🔗 Share this article

A century-old oak tree crashed down on the first day of a vacation. Minutes after James and his partner Andrew had finished eating breakfast 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 shattered the living room window and damaged the roof. "I was convinced the ceiling would cave in," James remembers. "Had it fallen minutes earlier, we could have been critically hurt or killed."

Had it fallen moments earlier we would have been seriously injured or fatally wounded

Emergency repairs took 24 hours after the host hauled the tree off the property, but the shaken couple worried the building might be structurally unsound and decided to book a hotel for the remainder of their week-long stay.

The booking platform remained unperturbed. "We understand this may have caused some inconvenience," wrote the first of many similar automated messages before concluding the unresolved case with a cheerful "Keep safe. Be well."

The host also showed little concern. "The only incident was you heard a loud noise and observed a tree lying on the terrace," she responded to the couple's refund request. "You have chosen to remember the worry and distress rather than celebrating a unique memory."

Peak Season Travel Problems Emerge

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

Unlucky travelers report being trapped inside or locked out their accommodation – if it was real – or abandoned at night in strange cities when it did not. Accounts include filthy bedrooms, dangerous equipment and unauthorized 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 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 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 reliant on their host's willingness to help.

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

James and Andrew had spent £931 for their week in the Provençal cottage and when they felt too unsafe to return, ended up spending 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 reimburse customers for serious problems, 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 declared the case had dragged on long enough and summarily closed it. The host decided 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 positive story."

The platform finally issued a full refund along with a £500 voucher after questions were raised about its safety policies.

Trapped

Kim Pocock used a booking platform to reserve a flat for a weekend stay in Barcelona. She and her daughter were left trapped the property for the majority of their single 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 attempted for several 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 tools. With us prying the lock from the inside and the locksmith banging 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 serious risk if there had been an crisis while we were trapped, yet the host blamed us for using the lock

Pocock asked for a full refund 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 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 locked out the London flat he booked for £70 when, upon trying to check in, he found the key safe empty. The owners informed him they were overseas and could not help and suggested him to locate alternative accommodation for the night. He paid an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the intervening four months trying in vain to get this refunded.

"The platform has essentially 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 function this way with no accountability. The extra frustration is that the property in question is continues being advertised on the platform."

The platform reimbursed both customers after intervention. The company confirmed the host who had locked Philip out of his rental had failed to its questions. 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 tell the whole story. A previous investigation highlighted that one platform's default system was displaying reviews it considered "important." This means that it is simple for users to overlook a current flood 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 lowest score 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 responded that it depended on hosts to abide by its rules and ensure that availability was up to date.

Regulatory Uncertainty

The problem for travelers who do not get what they paid for is that their legal agreement 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 more difficult battle. Both tend to 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 course of action 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 legal action in their country."

They add: "You could argue that the online marketplace didn't manage to look into your complaint thoroughly and try to pursue them, but this is a grey area. Both companies are based overseas and have deep pockets."

Government authorities say new customer safety legislation requires online platforms to "demonstrate professional diligence" in relation to consumer transactions 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: "Businesses selling services to local consumers must follow national law, and we have strengthened oversight authorities' powers to make sure they face substantial penalties if they do not."