Skarbimierzyce Hotels from ₹3,636

"Had a really nice stay, the penthouse apartment was lovely, all modern, clean and very well kept. Balcony got loads of sun so was a really nice feature to have. Only downside was the check in as I didn't receive any emails or messages on how to check in and the coffee shop that was listed to go to was closed for 4 days so we where unable to ask there , so we have to find a number online to message the host, after getting no reply on Expedia chat. However this did not damper the holiday as the apartment was lovely. I would recommend."

"Had a very good 1 night stay. All the staff where friendly and helpful with the extra request for a pillow. Was allowed to leave bags at the hotel after check out to be picked up later. Hotel has a very fun and funky circus theme."

"Wow this hotel went down hill lately. Everything is outdated, room was dirty, hair on floor and bed :/ during our 4 night stay, not even once we received cleaning service, or fresh towels or toilet paper. Even found hair in the coffee station. Furniture, even toilet was yellow. I typically love staying at Radissons all over the world but this location was more of a motel feel for me . "

"Ordinary and staff not very interested in their job"

"The staff were really helpful the room was a bit light though with just blinds no curtains"

"Very suited for quick business trip "

"Do not stay"

"Hotel was clean and the parking was in a good location. The staff was very friendly, although they were stingy when we asked for ice, and would only give us one extra pillow. The breakfast was amazing with lots of variety. We would definitely return."

"Worse than Radisson. The bathroom reeked of cigarettes; I had to ask for a room change. The window couldn't be opened, there was no option for fresh scrambled eggs with onions at breakfast, which is a regular menu for me when I travel, and the selection of fruit and fresh vegetables was poor. Overall, the standard was very average to mediocre, but I'd call it a 3-star hotel, maybe 3.5, but certainly not 4."