🔗 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 crushed their rental car's windscreen.

The vacation home in Provence, France was engulfed by branches that shattered 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 fatally wounded."

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

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

The booking platform remained unperturbed. "We recognize this may have created some disruption," stated the first of many identical automated messages before concluding the pending case with a upbeat "Keep safe. Stay healthy."

The host also showed little concern. "The only incident was you experienced a loud sound and saw a tree resting on the terrace," she replied to the couple's refund request. "You have chosen to focus on the worry and distress rather than cherishing a special memory."

Peak Season Travel Issues Emerge

With the peak travel period has concluded, numerous travel nightmare accounts are coming to light.

Unlucky travelers report being trapped inside or locked out their rental – when it existed – or left stranded at night in unfamiliar cities when it did not. Stories include filthy bedrooms, dangerous equipment and illegal sublets. One shared element connects these ruined holidays: they were reserved through digital reservation services that refused refunds.

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

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

Legal Gaps

All-inclusive customers have legal recourse for holiday nightmares under travel protection 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 individual or company providing the accommodation.

James and Andrew had spent £931 for their week in the Provençal cottage and when they felt too unsafe to return, found themselves paying 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 stated it was up to the host to approve a refund; the host insisted the determination was the platform's.

After two and a half months of similar automated messages in response to James's complaint, the platform announced 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 suggested that instead the couple celebrate their survival and "transform the event into a positive story."

The platform finally issued a complete reimbursement along with a £500 voucher after inquiries were raised about its health and safety policies.

Trapped

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 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 several hours to fix the lock from the outside. He had to buy a rope, which he tossed up to our window and we lifted up a wrench and tools. With us levering the lock from the inside and the locksmith hammering it from the outside, we eventually managed to remove it. It was discovered loose screws had blocked the mechanism. By then it was almost 4pm."

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

Pocock requested a full refund to compensate her ruined 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 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 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 attempting in vain 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 don't understand how a business can operate this way with no responsibility. The additional frustration is that the property in question is continues being advertised on the platform."

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

Review Systems

Ratings do not always reveal the whole story. A previous investigation highlighted that one platform's default system was showing reviews it considered "important." This means that it is simple for users to overlook a current deluge of reviews cautioning that a listing is a scam or not available.

The platform responded that customers could easily organize reviews by the most recent or lowest score 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 relied on hosts to abide by its rules and ensure that booking information was current.

Regulatory Grey Area

The issue for travelers who do not get what they expected is that their contract 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 interrupted stay is a more difficult struggle. Both tend to rely on the owner to do the right thing.

The industry needs more regulation, according to consumer advocates. "Because online platforms essentially self-regulate, the only option if the dispute isn't resolved is legal action," analysts 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: "One might claim that the online marketplace failed to investigate your complaint thoroughly and try to pursue them, but this is a legal uncertainty. Both companies are registered abroad and have deep pockets."

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

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

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