P Plus Hotel Pattaya: a hotel to avoid - one of the worst hotel experiences we have documented
If a hotel is judged by how it looks when everything goes well, P Plus Hotel Pattaya may perhaps pass thanks to its location in the central part of the city. If, however, a hotel is judged by how it behaves when a guest reports a problem, the experience we documented leaves an extremely poor impression. Dirt in the room, visible signs of dampness or mold, the appearance of cockroaches, dissatisfaction with maintenance, a charge of 500 Thai baht for a room key card, and communication that the guest experienced as rude, mocking, and completely uninterested in solving the problem together make up an experience because of which we cannot recommend P Plus Hotel Pattaya. After everything that was recorded during the stay and after the way the hotel responded to the complaints, our advice is simple: travelers who have a choice should consider other accommodation.
This is not a conclusion reached because of one minor issue or because of a desire for a refund. In written communication, the guest explicitly stated that he was not asking for and would not accept a refund of the 500 baht, and that the financial part of the matter was over for him. The problem is much broader: the attitude toward the guest, the professionalism of the employees, the transparency of the hotel's rules, the condition of the room, hygiene, maintenance, and the management's willingness to answer specific questions. When all these elements are combined, the good location remains almost the only thing we can identify from this experience as a clear advantage.
From the first serious complaint to a complete loss of trust
One of the most striking events during the stay occurred after the guest temporarily found himself without the card used to enter the room. He had accidentally left the card in a nearby café, and because he urgently needed to get into the room, he contacted reception. According to his description of the event, he was charged 500 Thai baht for a new card. Only a few minutes later, the original card was found and returned to the hotel, but the amount charged was not refunded.
In a subsequent official response, the hotel presented a different version. According to the reply signed only as "Duty Manager", the guest was allegedly offered two options before being charged: a temporary card with a refundable deposit of 500 baht or a permanent replacement card with a non-refundable fee of 500 baht. The hotel claims that the guest knowingly chose the second option. The guest disputed this and stated that he does not remember such a choice being clearly presented to him or that he knowingly agreed to a non-refundable option.
This is precisely where the story stops being an ordinary dispute over hotel policy. If two sides give different descriptions of the same conversation, the simplest way to clarify the matter would be to show whether a written or electronic record exists, who exactly explained the rules, at what point, and in what language. Those questions were later submitted to the hotel in an official media inquiry. The hotel was also asked to state whether documentation exists that could confirm its version. According to the correspondence available to us, no substantive response was provided to those specific questions.
The reception desk that was supposed to solve the problem became part of the problem
The following day, the guest tried to speak with someone at reception about the 500 baht charge and the way the situation had been handled. According to his account, the employee conducting the conversation introduced herself only as "Apple" and refused to provide her full name. The guest says that during the conversation she contacted someone by phone, after which he was again informed that the decision would not be changed. He asked who she had spoken with and whether the person was the owner, a manager, or another individual authorized to make such decisions.
The mere fact that an employee does not want to disclose personal information does not automatically indicate unprofessional conduct. However, when a formal complaint is being handled, the guest must at least be able to know the position and level of responsibility of the person making the final decision. This is precisely why the fact that the hotel's official response was also signed only as "Duty Manager", without the name of the responsible person, left a particularly poor impression. The hotel was later explicitly asked why the official statement had not been signed with a first and last name. According to the documentation at our disposal, no explanation followed on that point either.
Even more serious is the guest's subjective experience of the communication itself. The guest describes the behavior of some members of staff as unfriendly, mocking, and rude, and says that he came away with the impression that his remarks were being ignored and that employees were laughing at him. We cannot turn such an allegation into a universal claim about every hotel employee, but we can clearly say that this is how the guest experienced the conversations for which we later obtained a written continuation through official correspondence. For the hospitality industry, this is a serious problem: a guest reporting a deficiency should not leave a conversation feeling mocked, belittled, or unwelcome.
Dirt, dampness, and cockroaches: what you do not expect from a hotel room
The dispute over the card was not the only reason for the extremely negative impression. During the stay, the guest also reported serious shortcomings in the room itself: visible signs of dampness or mold, poor maintenance, and the appearance of cockroaches. In the media inquiry, the hotel management was directly asked about the condition of the accommodation, including visible dampness, mold, and other deficiencies. The hotel was even invited to provide its own current photographs of the rooms and common areas so that its side of the story could be presented as fairly as possible. According to the correspondence available, no response arrived after that inquiry that would have disputed or explained those allegations in detail.
It is not possible, based on one room, to claim that the entire property is in the same condition. But such a statistical caveat means little to a traveler who pays for a hotel room if it is precisely their room that has signs of dampness, hygiene problems, or insects. A guest does not book an average room in theory; they book a specific room in which they are supposed to sleep, shower, and leave their belongings. If that room gives an impression of neglect or uncleanliness, the hotel has failed exactly where it matters most to the guest.
It is also concerning that some similar complaints appear in more recent publicly available reviews by other travelers. On Trip.com, a guest who stayed in June 2026 wrote that they found the room dirty and covered with hair and had to request that it be cleaned again. Another guest stated in February 2026 that there was an unpleasant smell in the bathroom, visible dirt, stained bedding, and towels that did not seem fresh. A review from August 2026, referring to a stay in July, mentions problems with water pressure lasting several days and an extremely unpleasant condition of one fixture in the bathroom. These reviews do not prove every individual allegation from this experience, but they show that complaints about cleanliness and maintenance are not completely isolated.
The hotel advertises itself as a place with full amenities, but the basics must be clean and professional
On its official website, P Plus Hotel Pattaya lists air conditioning, bathroom amenities, towels, a shower, hot water, Wi-Fi, a refrigerator, a television, and other standard amenities, while the hotel also highlights a swimming pool and sports club. These are ordinary features that a guest expects from commercial accommodation. But neither a swimming pool, nor a gym, nor a central location can compensate for poor hygiene or the feeling that a guest's complaint is being handled without respect.
That is precisely why we believe it is wrong in this case to reduce the discussion to whether 500 baht is a lot or a little. The amount is not the essence of the problem. The problem is that after a series of events, the guest lost trust in the staff and the management of the property. When a guest no longer believes that reception will clearly explain the rules, that a problem in the room will be taken seriously, or that management will transparently answer a question, then the very foundation of the relationship between the hotel and the person who paid for the accommodation has been damaged.
Public ratings do not erase serious negative reviews
P Plus Hotel Pattaya also has positive ratings on major booking platforms, especially for its location. Trip.com currently shows an overall rating of around 8.3 out of 10, with a higher rating for location, while Booking.com also highlights location as one of the better-rated elements. These figures should be mentioned for the sake of a complete picture, but they do not invalidate the content of specific negative reviews or the experience that is the subject of this article.
An average rating can conceal major differences between individual stays. To a traveler who gets a dirty room, notices an unpleasant smell, encounters a water problem, or feels belittled at reception, the fact that someone else had a carefree weekend means little. That is why choosing a hotel should not be based on a single number alone. It is necessary to read the most recent reviews and pay particular attention to complaints that are repeated. In the case of P Plus Hotel Pattaya, among the more recent negative reviews, the very themes that also appeared in the experience described in this article can be found: cleanliness, maintenance, water, noise, and dissatisfaction with the service.
The hotel was given an opportunity to respond - questions remained unanswered
Before the story was published, a detailed media inquiry was sent to the hotel. This was not one general message or a request for the hotel to "apologize". Specific questions were sent: whether management stands by the claim that the two card options were clearly explained before the charge, whether any record of this exists, who gave the explanation, in what language, why the official response was signed only with a job title, whether the hotel considers it appropriate for the person handling a complaint to refuse to give their full name, and who confirmed the final decision by phone.
The hotel was also given an opportunity to comment on the condition of the accommodation and the allegations concerning dampness, mold, and other deficiencies. It was offered the opportunity to send its own recent photographs of the rooms, reception, common areas, swimming pool, and the exterior of the property, together with clear confirmation of the right to publish them. The message explicitly stated that no refund or any financial benefit was being sought. The aim was to obtain a response for the purposes of an independent journalistic article.
After that, an additional reminder was also sent before publication. According to the documentation at our disposal, no substantive response to the broader set of questions was received. That is the hotel's decision, but it is also information that readers have a right to know. When a business is given the opportunity to respond to detailed allegations and key questions remain unanswered, a journalist cannot invent explanations on its behalf.
The location is good. For us, that is not enough.
P Plus Hotel is located in a lively central part of Pattaya, near Soi Buakhao and a large number of restaurants, bars, and other amenities. The official website uses the location and available facilities as part of its offer, and users of booking platforms often rate the location more highly than other categories. That is a genuine advantage of the property, and it would be unfair to claim otherwise.
But a hotel is not just an address. A hotel is the cleanliness of the room, the maintenance of the bathroom, the way an employee speaks to a guest at two o'clock in the morning, the willingness of reception to explain a charge, the identity and accountability of the person handling a formal complaint, and the management's ability to respond when clear questions are asked. In the experience we documented, it was precisely these elements that left the worst impression.
That is why the good location does not change our recommendation. A traveler who wants to stay in this part of Pattaya has a large number of other options and can compare other accommodation offers in Pattaya. After an experience involving complaints about dirt, dampness or mold, cockroaches, a disputed card charge, and communication that the guest experienced as extremely unfriendly and mocking, it is difficult to find a reasonable reason to advise someone to risk the same scenario.
Our advice to travelers: avoid P Plus Hotel Pattaya
Based on the documented experience that is the subject of this article, the correspondence with the hotel, the unanswered follow-up questions, and public reviews that also record problems with cleanliness and maintenance, P Plus Hotel Pattaya is not accommodation we can recommend. This is not a claim that every guest will have the same experience, nor that there are no hotel employees who perform their jobs properly. It is an editorial assessment of risk following a specific experience and a review of the available information.
What is most concerning is the combination of problems. One unpleasant situation can be a coincidence. One dirty surface can be an oversight. One bad conversation can result from a misunderstanding. But when serious dissatisfaction with the condition of the room, reports of cockroaches and dampness, a feeling of humiliating communication at reception, a dispute over a charge, refusal to clearly identify the responsible person, and then a lack of response to a detailed media inquiry all occur during the same stay, a pattern emerges that cannot simply be dismissed.
Hospitality is not a smile in a promotional photograph, but behavior when a problem arises. It is precisely on that test that P Plus Hotel Pattaya, according to the experience we documented, left an exceptionally poor impression. A good location cannot clean a dirty room, remove dampness, solve a problem with insects, or replace professional communication. That is why our recommendation after everything stated above is clear: if cleanliness, fair treatment, and the feeling that a complaint will be taken seriously matter to you, consider another hotel.
Sources:
- Documented correspondence between the guest and P Plus Hotel Pattaya from July and August 2026 - the guest's complaint, the hotel's official response, and subsequent media inquiries.
- P Plus Hotel Pattaya - official website, location, hotel description, amenities, and contact information (link)
- Trip.com - current ratings and verified guest reviews, including more recent complaints about cleanliness, maintenance, and water pressure (link)
- Booking.com - information about the property, location, and guest ratings (link)