🔗 Share this article

A 100-year-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 massive tree smashed 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 cave in," James remembers. "Had it fallen minutes earlier, we could have been seriously injured or fatally wounded."

Had it come down moments earlier we would have been seriously injured or killed

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

The booking platform showed little concern. "We understand this may have created some inconvenience," wrote the first of many identical automated messages before concluding the unresolved case with a upbeat "Keep safe. Be well."

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

Peak Season Travel Problems Emerge

With the peak travel period has ended, numerous holiday horror stories are coming to light.

Unlucky travelers report being trapped inside or locked out their rental – when it existed – or abandoned at night in strange cities when it wasn't. Stories include filthy bedrooms, dangerous equipment and unauthorized sublets. One shared element unites these ruined holidays: they were reserved through digital reservation services that refused refunds.

The growth of rental platforms has prompted a rise in travelers organizing their own holidays. These companies display global property portfolios on their websites and promise to satisfy travel dreams on a budget.

Consumer protections, though, have not kept pace with their popularity.

Legal Loopholes

All-inclusive customers have legal recourse for holiday nightmares under travel protection regulations, but those who book accommodation through third-party platforms find themselves reliant on their host's cooperation.

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

James and Andrew had spent £931 for their week in the French cottage and when they felt sufficiently endangered to return, found themselves spending double the amount for a hotel. They have yet to receive notification about whether they are liable for the broken 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 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 continued 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 commemorate their survival and "transform the event into a beautiful story."

The platform finally 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 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 malfunctioned.

"The host dispatched a maintenance man, 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 banging it from the outside, we finally managed to extract it. It was discovered 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 full refund to make up for her ruined trip and the anxiety. The booking platform said this was at the decision of the host. The host not only refused, but withheld her €250 deposit to pay for the new 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 lockbox empty. The owners informed him they were abroad and could not help and advised him to locate 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 reimbursed.

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

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

Review Systems

Ratings do not always reveal the whole story. A previous consumer report highlighted that one platform's standard setup was displaying reviews it considered "relevant." This means that it is easy for users to miss a recent deluge of reviews warning that a listing is a fraud or not available.

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

The same report stated that listings that had been repeatedly reported as scams were not taken down. The platform answered that it relied on hosts to abide by its rules and ensure that booking information was up to date.

Regulatory Grey Area

The problem for travelers who do not get what they expected is that their contract is with the accommodation provider not the booking platform.

Major platforms commit to help find alternative accommodation in an emergency, 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 sector needs greater regulation, according to consumer protection experts. "Since online platforms essentially self-regulate, the only option if the dispute isn't resolved 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: "One might claim that the online marketplace failed to look into your complaint thoroughly and try to sue them, but this is a grey area. Both companies are registered overseas and have significant financial resources."

Regulatory bodies say recent consumer protection legislation requires online platforms to "exercise professional diligence" in relation to consumer transactions promoted or made on their platforms.

A representative says: "Authorities are on the side of consumers and we have brought into force tough new financial penalties for breaches of consumer law to protect people's funds."

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