🔗 Share this article

A century-old oak tree toppled over on the first day of a vacation. Minutes after James and his partner Andrew had finished eating breakfast on the terrace, the massive tree smashed their table and chairs and damaged their rental car's windscreen.

The rental cottage in Provence, France was covered by branches that broke the living room window and harmed the roof. "I was certain the ceiling would cave in," James recalls. "Had it fallen minutes earlier, we could have been critically hurt or killed."

Had it come down moments earlier we would have been seriously injured or killed

Urgent repairs took a full day after the host winched the tree off the property, but the shaken couple worried the building might be structurally unsound and chose to book a hotel for the rest of their week-long stay.

The booking platform showed little concern. "We understand this may have created some disruption," stated the first of many similar automated messages before concluding the unresolved case with a cheerful "Keep safe. Be well."

The host also showed little concern. "The only incident was you experienced a loud sound and saw a tree lying on the terrace," she responded to the couple's refund request. "You have chosen to remember the anxiety and distress rather than cherishing a unique memory."

Summer Vacation Problems Emerge

With the summer season has ended, countless travel nightmare accounts are coming to light.

Unlucky travelers report being trapped inside or unable to enter their accommodation – if it was real – or left stranded at night in strange cities when it wasn't. Accounts include dirty bedrooms, dangerous equipment and illegal sublets. One common factor unites these spoiled holidays: they were booked through digital reservation services that refused refunds.

The expansion of booking websites has prompted a increase in travelers organizing their own holidays. These companies showcase global property listings on their websites and promise to satisfy wanderlust on a limited funds.

Customer safeguards, however, have not caught up with their widespread use.

Regulatory Gaps

Package-deal customers have legal options for holiday disasters under travel protection regulations, but those who book accommodation through online booking services find themselves dependent on their host's cooperation.

Some platforms promote extra protections, but your agreement is with the person or company providing the accommodation.

James and Andrew had paid £931 for their week in the Provençal cottage and when they felt too unsafe to return, ended up spending twice that for a hotel. They have yet to receive information about whether they are liable for the damaged rental car. Despite the platform's protection pledge to reimburse customers for serious problems, the company declared it was up to the host to approve a refund; the host claimed the determination was the platform's.

After two and a half months of identical automated messages in response to James's complaint, the platform declared the case had dragged on long enough and abruptly ended it. The host decided that since repairs had cost her €5,000 (£4,350), she would not be offering a refund either. She proposed that instead the couple commemorate their survival and "turn the event into a beautiful story."

The platform eventually issued a complete reimbursement along with a £500 voucher after questions were raised about its safety policies.

Trapped

Kim Pocock used a booking platform to reserve a flat for a two-night stay in Barcelona. She and her daughter were stuck inside the property for the majority of their single full day in the city after a security lock on the front door malfunctioned.

"The host dispatched a repair person, who was could not to help," she states. "They eventually called a locksmith who attempted for multiple hours to access the lock from the outside. He had to buy a rope, which he threw up to our window and we hoisted up a wrench and pliers. With us prying the lock from the inside and the locksmith hammering it from the outside, we finally managed to extract it. It turned out loose screws had blocked the mechanism. By then it was nearly 4pm."

We would have been at grave danger if there had been an emergency while we were locked in, yet the host blamed us for using the lock

Pocock requested a full refund to compensate her spoiled trip and the stress. The booking platform said this was at the decision of the host. The host not only refused, but withheld her €250 deposit to cover the replacement lock. The deposit was eventually returned by the platform but Pocock felt she was due the €446 rental cost.

Another platform customer, Philip, was locked out the London flat he booked for £70 when, upon attempting to check in, he found the lockbox empty. The owners told him they were abroad and could not help and suggested him to find somewhere else for the night. He paid an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the following four months trying unsuccessfully to get this refunded.

"The platform has basically said that as the owner won't reply to them there's little they can do," he states. "I can't comprehend how a business can function this way with no responsibility. The additional disappointment is that the property in question is still being listed on the platform."

The platform reimbursed both customers after intervention. The company verified the host who had locked Philip out of his rental had failed to its questions. When asked why unscrupulous accommodation providers were not removed, it said customers should review guest feedback to ensure a property was "suitable for them."

Rating Systems

Reviews do not always reveal the whole story. A recent investigation highlighted that one platform's standard setup was displaying reviews it considered "relevant." This means that it is easy for users to miss a recent flood of reviews cautioning that a listing is a scam or not available.

The platform responded that customers could easily sort reviews by the most recent or worst ratings so as to make their own decision on a property.

The same report stated that listings that had been multiple times reported as scams were not taken down. The platform responded that it depended on hosts to abide by its terms and conditions and ensure that booking information was up to date.

Regulatory Uncertainty

The problem for travelers who do not get what they paid for is that their legal agreement is with the accommodation provider rather than the booking platform.

Major platforms commit to help find alternative accommodation in an emergency, but getting payment for a interrupted stay is a more difficult battle. Both typically rely on the owner to do what's fair.

The sector needs greater regulation, according to consumer advocates. "Because online platforms effectively police themselves, the only option if the dispute continues is legal action," analysts say. "But against whom? As the contract is between you and the host you'd have to take legal action in their country."

They add: "One might claim that the online marketplace didn't manage to investigate your complaint properly and try to sue them, but this is a legal uncertainty. Both firms are based overseas and have deep pockets."

Regulatory bodies say new customer safety legislation requires online platforms to "demonstrate professional diligence" in relation to consumer purchases promoted or made on their platforms.

A spokesperson states: "Authorities are on the side of consumers and we have brought into force strict new financial penalties for breaches of consumer law to protect people's money."

They continued: "Businesses selling services to domestic consumers must comply with national law, and we have bolstered regulatory authorities' powers to make sure they face severe penalties if they do not."