Holiday Inn Los Angeles, Los Angeles, Dated

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » California » Los Angeles Destinations » Los Angeles Hotels » Holiday Inn Los Angeles

OpinionWell
Rank

5th

Out of 700

Holiday Inn Los Angeles	Average Price: $190 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

4222 Vineland Avenue

Los Angeles, 91602 View map

4-Star Hotel Rank: 3 of 45
Average review rating: 3.87

OpinionWell Value Index: 4

Traveler reviews analyzed: Expedia (33) , Travelocity (10) , TripAdvisor (535)

SAFE TO BOOK ? (3/5 issues found)

Is this hotel safe to book? See the trends in negative comments below to find out the real deal before you commit:

Construction:	There are recent comments about Construction.
Noise:	Recent comments complained about noise.
Room Smell:	No recent comments about room smell were found.
Parking Fees:	Recent comments complained about parking fees.
Bed Bugs:	No recent comments about bed bugs were found.

Search reviews for other problems

Keyword Cloud

The hotel review keyword cloud displays the words commonly used to describe the features and services of this hotel. Select a word and explore.

All Positive Negative

Keyword Search

a bit small (3) annoy (7) apologetic (5) avoid (5) bad (27) bed bugs (11) big deal (7) broke (3) complain (13) complaint (18) dated (11) difficult (5) dirty (6) disappoint (20) disturbing (6) downfall (5) downside (10) expensive (23) flaws (4) hard (9) horrible (7) issue (28) lack (11) loud (22) mistake (5) negative (12) noise (100) noisy (25) outdated (5) overpriced (10) poor (12) poorly (3) pricey (15) problem (64) ridiculous (4) rude (17) scary (3) shabby (3) shame (4) slow (14) smell (12) stain (3) stale (3) terrible (12) tiny (6) unfortunate (8) unfriendly (4) unhelpful (3) worst (10) wrong (8)

Dated

Appears in 15 comments.

The following words were used in comments with Dated:
appearance (2) arrival (2) carpet (2) clean (4) hotel (6) impressed (2) much (2) need (2) pretty (2) room (7) smell (2) smoke (2)

Users can vote for helpful comments, which are saved in the Most helpful section.

Sort by:

See all

1. Rooms are pretty dated and a little run down, but otherwise comfortable despite being fairly small.

"Dated, noisy, but good service " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/14/2012 Vote

2. It absolutely lives up to its Award for Business Excellence dated July 2011.

"LUVLY PLACE " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/12/2011 Vote

3. The bathroom was very clean just some of the fixtures appeared to date back to the1950s and were a bit tricky to turn on first go around.

"Great location and value for visiting Los Angeles " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/11/2011 Vote

4. I wish I had paid more attention to Krisrose's Trip Advisor review dated 9/11/2011 about this company - ditto to everything she stated.

"Great hotel! Great stay! " Read full review on TripAdvisor 11/24/2011 Vote

5. What the hotel could use is a refresh in the decor, the walk to the rooms is rather dark and dated.

"Time for a decor refresh " Read full review on TripAdvisor 11/7/2011 Vote

6. The rooms were large, clean and up to date.

"Lovely hotel but far away from most things " Read full review on TripAdvisor 9/13/2011 Vote

7. The worst hotel I have ever stayed at in my life, the room was very dated didnt appear very clean, people were allowed to smoke on the outside tables so all the cigarette smoke blew up onto your balcony and you could even smell it coming through the air vents.

"DISGUSTING DO NOT STAY HERE " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/4/2011 Vote

8. Yes, the rooms are dated, but what can do with the old cinder block walls? My experience? If you smile at the staff and treat them with respect, you'll be rewarded in spades.

"Once again, my home away from home! " Read full review on TripAdvisor 12/29/2010 Vote

9. The hotel is very dated is needing updating badly.

"just okay " Read full review on TripAdvisor 1/7/2008 Vote

10. It is dated and in need of some money spending on it but it is clean and tidy.

"Good place for a night or two in Hollywood! " Read full review on TripAdvisor 4/23/2007 Vote