🔗 Share this article

A 100-year-old oak tree crashed down on the first day of a holiday. Moments 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 damaged the roof. "I was certain the ceiling would collapse," James remembers. "Had it fallen moments earlier, we could have been critically hurt or killed."

If it had fallen moments earlier we would have been critically hurt or killed

Emergency repairs took a full day after the host winched the tree off the property, but the traumatized couple feared the building might be unsafe and chose to book a hotel for the remainder of their week-long stay.

The booking platform remained unperturbed. "We recognize this may have caused some inconvenience," wrote the first of many identical automated messages before closing the pending case with a cheerful "Stay safe. Stay healthy."

The host displayed little concern. "All that happened was you experienced a loud sound and observed a tree lying on the terrace," she responded to the couple's refund request. "You decided to remember the worry and distress instead of cherishing a special memory."

Summer Travel Issues Emerge

Now that the summer season has concluded, numerous travel nightmare accounts are emerging.

Unlucky travelers report being locked in or locked out their accommodation – if it was real – or abandoned at night in strange cities when it did not. Stories include dirty bedrooms, dangerous equipment and unauthorized sublets. One shared element connects these ruined holidays: they were booked through digital reservation services that refused refunds.

The expansion of booking websites has led to a rise in travelers organizing their own holidays. These platforms showcase global property portfolios on their websites and promise to satisfy wanderlust on a budget.

Customer safeguards, though, have not kept pace with their widespread use.

Regulatory Gaps

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

Some platforms promote extra protections, but your contract is with the person or business offering the accommodation.

James and Andrew had paid £931 for their week in the French cottage and when they felt sufficiently endangered to return, ended up spending twice that for a hotel. They have yet to receive notification about whether they are liable for the broken rental car. Despite the platform's guarantee program to reimburse customers for major issues, the company declared it was up to the host to approve a refund; the host insisted the decision 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 summarily closed it. The host decided that since repairs had cost her €5,000 (£4,350), she would not be offering a refund either. She suggested 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 inquiries were raised about its health and safety policies.

Locked In

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

"The host dispatched a maintenance man, who was could not to help," she states. "They eventually called a locksmith who attempted for multiple hours to fix the lock from the outside. He had to purchase a rope, which he tossed up to our window and we lifted 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 remove it. It turned out loose screws had blocked the mechanism. By then it was almost 4pm."

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

Pocock requested a complete reimbursement to make up for her spoiled trip and the anxiety. 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 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 overseas and could not help and advised him to locate alternative accommodation for the night. He spent an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the following four months trying unsuccessfully to get this reimbursed.

"The platform has basically said that as the owner won't reply to them there's nothing they can do," he states. "I can't comprehend how a business can operate this way with no responsibility. The extra disappointment is that the property in question is still being listed on the platform."

The platform reimbursed both customers after involvement. The company verified the host who had left Philip out of his rental had not responded to its questions. When asked why dishonest accommodation providers were not removed, it said customers should review guest feedback to ensure a property was "the right fit."

Review Processes

Reviews do not always tell the whole story. A previous investigation highlighted that one platform's standard setup was showing reviews it considered "important." This means that it is simple for users to overlook a recent flood of reviews cautioning that a listing is a scam or not available.

The platform countered that customers could readily organize reviews by the newest or worst ratings 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 responded that it depended on hosts to follow its terms and conditions and ensure that booking information was up to date.

Regulatory Grey Area

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

Major platforms promise to help find other accommodation in an crisis, but getting compensation for a disrupted stay is a tougher battle. Both tend to rely on the owner to do the right thing.

The sector needs more regulation, according to consumer advocates. "Because online platforms effectively 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 firms are based overseas and have significant financial resources."

Regulatory bodies say new consumer protection legislation requires online platforms to "exercise professional diligence" in relation to consumer transactions advertised or made on their platforms.

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

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