About twenty months ago there was a lot of discussion, on this site, regarding the day notice requirement for cancelling a reservation. One issue that was not discussed was "Why should there be any fee if the room ends up being rented for the night".
I have no objection being charged if I cancel on short notice and the hotel loses a night's rental.
I do think that it is unreasonable for the hotel to rent the room to someone else and still bill me for the night. I would even be happy if the Government outlaws the policy of re-renting as room and still charging a cancellation fee. I wouldn't even object to a longer cancellation notice requirement if the fee only applied to rooms that were not re-rented.
I'd be very surprised if Marriott makes such a change but the surprise would be a pleasant one.
this is a good one point. If i were to cxl or tried cxl and the hotel would not waive the fee, i would probably word it differently. Id tell them i would try to make it, that way they are forced to keep the room unsold or risk having to walk me and pay for my stay. (if its a 1 nighter) I dont think they would care though unless they are sold out or oversold.
I was about to make exactly that comment but your mind is quicker than mine.
How do you demonstrate that the room you reserved was actually rented? Unless the hotel was 100% booked and then you cancelled and then they added someone else then there is no proof that your room was rented. In fact, it could be argued the other way. If the hotel has 100 rooms and 90 are reserved, you cancel, and then 2 people come in late so they actually rented 91 rooms the hotel could argue that had you not cancelled they would have rented 92 rooms.