Elms Farmhouse - sleeps 19 guests in 8 bedrooms

This client was part of a group booking in which the lead party member gave us written feedback (on another website) that the whole group had a wonderful time and that the property was amazing. The lead party member never once mentioned any of the issues highlighted in this review and the first time we were made aware of any issues, genuine or otherwise, was upon reading this review. What we are aware of is that soon after departing the house at the end of their stay, the writer of this review discovered she had left behind a gadget of hers. She requested we post it back to her. We explained that there is an admin fee of £15 plus the postage costs for us to be able to do so. We explained that cost is necessary as we do not live near this property. We have independent contractors look after the property and the cleaning company responsible for this property charge us £15 + postage for their own operators time (time to drive to the property, retrieve the item, package it up and then drive to the nearest post office to send it registered post - the cleaning company is not based in the village of the property). £15 represents fair value for that company's time. However, this client failed to appreciate the cost of the request to post the item back to them. The client then emailed to say she had a lovely time at the house and was going to recommend the house to others but had now decided that she would instead leave negative feedback on websites because of the admin charge. We refused to be intimidated in this manner. What is interesting about this client is the fact that they were wholly responsible for leaving their item at the property but they were wholly unwilling to cover any cost associated in our having to help correct their mistake. Moreover, they join an increasing number of people who then use the threat of negative feedback to try to get their own way.

This client did suffer a major malfunction to the heating system during their stay which was rectified as quickly as possible (3 callouts in the first 18 hours of occupation, resulting in 1 night without heat - and free logs and back up heaters installed). We offered a very reasonable sum of money for compensation but the client refused to accept the offer and demanded over twice the sum, stating that, unless we accepted his figure, he would leave negative feedback on various websites. We refused to be intimidated by his demands and the matter ended up in Court. The Judge agreed that the figure we offered was the correct one and this figure (our original offer) was duly paid to the client immediately. I feel our experience with this client, highlights a major issue with 'feedback' forums. They can be used by unscrupulous people to apply extreme pressure onto decent folk in order to get large refunds. We stood our ground and were vindicated by the Court. On a further note regarding the smoking chimney. The client failed to light the fire correctly