🔗 Share this article

One century-old oak tree crashed down on the initial day of a holiday. Moments after James and his partner Andrew had finished eating breakfast on the terrace, the enormous tree destroyed their table and chairs and crushed their rental car's windscreen.

The vacation home in Provence, France was covered by branches that shattered the living room window and damaged the roof. "I was certain the ceiling would collapse," James recalls. "If it had fallen minutes earlier, we could have been seriously injured or killed."

If it had come down minutes earlier we would have been critically hurt or killed

Urgent repairs took 24 hours after the host winched the tree off the property, but the shaken couple feared the building might be unsafe and decided to reserve a hotel for the rest of their week-long stay.

The booking platform showed little concern. "We recognize this may have created some disruption," stated the first of many identical automated messages before concluding the unresolved case with a upbeat "Stay safe. Stay healthy."

The host displayed little concern. "The only incident was you heard a loud noise and observed a tree lying on the terrace," she replied to the couple's refund request. "You decided to remember the worry and distress instead of celebrating a special memory."

Peak Season Travel Issues Surface

Now that the peak travel period has concluded, numerous travel nightmare accounts are emerging.

Unlucky travelers report being trapped inside or locked out their accommodation – if it was real – or abandoned at night in strange cities when it did not. Accounts include dirty bedrooms, unsafe equipment and illegal sublets. One shared element connects these spoiled holidays: they were booked through digital reservation services that declined refunds.

The expansion of booking websites has led to a increase in travelers organizing their own holidays. These platforms display worldwide property listings on their websites and promise to fulfill wanderlust on a limited funds.

Customer safeguards, however, have not kept pace with their popularity.

Regulatory Loopholes

Package-deal customers have legal recourse for holiday disasters under travel protection regulations, but those who book accommodation through third-party platforms find themselves reliant on their host's cooperation.

Some platforms advertise additional protections, but your contract is with the person or company offering the accommodation.

James and Andrew had spent £931 for their week in the French cottage and when they felt too unsafe to return, ended up paying twice that for a hotel. They still await notification about whether they are liable for the broken rental car. Despite the platform's guarantee program to refund customers for major issues, the company declared it was up to the host to agree a refund; the host insisted the determination was the platform's.

After 10 weeks of similar automated messages in response to James's complaint, the platform declared the case had continued long enough and summarily closed it. The host concluded that since repairs had cost her €5,000 (£4,350), she would not be providing a refund either. She proposed that instead the couple celebrate their survival and "transform the event into a positive story."

The platform finally issued a full refund 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 left trapped the property for the majority of their single full day in the city after a security lock on the front door failed.

"The host sent a maintenance man, who was could not to help," she states. "They eventually sent a locksmith who tried 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 tool and tools. With us prying the lock from the inside and the locksmith hammering it from the outside, we eventually managed to extract it. It was discovered unfastened bolts had blocked the mechanism. By then it was almost 4pm."

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

Pocock requested a complete reimbursement to make up for her spoiled trip and the stress. The booking platform said this was at the discretion of the host. The host not only declined, but withheld her €250 deposit to pay for the new lock. The deposit was finally returned by the platform but Pocock felt she was due the €446 rental cost.

Another platform customer, Philip, was trapped outside the London flat he reserved for £70 when, upon trying to check in, he found the lockbox empty. The owners informed him they were overseas and could not help and advised him to find somewhere else for the night. He spent an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the following four months attempting in vain to get this refunded.

"The platform has essentially 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 operate this way with no responsibility. The additional frustration is that the property in question is still being advertised 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 dishonest accommodation providers were not delisted, it said customers should read guest feedback to ensure a property was "suitable for them."

Rating Systems

Reviews do not always tell the complete picture. A recent investigation highlighted that one platform's default system was displaying reviews it considered "important." This means that it is simple for users to miss a current flood of reviews cautioning that a listing is a fraud or not available.

The platform countered that customers could readily organize reviews by the most recent or lowest score so as to make their own choice on a property.

The same report claimed that listings that had been multiple times reported as scams were not taken down. The platform answered that it depended on hosts to abide by its rules and ensure that availability was up to date.

Regulatory Uncertainty

The issue 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 promise to help find alternative accommodation in an crisis, but getting payment for a disrupted stay is a tougher struggle. Both tend to rely on the owner to do the right thing.

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

They continue: "One might claim that the online marketplace failed to look into your complaint properly and try to pursue them, but this is a grey area. Both companies are based overseas and have significant financial resources."

Government authorities say recent customer safety legislation requires online platforms to "demonstrate professional diligence" in relation to consumer transactions promoted or made on their platforms.

A representative states: "Government agencies are on the side of consumers and we have implemented tough new fines for violations of consumer law to safeguard people's funds."

They added: "Companies selling services to local consumers must follow national law, and we have strengthened oversight authorities' powers to make sure they face severe penalties if they do not."