I'm sorry the thread was removed. I had read in its entirety and it seemed balanced to me. Lizzy had a bad experience and backed up her views with photos. Is every negative view of a hotel, restaurant, etc now to be banned? That would make this forum pointless.

I completely disagree with janisj on every point. 1) It was not a "just bash VIP" thread--both sides were presented. Now that the thead is gone, don't distort it into something it wasn't simply to serve your own views. 2) You have never repeated your opinions? Ever? 3) I scrolled through a lot of posts--there have been several instances of things being mistakenly labeled as trip reports--requests for information mislabeled as a trip report, for example. Those threads weren't removed. 4) You don't know why Fodors removed the thread. Maybe it had something to do with Lizzy's OP, maybe it didn't. Lizzy is entitled to her opinion and as it was distinctly travel related, she should be entitled to express it.

@Lizzy101 -

I found the original thread cached and saved it as a PDF. If you would like it email me at:
grass_hopper50 (at) hotmail (dot) com - then you can send it to anyone who is interested.

As I'm looking into Paris apartments for a trip, I found the thread very helpful - and a good cautionary tale, just like ones about the "ring scam," money-belts, etc.

The point of these forums is to archive useful information and, unlike Celticharper, I don't want these conversations to disappear into the aether like chats around a café table.

Best,
G

The best post so far was written by kevin_widrow. Nice work, Kevin.

<i><font color=blue>"We should note, however, that in this case, the only business that risks being seriously hurt by Lizzie's Tale is the agency. All the owner need do is pull the listing from this agency and list with another."</font></i>

Apartment owners hold all the cards. Unless your apartment is contracted with a very strict agency (those agencies get a larger percentage of the rental because they work harder, supposedly, and this game is ALL about money), you risk more surprises when you work with an agency that accepts less-expensive rental properties. This is not to say that inexpensive properties/agencies are all out to scam. The least expensive properties rent more often and average travelers who rent are extremely grateful to avoid the rising costs of hotel rooms and the limits that come with them. The days of really cheap travel seem to be over and people on shoe-string budgets are starving for workarounds, especially families.

<i><font color=blue>"She should have waited to get the final resolution before posting."</font></i>

And this re-post truly suggests that she's using Fodor's to augment her position. Since I'm a big fan of try-and-try-again-until-you-succeed and this thread hasn't been yanked yet, we shall see how comfortable Fodor's is with that.

Thank you for re-posting, I also think that it needs to be here for future research of potential renters.

As to "she posted before a final resolution" comments...well sometimes you are just so fed up with the process, you just need to take the next step. It certainly sounded this way to me...and I would do the exact same thing if I were in that situation, this is the place for these kinds of posts.

MLF611:

You completely mis-interpreted my post. If you had read the first (deleted) thread, I supported Lizzy. In fact I praised her for such a well detailed and reasonable explanation -- compared to most "Rant Threads" here on Fodors. I don't have a view to push - I don't have a horse in this race.

My point was to re-post a topic that was deleted by the editors is generally not a great idea.

The original thread <u>did</u> sort of morph into a bash-VIP fest. Not entirely unwarranted IMO -- but in general Fodors doesn't allow those sorts of discussions go on very long.

Yes - some threads are mis-tagged trip reports. And most of the time someone explains to the OP how to fix that. And MOST of the time they do (e-mailing the editors and having the tag removed)

Of COURSE Lizzy is entitled to her opinion - and I supported her the first time around. But Fodors also is entitled to delete it . . .

Hhm. The thread was removed because of a virus not because of any problem with a discussion.

But why repeat exactly the original posting when it already drew 120 responses? That doesn't make any sense. Many of the responses (including mine) suggesting that while the OP has some perfectly valid issues (lack of cleanliness, appliances not working etc), some of other other complaints (bed size, not liking the "courtyard" etc) lie in the different expectations and practices Americans and French on these issues. That is for me (having rented many apartments after previously living in France), these issues about national expectations do not provide grounds for a complaint or refund. Plus it's perfectly true that as many posters pointed out, if you take a bargain rate apartment, you're not going to get the Ritz. People have to be realistic when they decide to take a cheaper apartment about why it's cheaper. But of course even the most basic apartment should be spotlessly clean, and the OP of course is correct to have expected that and should have got that.

People who haven't rented apartments - don't be put off! It's a great way to go, not only in terms of finances, but you get a whole different sense of a place from even a brief experiment with "living" there. I would say if we polled, most people's experiences with renting apartments are overwhelmingly favorable and people are just (or maybe more) as likely to be unhappy with their hotel as an apartment. (See the slowtravle website at www.slowtrav.com for many helpful apartment rental reviews that do clearly show this pattern of a high rate of satisfaction.)

I would say the take away here is that if you have a complaint with an apartment, you need to make your complaint repeatedly and insistently RIGHT AWAY right at the start of your stay. We probably have a wide sampling of experiences with this on this board, but my sense if that you will almost never get any resolution after the event, and after you have in fact stayed there. In that sense, I agree the 100e or whatever offer the company made is probably as good as it's going to get.

We did rent a disappointing place once (in Scotland), so it will happen, and that unfortunately is just life.

>>>The original thread did sort of morph into a bash-VIP fest. Not entirely unwarranted IMO -- but in general Fodors doesn't allow those sorts of discussions go on very long.<<<

Why should Fodor's have a problem with a review? They want people to review hotels/restaurants/apartments just like TA. Are you saying they only want positive reviews and negative ones are deleted?

A negative review is not the same thing as a smartly worded attempt on a corporate internet forum that publishes travel books to negotiate a better refund. A negative review would have ended with the renter accepting the $100 credit, thanking the agency for making the offer (99.9% of agencies in France will offer nothing and won't respond to complaints), and offering readers tips on "how I would have done things differently if I had to do it over again."

<i><font color=blue>"People have to be realistic when they decide to take a cheaper apartment about why it's cheaper."</font></i>

Realism is not as much fun as fantasy and a fight for a refund once you've used the property and completed your vacation in Paris.

"<i>Why should Fodor's have a problem with a review? They want people to review hotels/restaurants/apartments just like TA. Are you saying they only want positive reviews and negative ones are deleted?</i>"

But this isn't really a 'review' anymore -- it became a saga of a dispute between a company and a customer. W/ names named and such. Fodors certainly allows reviews good and bad. But not a blow by blow of a problem that now looks to be posted mostly to give the customer more 'ammunition' in her battle.

"<i>Hhm. The thread was removed because of a virus not because of any problem with a discussion.</i>"

When there is one offending post in a thread - the editors usually just delete that post -- not the entire thread. Happens all the time - and makes some posts look out of context since they are replying to something that isn't there anymore.

The THREAD did not cause a virus. If a link in a thread did cause a virus (and we really only have one anecdotal report it did), deleting the post/link would solve the problem. Several of us alerted the editors about that poster - not because of any virus or not, but because it was an inappropriate advertisement.

I was glad to see the original topic revived because I didn't remember correctly some of Lizzy's original problems with her rental. I thought the toilet was non-functioning not a sink!! big difference ;;)

I don't think Lizzy mentioned how long the rental period was for them. $100 refund for a one week stay would seem meagre compensation vs the same amount for a one or two night stay.

I did appreciate the cautionary tale of Lizzy's Paris rental with a company I had used during two stays in Paris. I am reminded of the importance to verify those items in the description that would be critical to my stay even with a company I've used previously. In the case of Lizzy it was the sofa bed in the living area. Deborah

Lizzie: I'm glad that you reported your experience. And to those who wonder why you stayed in the apartment, well, where the heck were you to just up and move to and with the number of people that you had? Plus, you had already dished out a bundle on an apartment and now are expected to dish out a bundle on somewhere else to stay and at the spur of the moment? I think that's ludicrous. I hope you do get it resolved with VIP. And as for hotels, I've stayed in plenty of dumps that were advertised as nice. So, staying in a hotel isn't always better. Happy Travels!

My concerns about Lizzies warning of problems with this company were important to me as I have just rented an apartment from them for the middle of Feb.

I appreciate hearing both sides of a story, people who rave about a company and also people who have had problems. In fact when I check reviews I always read the negative ones first to see if something that is a deal breaker for me is mentioned by more than one reviewer. Since this was to be my first rental I did a lot of research, I checked several sites on on all of them the positives for VIP vastly out numbered the negatives, so I felt comfortable renting with this company.

My doubts about the motives of these posts were raised by the same things DeborahAnn mentioned.

Lizzie never said 1.How long the rental was? 2.what she considered to be fair compensation from the company for her inconvenience. The company offered $100 she said this was unacceptable but she never mentioned what she wanted from them. What she wanted as a refund is fundamentally important to this story. This sent up warning flags to me because she was explicit on every other detail. Why leave this one out every time she mentioned she was seeking additional satisfaction from the company.

<i><font color=#777777>"And to those who wonder why you stayed in the apartment, well, where the heck were you to just up and move to and with the number of people that you had?...I think that's ludicrous."</font></i>

In unregulated industries, especially illegal industries who don't report income and/or pay taxes, LUDICROUS things happen. Shock, denial and naivete will not help you. It's VERY IMPORTANT that renters understand their lack of rights before agreeing to participate in this style of adventure.

I know a family of four who rented an apartment for seven nights in Paris (I helped them with translation) only to find upon arrival that the apartment had been shut down due to a burst-pipe flood in the building. It was high-season and the small agency they used had no other apartments to offer in the city-center. The agency gave them their deposit back and worked to help them find immediate hotel lodging. The hotel cost was double and was reasonably located but there was nothing more the agency was willing to do. The contract stated, "If an act of God occurs, the agency will do all they can to assist in finding another property but the agency cannot offer any guarantees."

I know another family of three who locked themselves out of their Paris apartment on a Saturday morning because their agency only provided one key to the apartment. They did everything humanly possible to get back into their apartment. They went to the agency office (no emergency number, no one working on weekends) and they went to the local fire department who wouldn't offer any help after they found out it was a vacation rental. The family had to find a hotel room for Saturday night and, on Sunday, they had to hire a locksmith to replace the lock on the apartment so they could make their 7 AM flight scheduled for Monday morning. For anyone who doesn't know, Paris apartment locks cost $750 to replace and on a Sunday, locksmiths, if you can find one, only accept cash.

The husband of this family was a corporate executive. When he got back to the U.S. he asked his lawyer to get involved. The agency did nothing. They did not return phone calls and/or respond to emails. Eventually, (months passed) the husband gave up.

When you rent abroad, you rent at your own risk.

Geez, miss a few days on Fodors due to work and just look at all I missed while gone. Evil virus plants, missing threads, demonic possession....

Lizzy101, I'm glad you posted: I see no problem with having discussions of this type, since even if people disagree, it gives them something to think about when choosing accomodation for their trips.

Some other thoughts:

-- I get, and accept, that you didn't like the condition of the apartment, but:

I note the inclusion of several phrases in the ad that should serve as a heads up:

for example, the ad says the apt sleeps UP TO 6 people; this is not quite the same thing as saying it WILL accomodate 6 people, still less accomodate 6 people according to a subjective degree of comfort. Yes, I know, but the term does leave room for interpretation; it is not a precise guarantee, it has 'wiggle room' in it. It is not uncommon in the travel industry for terms to be used which need to be interpreted with caution by the consumer.

You chose the most optimistic interpretation; i.e, that the apartment would be able to sleep 2 couples and 2 independent single adults. For safety's sake, next time when 'shooting blind' (as we all often have to do as travelers when booking accomodation) pick the most pessimistic interpretation, especially when booking on the budget end. In other words, allow a little room for a difference in opinion between buyer and seller, and assume a room for "up to" 6 people will realistically sleep 70 - 80 per cent of that number, say 4. This is especially a good idea if you also expect to have room to cook and to dine. Failing that, if your budget is such that you are limited to the 'economical' end of things, and you're traveling in a group, bring along an inflatable mattress or two - I'm not kidding. When traveling on a tight budget, it is best to be prepared to do a certain amount of camping out in one's abode. I'm not saying this is how things should be, I am saying this can help save the holiday.

I hear you on the subject of bedroom lighting: it is a not uncommon complaint voiced by many travelers, even in expensive establishments. Again, it is best to assume a pessimistic expectation of lighting in rooms and take remedial action oneself. We now always pack battery operated book reading lights, to say nothing of flashlights for general use (especially useful if there's a power failure.) Again, I'm not saying this is how things should be, but I am saying that a preemptive approach often works best to save the holiday, which is the main consideration. It also nearly always beats any amount of after-the-fact negotiation and argument with suppliers.

As to why the ad is still there: the agency may have rented the place before to people who indicated they were satisfied or at least didn't complain; don't forget, just because (for example) the oven wasn't cleaned for YOU doesn't mean the owners never cleaned it, EVER, for ANY of their visitors. You don't have access to data which would say whether yours was the normal experience to be expected, or an aberration.

I think you've done the best thing: expressed your opinion to others, who will be able to draw their own conclusion. AS for the compensation expected, well, I've been known to be wrong on these things before, but I think about as good as you'll get by way of comp.

Hope you enjoyed Paris, despite all, and better luck next time.

Holiday apartments have lots of advantages over hotels for obvious reasons. It pays to get a word of mouth recommendation or deal directly with the owner who may live nearby. Don't write off all apartment rentals because of one bad apple - there are stunning apartments available in Paris and basic ones. The trick is in the researching and contact before you get there. Then there are no surprises. Very disappointing to have that experience clouding the wonderful experience of being in Paris. Holidays will sometimes present challenges but it just makes you a more alert traveller be it in your own country or otherwise.

For those of you who are criticizing Lizzy for posting her complaints here I ask you - what would you rather she do? One purpose of this website is for travelers to post their reviews of the hotels, restaurants, etc. . .that they have visited. This provides an invaluable service to those of us who then turn to Fodors when planning our next vacation. I, personally, would like to know if an apartment was not as advertised and when confronted with that issue, how the agency handled the complaint. If Lizzy hadn't posted, some unsuspecting Fodor's friend might have encountered the same situation in that apartment. I think this forum provides a valuable service in terms of motivating apartment rental agencies to accurately and honestly describe their apartments and provide the services promised.

Lizzy's post was very courteous and contained explicit details as to the problems -complete with documenting photographs. And yet, she is maligned as being too explicit. Had she just posted saying the apartment was a dump, I guarantee you she would have been blasted for being too vague.

I am perplexed why anyone would question her motives. Did you not look at the photos? Would you have been happy renting that apartment? What would you have done differently? Lizzy made it clear that after repeated attempts to contact management they have ignored her. What recourse does she have? None except to warn others so it doesn't happen to us.

FYI, I clicked on the photobucket link to Lizzy's photos and as I was looking at them, Windows Live One Care warned me of harmful software and began a cleaning out.

I think that Lizzy had every right to expect that the apartment would be clean, have functional plumbing, and contain 3 queen sized beds and a sofa bed as stated on the website. Even a not-very-expensive apartment should be as advertised.
The above stories of the burst pipe (where the owner helped the renter find alternative arrangements) and locking oneself out of the apartment are not analogous at all, IMO.
And she did not bash VIP; just stated the facts. She was not complaining b/c she didn't have 400 thread ct. sheets or a Nespresso machine.

I have rented apartments several times in France from individual owners with good results; Lizzy's experience negates the widely held notion that one is necessarily better off with an agency. Sometimes it may be better to have a nearby owner to work these issues out with.

Lizzy did have every right tp post here. Some just like to pick on posters.

I wasn't blasting at all (not sure if you meant me).

But not all of the OP's complaints are equally valid ie
* valid - dirty
* not valid - bed size & mattress quality, poor lighting etc. (I rented in Italy via the wonderful summerinitaly agency last summer, and we were highly amused at the long courteous explanation that accompanied the details of "all the things that are different in Italy to what you might expect in the US." One example was the beds actually - ie a double might well be two singles pushed together, and this is usual and not a special trick played on Americans. LOL at the complaints they must have had that led to that comment. But, as they said and as here, different doesn't mean
worse, just that's the way it is and enjoy your immersion in a different place. A cheap rented apartment in Paris should be immaculately clean, but it doesn't have to have a reading light... I think it's obvious from the photos actually that the beds aren't American style.)
* lighting. I have rented many apartments in old buildings in Europe (and used to live in a 17th centruy building in France), and I don't think I've ever had one where the wiring would have met US code ... and often the wiring has seemed very "funky" to us. Again standards are different. (The summerinitaly commentary noted this area too ...) It is safe by our standards? No. Is it common in old buildings in Europe? Yes.
* "strange detritus was stacked into the cupboards in the kitchen and bathroom. This included prescription medicines and plastic bottles filled with unidentifiable liquids." The photos show a few such items, not cupboards filled with them. We have almost never rented an apartment when there weren't a few such items, left over from previous visitors or whatever.
* The bathroom looks like all too many cheaply renovated bathrooms I've seen in France.

* As a recent poster said, I think it's important to always check the specifics of the sleeping arrangements very carefully, especially if your group is at the maximum of what the rental "can" sleep. If they said sofa bed, there should have been obviously, but even then this apartment looks extremely tight for six people. The table seems to sit only four, for example.

Again for the take away from this experience:

1)I think it's important to focus on how to make an effective complaint when you have cause - it's more effective to complain about a fewer number of things where there are clearly issues rather than diffuse into wider mutterings that include matters of opinion. The latter gives the agency an easy out to ignore you...

2) In this case, the OP agreed the apartment was acceptable after doing the initial tour with the property manager. Once you do that, you vastly weaken your position to make a subsequent complaint unless something changes during your stay.
If it was dirty, it was dirty at that time - that's your point of maximum leverage...