🔗 Share this article

One 100-year-old oak tree toppled over on the first day of a holiday. 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 vacation home in Provence, France was engulfed by branches that broke 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 minutes earlier we would have been critically hurt or killed

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

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

The host also showed little concern. "The only incident was you heard a loud noise and observed a tree resting on the terrace," she replied to the couple's refund request. "You decided to focus on the anxiety and distress rather than cherishing a unique memory."

Peak Season Travel Problems Surface

With the peak travel period has concluded, numerous holiday horror stories are emerging.

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

The growth of booking websites has prompted a rise in travelers arranging their own holidays. These companies showcase worldwide property portfolios on their websites and guarantee to satisfy wanderlust on a limited funds.

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

Regulatory Gaps

Package-deal customers have legal options for holiday nightmares under consumer travel regulations, but those who reserve accommodation through third-party platforms find themselves dependent on their host's cooperation.

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

James and Andrew had paid £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 information about whether they are responsible 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 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 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 "turn the event into a positive story."

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

Trapped

Kim Pocock used a booking platform to book a flat for a weekend stay in Barcelona. She and her daughter were left trapped the property for most of their only full day in the city after a security lock on the front door failed.

"The host sent a maintenance man, who was unable to help," she states. "Finally they called a locksmith who attempted for several hours to fix the lock from the outside. He had to purchase a rope, which he tossed up to our window and we hoisted up a wrench and tools. With us levering the lock from the inside and the locksmith banging it from the outside, we eventually managed to extract it. It was discovered loose screws had jammed 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 asked for a full refund to compensate her ruined trip and the anxiety. The booking platform said this was at the decision of the host. The host not only declined, but kept 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 booked for £70 when, upon attempting to check in, he found the key safe empty. The owners told him they were overseas and could not help and suggested him to locate 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 accountability. The extra frustration is that the property in question is still being advertised on the platform."

The platform refunded both customers after intervention. The company verified the host who had left Philip out of his rental had failed to its questions. When asked why dishonest accommodation providers were not delisted, it said customers should read guest feedback to ensure a property was "the right fit."

Rating Systems

Ratings do not always tell the whole story. A recent consumer report highlighted that one platform's default system was showing reviews it considered "important." This means that it is simple for users to miss a current deluge of reviews warning that a listing is a scam or not available.

The platform countered that customers could easily sort reviews by the newest or worst ratings so as to make their own decision on a property.

The same report claimed that listings that had been repeatedly reported as scams were not removed. The platform answered that it relied on hosts to follow its terms and conditions and ensure that availability 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 not the booking platform.

Major platforms promise to help find other accommodation in an crisis, but getting payment for a interrupted stay is a tougher battle. Both tend to rely on the owner to do the right thing.

The sector needs greater regulation, according to consumer advocates. "Because online platforms effectively self-regulate, the only course of action 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 continue: "One might claim that the online marketplace failed to look into your complaint properly and try to sue them, but this is a grey area. 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 purchases promoted or made on their platforms.

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

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