Your illustration shows the difference between Keyenaian (or even MMT) analysis of money velocity, modern banking, and real exchange.
The deposit holder committed fraud by using the deposit to pay a debt. The money the hotel owed the electrician should have come from a different fund, not a deposit. That money belongs to the depositor.
The landlord provides shelter and maintenance. We could discuss the pitfalls here, but a service with value was rendered and paid. Likewise, when the landlord seeks use of a space on the hotel, the service was paid.
Then, when the depositor returns, the fraud has been remedied to a degree, but the funds remain improperly allocated. The hotel has profited by not paying the electrician in the first place. Had the specific situation described not occurred, and the landlord gone anywhere else at all, they would have had to pay from the funds owed to the electrician.
This is getting into the weeds of accounting and econo.oc analysis, but there remains something incomplete in your illustration.
I will say any token for exchange must be perceived as valuable first on order for people to use it as money. HIVE adds value within our Blockchain. Bitcoin volatility has made it seem like a gamble, and people suffering poverty have a very high time preference for immediate problems instead of saving, investing, and participating in a long-term project.
please forgive my weak vote... I'm taking some safety precautions at the moment, and thus...
That said.. You are on point (as usual) the receptionist did commit fraud. That said, I was trying to focus on something else, and of course, you laid it out nicely.