Legal implications of HA/OD preventing pre-booking vetting

OTA = Online Travel Agency, which means those sites that sell the booking and take the payment for you.
User avatar
greenbarn
Posts: 6146
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 6:41 pm
Location: The Westmorland Dales, Cumbria

Post by greenbarn »

paolo wrote:This is a grey area. According to Visit Britain as a self-catering accommodation provider you can discriminate on grounds of age only if you can objectively justify it, for example "if you can show evidence of problems they have had with that age group in the recent past or where other providers have reported such problems – for example, during large events such as festivals when large groups of younger people tend to gather"

That doesn't really apply to most properties.

But when owners talk about vetting, they are not just talking about groups of youngsters. Some are forming opinions based on names, nationalities, facebook page, etc. For example, where I am in France a lot of French owners will not rent to the French.

I would be interested to know: what is a legitimate reason for refusing a booking? Excluding the above scenario, and assuming they don't exceed the max number of people or have animals.
My understanding is that as an owner of a self-catering property in the UK we can refuse a booking without giving a reason, however at the moment I can’t point to any reliable source to confirm that - I might have to dig deep! It’s different for a hotel.

However, if we give reasons for refusing it has to be within the terms of the Equality Act, so you can’t impose a blanket ban based on age (if over 18 ), gender, race etc etc. You can choose not to accept single-sex groups as long as you apply that both to all male and all female groups, not just one.

So in answer to the question "what is a legitimate reason for refusing a booking?” the only other one I can come up with is “I don’t believe our property would be suitable for you”, end of.

A grey area indeed.
User avatar
paolo
Posts: 3885
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:18 pm
Location: Provence, France
Contact:

Post by paolo »

Oldhacker wrote:So my question to you remains are HA/OD overstepping the mark in preventing owners vetting potential renters?
There is an irony to a company called Owners Direct not letting you communicate directly with an owner. For the 4 big listing sites, or OTAs as they are called now, they will do whatever they want to maximise profit. Until such point as people vote with their feet. Which won't happen for now because these sites dominate Google results and spend so much on advertising that renters gravitate to them without even using Google.

If you want the renter to be able to circumvent the listing sites and get to you through your own site, make sure your house has a distinctive name (not Rose Cottage) and put the name of your house in the title of your ad, and prominently in the text. I have seen ads on listing sites that successfully mention the address of the personal website, either by omitting the www. or adding spaces in the address.
Paolo
Lay My Hat
User avatar
roxytoo
Posts: 1701
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 8:23 am
Location: Spain Costa Blanca

Post by roxytoo »

My title (villa lisa) on trip advisor has now been taken out with this message

To keep payments secure, we can't allow contact details, payment information or references to other sites in messages or listings.

The title for our apartment Casa De Suenos is still there!
Oldhacker
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 2:38 pm

Post by Oldhacker »

There is an irony to a company called Owners Direct not letting you communicate directly with an owner. For the 4 big listing sites, or OTAs as they are called now, they will do whatever they want to maximise profit. Until such point as people vote with their feet. Which won't happen for now because these sites dominate Google results and spend so much on advertising that renters gravitate to them without even using Google.
Hi Paolo - what you describe is abuse of a dominant / monopolistic market position by HA/OD etc. which could be of interest to the CMA or Trading Standards in the UK. There is also the question of removing the ability of owners to vet prospective renters riding roughshod over local laws in some countries which require such vetting. Certainly if OTA's were regulated or licensed in the same way that airlines and taxi companies are I think they would be in hot water already. Just look at Ryanair and Uber just now as two examples. In the UK it is now a criminal offence (punishable by prison or an unlimited fine) for residential property owners not to vet and carry out identity checks on prospective tenants. Holiday lettings are currently exempt but it is a fine line in some cases.

There is also the legal issue of the role HA/OD are playing in substance. They claim to be pure advertising platforms but the recent changes such as charging booking fees to guests, removing direct communication between owners and potential guests, encouraging potential guests to phone them with questions and denying owners access to details of potential guests mean that, in substance, they are carrying on more as agents than advertising portals. This potentially opens up a whole host of legal issues for them.
jafa
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:08 pm
Location: Kirchberg in tirol
Contact:

Post by jafa »

Ive already contacted Trading Standards in the UK. As they are a Swiss registered company, they weren't interested.
Jafa
Oldhacker
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 2:38 pm

Post by Oldhacker »

jafa wrote:Ive already contacted Trading Standards in the UK. As they are a Swiss registered company, they weren't interested.
Hi Jafa - they are not a Swiss registered company. From their website and T&C's:
The operations of HomeAway in Europe are managed by HomeAway UK Limited of Level 25, Portland House, Bressenden Place, London SW1E 5BH
https://www.ownersdirect.co.uk/info/abo ... conditions

And from their FB page-
Company Overview
Owners Direct specialises in advertising privately owned holiday accommodation direct from the owner. We have advertised holiday properties since 1997 and on our web site you will find over 57,000 villas, apartments, chalets, farmhouses and cottages - all types of holiday accommodation in countries throughout the world. We have seen enormous growth in recent years and are delighted to report that, we were voted Runner Up in the Best Villa Rental Companies category in the Conde Nast Readers Travel Awards 2009.

In August 2007 Owners Direct became part of HomeAway Inc. which owns the largest holiday websites in the US and Europe. We continue to operate as a separate brand from our offices in Epsom, UK.
https://www.facebook.com/pg/ownersdirec ... e_internal
jafa
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:08 pm
Location: Kirchberg in tirol
Contact:

Post by jafa »

No problem, when I contacted TS it was them that looked them up and told me due to the Swiss connection.
Jafa
ManxRed1
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 9:52 am
Location: Polperro, Cornwall, UK

Post by ManxRed1 »

jafa wrote:Ive already contacted Trading Standards in the UK. As they are a Swiss registered company, they weren't interested.
Your local Trading Standards? Is there a Trading Standards UK?

This is the company that is listed as being the contracting party on the Ts & Cs you sign up to when you advertise on HomeAway:

HOMEAWAY UK LIMITED
25TH FLOOR
PORTLAND HOUSE BRESSENDEN PLACE
LONDON
SW1E 5BH
Company No. 03152676

Definitely NOT a Swiss company. This is the company you need to complain about. Depending on where you live, local trading standards can vary wildly from 'tenacious' to 'don't give a monkeys'. It can sometimes be pot luck.

On the subject of oldhacker's point above:
There is also the legal issue of the role HA/OD are playing in substance. They claim to be pure advertising platforms but the recent changes such as charging booking fees to guests, removing direct communication between owners and potential guests, encouraging potential guests to phone them with questions and denying owners access to details of potential guests mean that, in substance, they are carrying on more as agents than advertising portals. This potentially opens up a whole host of legal issues for them.
This is the nub of the issue for them. Also, (and I've just put a review on trustpilot about this) they are quite happy to spin a response of 'we're a booking platform, not an advertising website' AND 'we're an advertising website, not a booking platform' depending on what the complaint is in regard to. They essentially spin it to the answer that most supports their response.

They WANT to be booking platform, because that justifies the added fees/revenue, the control over the holidaymaker, the commoditising of other people's property, ability to compete with hotel booking websites, etc... but they CAN'T actually be one, because they have no control over the properties, pricing, availability (owners are, after all, likely to advertise in more places than simply HomeAway/OD), owners' ability to veto bookings, etc.

They can try as much as they like, but their ambition is to be a booking website, but deep down they know they can't. In the process of taking it as far as they can though, owners (and holidaymakers) will suffer. But that's not their concern.

Neither, it seems, is the law. Michael O'Leary is not alone it would seem.
COYS
Posts: 795
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 1:24 pm
Location: Greek Islands

Post by COYS »

Oldhacker wrote:
There is an irony to a company called Owners Direct not letting you communicate directly with an owner. For the 4 big listing sites, or OTAs as they are called now, they will do whatever they want to maximise profit. Until such point as people vote with their feet. Which won't happen for now because these sites dominate Google results and spend so much on advertising that renters gravitate to them without even using Google.
Hi Paolo - what you describe is abuse of a dominant / monopolistic market position by HA/OD etc. which could be of interest to the CMA or Trading Standards in the UK. There is also the question of removing the ability of owners to vet prospective renters riding roughshod over local laws in some countries which require such vetting. Certainly if OTA's were regulated or licensed in the same way that airlines and taxi companies are I think they would be in hot water already. Just look at Ryanair and Uber just now as two examples. In the UK it is now a criminal offence (punishable by prison or an unlimited fine) for residential property owners not to vet and carry out identity checks on prospective tenants. Holiday lettings are currently exempt but it is a fine line in some cases.

There is also the legal issue of the role HA/OD are playing in substance. They claim to be pure advertising platforms but the recent changes such as charging booking fees to guests, removing direct communication between owners and potential guests, encouraging potential guests to phone them with questions and denying owners access to details of potential guests mean that, in substance, they are carrying on more as agents than advertising portals. This potentially opens up a whole host of legal issues for them.
Excellent analysis Oldhacker & has long been my view that the 'one size fits all' mantra so coveted by the OTA's fails to consider differing regional regulations & laws across the private rental sector. They will have little interest in this until it bites them on the bum like Uber, Ryanair etc as has already started happening in a few selected regions.
Were we to be found in breach of our licence conditions - for example: over occupation, non registered tenants, mimimum durations, noise pollution & any number of others we would be in deep s**t. Huge fines or revoked licences would follow. Choose to rent without the proper authorisations & you risk worse.
Working within the rules of our chosen region & the diktat of the OTA's is therefore a risky proposition & I don't see perfectly worthwhile regional regulations &/or business practices being scrapped just so the OTA's can keep their numbers up.
This time next year Rodney, we'll be millionaires.
User avatar
Rogthedodge
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:07 pm
Location: Praia da Luz, Algarve
Contact:

Post by Rogthedodge »

S'cuse my ignorance but what does OTA stand for.

Really good discussion from all, but nobody on this earth will tell me who I can or cannot accommodate in my house. Arrogant yes, sensible even more yes.
Deary me am I real.

www.holiday-rentals.com/52179
User avatar
paolo
Posts: 3885
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:18 pm
Location: Provence, France
Contact:

Post by paolo »

roxytoo wrote:My title (villa lisa) on trip advisor has now been taken out]
I don't think it will be long before this is adopted by all of them, it's such an obvious flaw in their sealed system.
Paolo
Lay My Hat
AndrewH
Posts: 1499
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:17 pm
Location: Kefalonia, Greece
Contact:

Post by AndrewH »

Oldhacker wrote: Hi Jafa - they are not a Swiss registered company.
"Owners Direct Holiday Rentals Limited" and "Homeaway UK Limited" are both UK private limited companies, registered at Companies House in London and both have the same Registered Office address at Portland House, London.

If anyone should need to know (i.e. Trading Standards and the like), the registered company number for OD is 05347639 and for HA(UK) it is 03152676. In both cases, they are put under the category "Web Portal".
Last edited by AndrewH on Sat Sep 30, 2017 7:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
COYS
Posts: 795
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 1:24 pm
Location: Greek Islands

Post by COYS »

Rogthedodge wrote:S'cuse my ignorance but what does OTA stand for.

Really good discussion from all, but nobody on this earth will tell me who I can or cannot accommodate in my house. Arrogant yes, sensible even more yes.
Online Travel Agent (Agency)
Or my personal fave
Odious Twats Association.
You choose :wink:
This time next year Rodney, we'll be millionaires.
User avatar
Rogthedodge
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:07 pm
Location: Praia da Luz, Algarve
Contact:

Post by Rogthedodge »

Odious Twats Association. :P
Deary me am I real.

www.holiday-rentals.com/52179
Oldhacker
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 2:38 pm

Post by Oldhacker »

Excellent analysis Oldhacker & has long been my view that the 'one size fits all' mantra so coveted by the OTA's fails to consider differing regional regulations & laws across the private rental sector. They will have little interest in this until it bites them on the bum like Uber, Ryanair etc as has already started happening in a few selected regions.
It is interested that both the Owners Direct and Homeaway UK websites are still stating:
Please note: we highly recommend you always screen any potential guest before letting them book your home.
https://www.ownersdirect.co.uk/info/tip ... -questions

While at the same time making it impossible for owners to do so! I reckon this issue is going to come back and bite them hard.
Post Reply