Mixed reports: some guests praised cleanliness and housekeepers, while others described rooms and furniture as "gross" and noted persistent odours. Overall slightly below target due to those negative comments.

Service is inconsistent: several reports of rude, unhelpful or evasive front-desk staff and at least one alleged fraudulent billing incident, but one review explicitly praised hospitality and staff. Score reflects negative incidents tempered by occasional positive interactions.

Not mentioned in the reviews; assigned the target overall rating (standard quality for this hotel tier).

Rooms were described as nice and spacious by some guests, though others reported bad bathroom odour, a window that would not open and being moved to a smaller room. Positive remarks about space drive a higher score, with some penalties for comfort issues.

Issues with advertised amenities (notably pet policy inconsistencies) were reported, but there were no detailed failures of other amenities; score reflects the pet-policy problem while acknowledging typical amenity levels for the property.

Multiple complaints about incorrect charges, having to dispute billing, and being charged for an extra day for a brief late checkout lower perceived value significantly.

Mixed but often positive: at least one guest called the breakfast "excellent and clean," while others found the breakfast poor or repetitive; overall weighted toward the positive comments.

Overall impressions are mixed: some guests had very negative experiences (billing disputes, rude staff, cancellations), while others enjoyed good service, rooms and breakfast. Score is elevated to balance strong positive comments alongside many negatives.