🔗 Share this article

One century-old oak tree toppled over on the first 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 crushed 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 collapse," James recalls. "Had it fallen moments earlier, we could have been seriously injured or killed."

Had it fallen moments earlier we would have been critically hurt or fatally wounded

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

The booking platform remained unperturbed. "We recognize this may have caused some disruption," stated the first of many similar automated messages before concluding the unresolved case with a upbeat "Keep safe. Be well."

The host displayed little concern. "All that happened was you heard a loud noise and saw a tree resting on the terrace," she responded to the couple's refund request. "You decided to remember the anxiety and trauma instead of cherishing a special memory."

Peak Season Travel Problems Emerge

With the summer season has ended, countless travel nightmare accounts are emerging.

Unfortunate travelers report being locked in or locked out their rental – if it was real – or left stranded at night in unfamiliar cities when it wasn't. Stories include filthy bedrooms, dangerous equipment and unauthorized sublets. One common factor connects these spoiled holidays: they were reserved through digital reservation services that declined refunds.

The growth of rental platforms has led to a rise in travelers arranging their own holidays. These platforms display global property listings on their platforms and guarantee to satisfy travel dreams on a limited funds.

Consumer protections, however, have not caught up with their popularity.

Regulatory Loopholes

All-inclusive customers have legal recourse for holiday nightmares under travel protection regulations, but those who book accommodation through online booking services find themselves dependent on their host's cooperation.

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

James and Andrew had spent £931 for their week in the Provençal cottage and when they felt sufficiently endangered to return, ended up spending double the amount for a hotel. They have yet to receive notification about whether they are responsible for the damaged rental car. Despite the platform's guarantee program to reimburse customers for major issues, the company stated it was up to the host to agree a refund; the host claimed 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 summarily closed it. The host concluded that since repairs had cost her €5,000 (£4,350), she would not be offering 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 full refund 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 stuck inside 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 repair person, who was could not to help," she says. "Finally they called a locksmith who tried for multiple hours to access 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 tools. With us prying the lock from the inside and the locksmith hammering it from the outside, we eventually managed to extract it. It turned out loose screws had blocked the mechanism. By then it was nearly 4pm."

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

Pocock requested a complete reimbursement to compensate her ruined trip and the anxiety. The booking platform indicated this was at the discretion 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 key safe empty. The owners told 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 intervening four months attempting in vain to get this refunded.

"The platform has essentially said that as the owner isn't responding to them there's little they can do," he says. "I can't comprehend how a business can operate this way with no accountability. The additional disappointment is that the property in question is continues being advertised on the platform."

The platform reimbursed both customers after involvement. The company confirmed the host who had left 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."

Rating Processes

Reviews do not always tell 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 miss a current deluge of reviews cautioning that a listing is a scam or not available.

The platform countered that customers could easily organize reviews by the newest 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 depended on hosts to abide by its rules and ensure that availability was current.

Regulatory Grey Area

The issue for travelers who do not get what they paid for 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 compensation for a interrupted stay is a tougher struggle. Both typically rely on the owner to do what's fair.

The industry needs more regulation, according to consumer protection experts. "Because online platforms essentially police themselves, the only option if the dispute isn't resolved is legal action," experts say. "But who against? 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 investigate your complaint thoroughly and try to pursue them, but this is a legal uncertainty. Both firms are registered overseas and have significant financial resources."

Government authorities say recent 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 fines for violations of consumer law to protect people's money."

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