it」: an unauthorised promise binds the hotel in the guest's mind and creates a second dispute tomorrow morning, this time about broken commitments rather than noise.
2. Should the night manager telephone the duty manager at home? State the test he should apply and what he must do before making any promise.
Read the worked answer
The test is twofold: does the request exceed his authority, and is delay more expensive than the call? Both are true here. ¥18,400 exceeds his ¥5,000 limit, and the guest is high-value, angry and threatening public exposure - precisely the situation escalation exists for. So yes, call, but structure it. Open with thirty seconds of facts (room, cause, what has been offered, what the guest demands), state his own recommendation, and ask for a decision. A duty manager woken at midnight needs a decision, not a narrative.
Before telling the guest anything, obtain the approval in writing - a reply message or chat screenshot - so the hotel is not later split between two versions of what was authorised. If the duty manager cannot be reached after two attempts, the fallback is documented: move the guest, waive the ¥5,000 he can waive, and give a written commitment that the manager will call by 9:00 a.m. before checkout.
3. What should be written in the handover log, and how does the demolition disclosure affect the hotel's position?
Read the worked answer
The log needs: time of call, room number, the complaint in the guest's own words, the offer made and his response, the room move, the amount waived, each escalation attempt with its time, the promise given, and the author's name. This is both a service record and the hotel's defence if the guest disputes the card charge or publishes the story.
The disclosure cuts both ways. Announcement on the hotel website two months earlier supports the hotel - but only if the guest could actually have seen it. Check what the booking channel he used displayed. If the notice was buried, Japanese-only, or absent from the OTA page at the point of booking, the hotel's moral and legal footing weakens sharply and a full refund plus a goodwill gesture becomes the cheaper outcome. The disclosure only protects the hotel where it was visible before payment; otherwise it is an internal note, not consent.