🔗 Share this article

One century-old oak tree toppled over on the initial day of a vacation. Moments after James and his partner Andrew had finished breakfasting on the terrace, the enormous tree smashed their table and chairs and damaged their rental car's windscreen.

The vacation home in Provence, France was engulfed 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 minutes earlier, we could have been critically hurt or killed."

Had it fallen minutes 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 worried the building might be unsafe and decided to reserve a hotel for the remainder of their week-long stay.

The booking platform showed little concern. "We understand this may have caused 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. "All that happened was you heard a loud noise and saw a tree lying on the terrace," she responded to the couple's refund request. "You have chosen to remember the anxiety and trauma instead of celebrating a special memory."

Peak Season Travel Issues Surface

Now that the peak travel period has concluded, countless holiday horror stories are emerging.

Unfortunate 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 filthy bedrooms, unsafe equipment and unauthorized sublets. One common factor connects these spoiled holidays: they were reserved through online booking platforms that declined refunds.

The expansion of booking websites has led to a rise in travelers arranging their own holidays. These platforms showcase global property portfolios on their websites and promise to fulfill travel dreams on a budget.

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

Legal Gaps

All-inclusive 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 willingness to help.

Some platforms advertise extra protections, but your contract is with the individual or company providing the accommodation.

James and Andrew had paid £931 for their week in the French cottage and when they felt sufficiently endangered to return, found themselves paying twice that for a hotel. They have yet to receive information about whether they are responsible for the damaged rental car. Despite the platform's guarantee program to refund customers for serious problems, the company stated 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 announced the case had dragged on long enough and abruptly ended 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 beautiful story."

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

Locked In

Kim Pocock used a booking platform to book 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 safety lock on the front door failed.

"The host dispatched a maintenance man, who was could not to help," she says. "Finally they sent a locksmith who tried for multiple hours to access the lock from the outside. He had to purchase a rope, which he threw up to our window and we lifted 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 remove it. It turned out unfastened bolts had jammed the mechanism. By then it was nearly 4pm."

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

Pocock requested a complete reimbursement to compensate her ruined trip and the stress. 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 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 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 spent an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the intervening four months trying in vain to get this reimbursed.

"The platform has basically said that as the owner isn't responding 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 frustration is that the property in question is continues being listed on the platform."

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

Rating Systems

Ratings do not always tell the complete picture. A previous investigation highlighted that one platform's standard setup was showing reviews it considered "relevant." This means that it is simple for users to overlook 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 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 removed. The platform responded that it relied on hosts to abide by 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 contract is with the accommodation provider rather than the booking platform.

Major platforms promise to help find alternative accommodation in an crisis, but getting compensation for a interrupted stay is a tougher struggle. Both typically rely on the owner to do the right thing.

The sector needs more regulation, according to consumer protection experts. "Because online platforms effectively police themselves, the only option if the dispute continues is lawsuits," 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 continue: "You could argue that the online marketplace didn't manage to look into your complaint properly and try to sue them, but this is a legal uncertainty. Both firms are registered abroad and have significant financial resources."

Regulatory bodies say recent consumer protection legislation requires online platforms to "exercise professional diligence" in relation to consumer purchases advertised 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 funds."

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