voco St. Johns Solihull by IHG vs Similar Hotels

Rooms are described as clean and comfortable, though some had noise issues.

Rooms were comfortable but concerns about lighting and noise from machinery were noted.

Rooms described as comfortable, stylish and well-equipped (coffee machines), but some guests note minimalistic supplies (no slippers, no laundry bags) and occasional maintenance faults (broken TV, one report of no hot water).

Multiple issues reported: rooms overheating in sun with no AC, uncomfortable beds, blinds ineffective, TV failures and long walks to some rooms—room comfort and reliability are noticeably weak.

Some rooms reported issues with insect bites and cleanliness.

Rooms were generally clean despite worn furnishings. However, concerns about the cleanliness of the spa.

Rooms repeatedly described as clean, tidy and looking new; isolated notes about a strange towel smell and external grounds/cigarette litter due to building work.

Mixed reports: several guests noted clean rooms, but multiple reviews reported dirty showers, hair in shower, used toilet roll in a room and flies—overall below average cleanliness.

Convenient location for M42 and access to local attractions.

The location was consistently praised, being very convenient next to a shopping center.

Multiple mentions of a great location for the airport and nearby amenities; convenient for short stays and events.

Frequently noted as conveniently located (just off the motorway, close to destination) and with a good bar area; occasional downside when rooms faced a beer garden causing noise, but location is generally a strength.

Generally helpful staff, although there were some issues with responsiveness.

Staff were described as friendly and accommodating, especially during the room change situation.

Staff are frequently praised as lovely, polite and helpful; however there are occasional service lapses (missed room cleaning when requested).

Consistently praised staff described as friendly, helpful and accommodating across many reviews (helped with fans, moved rooms when requested), though isolated lapses (fire-alarm confusion) occurred; overall service is a strong positive.

Breakfast could improve in quality, but dinner options were well-received.

Breakfast was well-received, but service at the bar was occasionally slow.

Bar service and many breakfasts are praised, but there are recurring criticisms about breakfast quality/options (limited vegetarian choices, one comment that breakfast ‘wasn't great’).

Several positive comments about the food and bar (good food, lovely bar, able to watch events in bar); isolated negative note about poor breakfast, but F&B is generally a positive aspect.

Facilities include decent breakfast options but some wear and tear noted.

Lifts were frequently mentioned as problematic and the spa had cleanliness issues.

Good range of amenities reported (bar, pool, on-site Starbucks, breakfast) but issues mentioned with busy bar/reception, small lift, gym-heavy atmosphere, and building work affecting appearance.

Significant amenity shortfalls cited: lack of air conditioning, broken or missing TVs, no wifi in some rooms, no in-room phone, missing soap/coffee/tea—amenities are poor overall.

Parking fees perceived as excessive, but overall value is fair.

The hotel met expectations for price but guests expressed some concerns about hidden costs like parking.

Several guests call it good value or reasonably priced and would return for the price; a few felt room standard or charges (e.g., parking) didn't match expectations for certain bookings.

Mixed: some guests found the price acceptable for convenience, but several described the stay as a 'waste of money' or 'expensive considering' the issues, so perceived value is below the target overall rating.