[Windy]

Well TS have had a full week to act now and the site is still displaying unearned (or paid for) star ratings. I disappointed but not overly surprised I suppose. The guy who runs the site must be killing himself laughing that he can get away with this in spite of complaints to the only people with the teeth to stop him.

Scores so far

VB - 0/10
TS - 0/10
Stay In - 10/10 winning all the way.

Convincing proof that you can lie about not one but several VB ratings and still get away scot free.

[Windy]

And it's still there now - It has been viewed by no less than 3,000 more people since I first raised this issue apparently. That's 3,000 more people who are being mislead about VB's star rating scheme and VB / TS either can't or won't do a d*** thing about it. There was a trail of letters in the Blackpool Gazzette ( - the local evening rag where I live) about why local hoteliers are not renewing their VB subscription. I think may have to add to it.

[VisitEngland_Feedback_]

Some of the post on this thread have been removed as the contents of recent posts have breached the guidelines of this Forum, by disclosing personal data.
If Forum members wish to report examples of VisitEngland exterior or online signage/star ratings they believe to be out-of-date or invalid, please email feedback@visitengland.org as this mailbox is monitored daily. All reports will be passed to Quality in Tourism, who will follow up on VisitEngland's behalf.

[greenbarncottages]

It's a rather unfortunate development that a post that had been previously passed as suitable for the forum is subsequently deleted in its entirety; I don't recall the inclusion of any personal data beyond the name of the owner of the offending website, but I imagine the reasons for the decision by VE management to remove the post run a lot deeper than that. I've now seen that Sharpe's post has also gone, perhaps because it referred to the subsequently deleted post, rather than because it was critical of VE management.

Regardless of any possible doubts over the reasons, or any questions as to whether this was a good decision by VE management, the OP's persistence in standing up for the VE membership does seem to have been noticed, and it is very good to have the assurance from VE that they will now take action against all instances of the abuse and misrepresentation of the rating system. This system, after all, is the key benefit to members within the s/c sector and its reliability is fundamental to the existence of VE as a credible organisation.

So a partial thumbs up for VE, then, and two thumbs up for Windy.

[eastcoastsurfer]

One problem I have encountered is with businessess that have stopped using the official rating system - but the official ratings still appear on various booking sites, i.e. laterooms, Booking.com, Expedia and Trip advisor to name but a few. Obviously this gives these operators an advantage as they have the benefit of appearing to be in an assessed scheme, but none of the costs. I conplained to VB about one such establishment, quoting them and Laterooms. This was recified, but not presumably not via the operator, but just through Laterooms, they are still promoting themselves on Trip Advisor and Expedia as a VB assessed property.

I would suggest that VB employ one of there staff for a few days to:

1. Contact the various promotional websites and ask them to emial thier clients in respect to the fraudulent claims in respect to assessment.

2. Have a trawl through the estagblishments that have dropped out of the scheme and conduct some sample research to get a feel for the scale of the problem.

If this is nor reseolved I will probably join this particular bandwagon and have a slightly better holiday myself this year!