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 covered by branches that broke the living room window and damaged the roof. "I was convinced the ceiling would collapse," James recalls. "If it had fallen moments earlier, we could have been seriously injured or fatally wounded."
If it had come down minutes earlier we would have been critically hurt or fatally wounded
Emergency repairs took 24 hours after the host hauled the tree off the property, but the shaken couple feared the building might be structurally unsound and decided to book a hotel for the rest of their week-long stay.
The booking platform showed little concern. "We understand this may have caused some disruption," stated the first of many identical automated messages before concluding the unresolved case with a upbeat "Keep safe. Stay healthy."
The host displayed little concern. "All that happened was you experienced a loud sound and saw a tree lying on the terrace," she responded to the couple's refund request. "You have chosen to remember the worry and distress instead of celebrating a unique memory."
With the summer season has ended, countless holiday horror stories are coming to light.
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 did not. Stories include dirty 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 rental platforms has led to a rise in travelers arranging their own holidays. These platforms showcase worldwide property portfolios on their platforms and promise to satisfy travel dreams on a limited funds.
Customer safeguards, however, have not kept pace with their widespread use.
All-inclusive customers have legal options 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 agreement is with the person or business 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 paying twice that 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 major issues, the company stated it was up to the host to agree a refund; the host claimed the determination was the platform's.
After 10 weeks of similar automated messages in response to James's complaint, the platform declared the case had continued 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 commemorate their survival and "turn 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.
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 the majority of their only full day in the city after a safety lock on the front door failed.
"The host dispatched a maintenance man, who was unable to help," she states. "They eventually called a locksmith who attempted 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 hoisted up a wrench and tools. With us prying 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 blocked the mechanism. By then it was almost 4pm."
We would have been at serious risk if there had been an emergency while we were trapped, 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 said this was at the discretion of the host. The host not only declined, but kept her €250 deposit to cover the replacement 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 reserved for £70 when, upon trying to check in, he found the lockbox empty. The owners informed him they were overseas and could not help and advised him to locate somewhere else for the night. He spent an extra £123 on a hotel room and has spent the following four months trying unsuccessfully to get this refunded.
"The platform has essentially said that as the owner won't reply to them there's nothing they can do," he says. "I can't comprehend how a business can function this way with no accountability. The additional frustration is that the property in question is continues being advertised on the platform."
The platform refunded both customers after intervention. The company confirmed the host who had locked Philip out of his rental had not responded to its questions. When asked why unscrupulous accommodation providers were not removed, it said customers should review guest feedback to ensure a property was "the right fit."
Ratings do not always tell the complete picture. A recent investigation highlighted that one platform's standard setup was displaying reviews it considered "relevant." This means that it is simple for users to overlook a current deluge of reviews warning that a listing is a scam or not available.
The platform responded that customers could easily sort reviews by the most recent or lowest score so as to make their own choice 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 terms and conditions and ensure that booking information was current.
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 alternative accommodation in an crisis, but getting payment for a disrupted stay is a more difficult struggle. Both tend to rely on the owner to do what's fair.
The sector needs greater regulation, according to consumer advocates. "Since online platforms effectively self-regulate, the only option 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 court proceedings in their country."
They continue: "One might claim that the online marketplace failed to investigate your complaint properly and try to sue them, but this is a legal uncertainty. Both companies are registered overseas and have significant financial resources."
Regulatory bodies say new customer safety legislation requires online platforms to "exercise professional diligence" in relation to consumer transactions advertised or made on their platforms.
A spokesperson says: "Government agencies are on the side of consumers and we have implemented strict new financial penalties for violations of consumer law to safeguard people's money."
They added: "Businesses selling services to domestic consumers must comply with national law, and we have bolstered oversight authorities' powers to make sure they face severe penalties if they do not."
Music enthusiast and cultural critic with a passion for uncovering emerging trends and sharing in-depth analyses.
