Royal Cambridge Hotel - London, United Kingdom 

KH
Posted: Wed, May 13 2009
the room itself was small but clean. bathroom needs improvement: the shower head seemed to be mouldy, the tap of the washbasin was not installed correctly, the light was poor. but considering the top location and the low price one can live with the shortcomings. for my next travel to london i would try another hotel at sussex gardens.

SK
Posted: Fri, Mar 06 2009
Often the included breakfast wasn't ready at the given time, and often it was incomplete (some days it missed beans, cheese etc.). The surrondings didn't make much noise, but when other guests walked thru your room, and shutted doors, you will hear it very well.

Iben Bjurner
Posted: Fri, Aug 08 2008
I suppose that London hotels do not offer that high a standard for ?65 which is why the lamps in my room (309) were broken, the drawers likewise ... the location was the only benefit in connection with this stay. On Venere's website it said that the hotel was recently refurbished - but this seemed to apply to the reception areas only.

Iben Bjurner
Posted: Wed, Aug 06 2008
I suppose that London hotels do not offer that high a standard for £65 which is why the lamps in my room (309) were broken, the drawers likewise ... the location was the only benefit in connection with this stay. On Venere's website it said that the hotel was recently refurbished - but this seemed to apply to the reception areas only.

PD
Posted: Thu, Jul 24 2008
Room was dirty, tiny and old - a cramped attic space which was entirely different from the pictures. Water marks on walls and ceilings, cobwebs, cracks in walls. Staff were glum and not happy to be around - particularly the breakfast staff. what was billed as a three star hotel was an absolute waste of money and a complete rip-off at 80 pounds per night. When we asked if there was another room spare that we could move to given the conditions staff refused. Don't waste your time or your money staying here.