🔗 Share this article

A 100-year-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 damaged their rental car's windscreen.

The vacation home in Provence, France was covered by branches that broke the living room window and damaged the roof. "I was certain the ceiling would cave in," James recalls. "If it had fallen moments earlier, we could have been critically hurt or fatally wounded."

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

Emergency repairs took 24 hours after the host hauled the tree off the property, but the traumatized couple feared the building might be unsafe and chose to reserve a hotel for the remainder of their week-long stay.

The booking platform showed little concern. "We understand this may have created some disruption," wrote the first of many identical automated messages before closing the pending case with a cheerful "Keep safe. Stay healthy."

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

Summer Travel Problems Surface

Now that the peak travel period has ended, numerous holiday horror stories are emerging.

Unlucky travelers report being trapped inside or locked out their accommodation – if it was real – or abandoned at night in unfamiliar cities when it wasn't. Accounts include filthy bedrooms, unsafe equipment and unauthorized sublets. One common factor connects these spoiled holidays: they were booked through online booking platforms that refused refunds.

The growth of booking websites has led to a increase in travelers arranging their own holidays. These companies showcase worldwide property portfolios on their websites and promise to satisfy travel dreams on a limited funds.

Consumer protections, though, have not caught up with their widespread use.

Regulatory Gaps

Package-deal customers have legal options 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 additional protections, but your agreement is with the person or business providing the accommodation.

James and Andrew had spent £931 for their week in the Provençal cottage and when they felt sufficiently endangered to return, found themselves paying double the amount for a hotel. They still await notification about whether they are liable for the damaged rental car. Despite the platform's guarantee program to reimburse customers for serious problems, the company stated it was up to the host to agree 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 continued long enough and summarily closed it. The host decided that since repairs had cost her €5,000 (£4,350), she would not be providing a refund either. She proposed that instead the couple commemorate their survival and "transform the event into a positive story."

The platform eventually issued a full refund along with a £500 voucher after questions were raised about its health and safety policies.

Trapped

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 safety lock on the front door malfunctioned.

"The host sent a maintenance man, who was unable to help," she states. "They eventually sent a locksmith who attempted for several hours to fix 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 levering 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 nearly 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 asked for a complete reimbursement to compensate her ruined trip and the anxiety. The booking platform indicated 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 owed 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 advised him to find alternative accommodation for the night. He spent an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the intervening four months attempting in vain to get this reimbursed.

"The platform has essentially said that as the owner won't reply to them there's little they can do," he states. "I don't understand how a business can operate this way with no responsibility. The extra disappointment is that the property in question is continues being advertised on the platform."

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

Rating Processes

Reviews do not always reveal the complete picture. A previous investigation highlighted that one platform's standard setup was displaying reviews it considered "important." This means that it is simple for users to miss a current flood of reviews warning that a listing is a scam 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 follow its rules and ensure that booking information was current.

Legal Grey Area

The problem for travelers who do not get what they expected 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 emergency, but getting compensation for a interrupted stay is a tougher struggle. Both typically rely on the owner to do what's fair.

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

They add: "One might claim that the online marketplace didn't manage to look into your complaint thoroughly and try to pursue them, but this is a legal uncertainty. Both companies are based abroad and have significant financial resources."

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

A representative says: "Government agencies are on the side of consumers and we have brought into force tough new financial penalties for breaches of consumer law to safeguard people's money."

They continued: "Businesses selling services to local consumers must follow local law, and we have strengthened regulatory authorities' powers to make sure they face substantial penalties if they do not."