Hampton Inn Raleigh, Raleigh, Issue

OpinionWell's Blog

Home » United States » North Carolina » Raleigh Destinations » Raleigh Hotels » Hampton Inn Raleigh

OpinionWell
Rank

28th

Out of 119

Hampton Inn Raleigh	Average Price: $92 Check Rates

Hotel Class:

1001 Wake Towne Drive

Raleigh, 27609 View map

3-Star Hotel Rank: 15 of 21
Average review rating: 4.08

OpinionWell Value Index: 3

Traveler reviews analyzed: BedBugRegistry (3) , Expedia (21) , MyTravelGuide (8) , Travelocity (3) , TripAdvisor (37) , YahooTravel (4)

SAFE TO BOOK ? (0/5 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:	No recent comments about construction were found.
Noise:	No recent comments about noise were found.
Room Smell:	No recent comments about room smell were found.
Parking Fees:	No recent comments about parking fees were found.
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

apologetic (1) awful (1) bad (2) bug (2) chipped (6) complain (1) complaint (2) dirty (1) disappoint (1) dump (2) hard (3) issue (1) lack (1) loud (1) lousy (1) mildew (1) mistake (1) negative (1) noise (1) problem (6) slow (1) smell (2) terrible (3) tiny (1) unfortunate (1) worst (2) wrong (1)

Issue

Appears in 2 comments.

The following words were used in comments with Issue:
room (2)

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

Sort by:

1. The bed was the only issue as my wife and I woke up with a stiff lower back each day.

"Good Location at good price " Read full review on Travelocity 6/1/2008 Vote

2. The room was very clean and comfortable (standard issue Hampton Inn room) and the staff was particularly friendly.

"What you would expect from Hampton " Read full review on TripAdvisor 6/28/2006 Vote