🔗 Share this article

One 100-year-old oak tree toppled over on the first day of a vacation. 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 shattered 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."

If it had come down moments earlier we would have been critically hurt or fatally wounded

Emergency repairs took 24 hours after the host winched the tree off the property, but the shaken couple worried the building might be unsafe and decided to reserve a hotel for the rest 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 concluding the unresolved case with a cheerful "Stay safe. Be well."

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

Summer Travel Issues Surface

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

Unlucky travelers report being trapped inside or locked out their accommodation – when it existed – or left stranded at night in unfamiliar cities when it wasn't. Stories include dirty bedrooms, dangerous equipment and unauthorized sublets. One common factor unites these ruined holidays: they were reserved through digital reservation services that refused refunds.

The expansion of booking websites has prompted a increase in travelers arranging their own holidays. These platforms display global property portfolios on their websites and guarantee to satisfy wanderlust on a limited funds.

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

Regulatory Gaps

All-inclusive customers have legal options for holiday nightmares under consumer travel regulations, but those who book accommodation through online booking services find themselves reliant on their host's willingness to help.

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

James and Andrew had paid £931 for their week in the Provençal cottage and when they felt too unsafe to return, found themselves spending twice that for a hotel. They have yet to receive notification about whether they are liable for the damaged rental car. Despite the platform's protection pledge to reimburse customers for serious problems, the company stated it was up to the host to approve 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 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 suggested that instead the couple commemorate their survival and "turn 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.

Locked In

Kim Pocock used a booking platform to reserve a flat for a weekend stay in Barcelona. She and her daughter were stuck inside the property for most 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 unable to help," she says. "They eventually sent a locksmith who tried 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 lifted up a tool and tools. With us prying the lock from the inside and the locksmith banging it from the outside, we eventually managed to remove it. It was discovered unfastened bolts had blocked the mechanism. By then it was nearly 4pm."

We would have been at serious risk if there had been an crisis while we were locked in, yet the host faulted us for using the lock

Pocock requested a full refund to make up for her spoiled trip and the anxiety. The booking platform indicated 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 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 reserved for £70 when, upon trying to check in, he found the lockbox empty. The owners informed him they were abroad and could not help and advised him to find alternative accommodation for the night. He paid an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the intervening four months trying 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 accountability. The extra disappointment is that the property in question is continues 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 delisted, it said customers should review guest feedback to ensure a property was "suitable for them."

Rating Processes

Ratings do not always tell the complete picture. A recent consumer report highlighted that one platform's default system was displaying reviews it considered "relevant." This means that it is simple for users to overlook a current flood of reviews warning that a listing is a scam or not available.

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

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

Regulatory 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 commit to help find other 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 industry needs greater regulation, according to consumer advocates. "Because online platforms effectively police themselves, the only course of action if the dispute isn't resolved is lawsuits," experts say. "But against whom? As the contract is between you and the host you'd have to take court proceedings in their country."

They add: "You could argue that the online marketplace didn't manage to investigate your complaint properly and try to pursue them, but this is a legal uncertainty. Both firms 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 purchases promoted or made on their platforms.

A representative states: "Authorities are on the side of consumers and we have implemented tough new financial penalties for violations of consumer law to protect people's funds."

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