
Peerspace Covid-19 Policy: not entitled to cancel, receive a refund - sdedovic
https://www.peerspace.com/legal/terms/cancellation-policy
======
notlukesky
Here is a humorous piece on how to get a refund:

“From a friend, a few days ago:

We were supposed to be in Vienna today for a short vacation, but the city is
at high risk and we would have had to be quarantined on the way back.

The hotel refused to refund the payment. I called and asked to extend from 3
nights to 10 nights. When they asked the reason, I replied that I just got
back from Italy and am looking for a place to stay until the 14-day quarantine
period is over. “I want to stay in one place and not move around,” I told
them.

They canceled my reservation immediately.”

From:

[https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2020/03/16/how-to-get-
your...](https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2020/03/16/how-to-get-your-money-
back-on-a-non-refundable-hotel/)

And the thread on it:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22600819](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22600819)

------
sdedovic
A friend noticed this while attempting to cancel a booking earlier today. The
specific section reads:

Guests who cancel Bookings confirmed, updated or rescheduled prior to March
25, 2020, for Events scheduled to occur on or following April 30, 2020, will
not be entitled to cancel and will not be eligible to receive a refund due to
COVID-19.

This is very frustrating as their poly up to today (3/26) was to allow a FULL
refund in case of a state of emergency.

~~~
dragonwriter
It makes some sense to restrict cancellation of bookings made, confirmed, or
altered during the same emergency. There's a difference between an emergency
that the customer could not have reasonably expected when making arrangements
and one that they should have known existed and factored into their planning.

~~~
sdedovic
But this also covers bookings made in January, for example. While I agree with
what you are saying the new policy does not exclude bookings made months ago
to occur this summer.

~~~
dragonwriter
Sorry, I must have misread “prior to” as “after” somehow. I agree that this is
odd.

The thinking may be that they are presuming the emergency will be passed by
April 30, or at least that, at this moment, cancelling that far out is not
justified by the present emergency. Not endorsing, just speculating on the
thought process.

