🔗 Share this article

A century-old oak tree crashed down on the first day of a holiday. Minutes after James and his partner Andrew had finished eating breakfast on the terrace, the massive tree destroyed their table and chairs and crushed 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 convinced the ceiling would collapse," James remembers. "Had it fallen moments earlier, we could have been critically hurt or killed."

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

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

The booking platform showed little concern. "We recognize this may have created some inconvenience," stated the first of many similar automated messages before closing the pending case with a upbeat "Stay safe. Be well."

The host also showed little concern. "All that happened was you experienced a loud sound and observed a tree resting on the terrace," she replied to the couple's refund request. "You have chosen to focus on the worry and distress instead of celebrating a special memory."

Peak Season Travel Issues Emerge

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

Unlucky travelers report being trapped inside or unable to enter 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 shared element unites these spoiled holidays: they were booked through digital reservation services that refused refunds.

The growth of rental platforms 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 limited funds.

Consumer protections, however, have not kept pace with their widespread use.

Regulatory Gaps

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

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

James and Andrew had spent £931 for their week in the French cottage and when they felt too unsafe to return, ended up paying double the amount for a hotel. They still await information about whether they are responsible for the broken rental car. Despite the platform's protection pledge to refund customers for major issues, the company declared it was up to the host to agree a refund; the host insisted the decision was the platform's.

After 10 weeks 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 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 celebrate their survival and "transform the event into a beautiful 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 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 sent a repair person, who was could not to help," she says. "They eventually sent a locksmith who attempted for multiple 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 wrench and pliers. With us levering the lock from the inside and the locksmith hammering it from the outside, we finally managed to remove it. It was discovered loose screws had jammed the mechanism. By then it was almost 4pm."

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

Pocock asked for a complete reimbursement to compensate her spoiled trip and the anxiety. The booking platform indicated this was at the decision of the host. The host not only declined, but withheld her €250 deposit to pay for the replacement lock. The deposit was eventually returned by the platform but Pocock felt she was owed the €446 rental cost.

Another platform customer, Philip, was trapped outside the London flat he booked for £70 when, upon attempting to check in, he found the key safe empty. The owners informed him they were abroad and could not help and suggested him to find alternative accommodation for the night. He paid an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the intervening four months attempting unsuccessfully to get this refunded.

"The platform has essentially said that as the owner isn't responding to them there's nothing they can do," he states. "I don't understand how a business can function this way with no accountability. The extra disappointment is that the property in question is still being advertised on the platform."

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

Rating Processes

Reviews do not always reveal the complete picture. A recent investigation highlighted that one platform's default system was showing reviews it considered "relevant." This means that it is easy for users to overlook a current flood of reviews warning that a listing is a fraud 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 choice on a property.

The same report stated that listings that had been repeatedly reported as scams were not removed. The platform responded that it relied on hosts to abide by its rules and ensure that availability was current.

Regulatory Uncertainty

The issue 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 emergency, but getting payment for a interrupted stay is a more difficult struggle. Both typically rely on the owner to do what's fair.

The sector needs greater regulation, according to consumer advocates. "Because online platforms effectively police themselves, the only course of action if the dispute continues 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 look into your complaint thoroughly and try to sue them, but this is a grey area. Both companies are registered abroad and have significant financial resources."

Regulatory bodies say new customer safety legislation requires online platforms to "demonstrate professional diligence" in relation to consumer purchases advertised or made on their platforms.

A representative says: "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 regulatory authorities' powers to make sure they face substantial penalties if they do not."