A woman has issued a warning to other travellers after her hotel booking was cancelled weeks after receiving confirmation.
Citing a technical glitch, she was asked by the booking platform to pay four times the amount she initially paid if she wanted to rebook.
Erika Mann booked for her family to stay at Montreal’s Holland Hotel through Booking.com to watch the Formula One Grand Prix next year.
On May 25, she booked a four-room unit for $4,300 CAD (around £2,300) for May 22-24, 2026.
But weeks after her reservation was confirmed, both the hotel and Booking.com told Erika that the price was a mistake, and if she still wanted the rooms for the two-night stay, she would need to pay more than $17,000 CAD (£9,200).
On June 27, the hotel called her saying the price was wrong and she needed to cancel or pay the new rate.
She contacted Booking.com, which told her she would either need to cancel the reservation herself or pay that new rate for the same unit on the same dates.
When she refused these options and demanded to keep her original booking, the website cancelled it.
A woman has issued a warning to other travellers after her hotel booking was cancelled weeks after receiving confirmation (stock image)
A traveller booked rooms for her family to stay at Montreal’s Holland Hotel through Booking.com to watch the Formula One Grand Prix next year
Erika had already booked her flights and she claimed hotel prices in the area were rising quickly.
The Holland Hotel, where Erika had booked, told Go Public a ‘synchronisation error’ with Booking.com caused the issue, allowing non-event pricing to briefly appear for two units at the property. When they did, the hotel said Erika booked one of them.
It said an automated software updates prices through Booking.com’s system, which means the hotel can’t manually override the rates shown on the platform.
The hotel said that when Formula One organisers confirmed in 2024 that the 2026 Montreal Grand Prix would take place on the third or fourth weekend of May, the system should have automatically adjusted those dates to ‘event pricing.’
Booking.com said the hotel asked them to review the case. The site sided with the property after it reported the posted rate was an error.
Erika said Booking.com did offer alternative accommodations for roughly what she paid but none were ‘remotely equivalent’ for the space they needed.
‘Our procedures do allow for cancellations in limited circumstances where a genuine rate mistake has occurred,’ Booking.com wrote to Go Public.
‘That being said, we recognise that communication to the customer fell short of our usual standards.’
The company said the cancellation was approved under its standard policy permitting properties to void bookings in ‘rare cases where a property identifies a clear rate error’.
The Holland Hotel, where Erika had booked, said a ‘synchronisation error’ with Booking.com caused the issue. The hotel is pictured
Booking.com eventually told Erika it would honour her original booking and cover the price difference, allowing her to keep the same four-bedroom unit at no additional cost.
It follows the Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) recent ruling that Booking.com used ‘from’ price claims for hotel rooms that exaggerated how many were available at the advertised rate.
Booking.com had an advert on May 6 stating ‘Places to stay in Sheffield – Best Price Guarantee,’ while further text read ‘easyHotel Sheffield City Centre From £28.’
Booking.com said the dates and prices shown were ‘dynamically chosen’ by Google from data it provided, meaning they could vary for each user and search.
The online travel company believed the information displayed in the advert was accurate and not misleading.
However, the ASA said the data Booking.com provided showed seven bookings were made at the easyHotel Sheffield City Centre for the advertised price in May.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled that Booking.com used ‘from’ price claims for hotel rooms that exaggerated how many were available at the advertised rate
The watchdog said it did not receive any other information from Booking.com, such as the number of dates on which rooms were available for £28, to help make an adequate assessment of the proportion of rooms at the hotel available at £28
Therefore it considered that the information provided was insufficient to substantiate the claim ‘From £28.’
Booking.com said: ‘Our aim is to consistently provide travellers with transparent information when planning and booking trips on our platform. This includes accurately showing rates and availability at the time of advertising.
‘Which was the case in this instance, with successful bookings being made at the advertised rate, evidence of which was shared with the ASA. We continue to work collaboratively with the ASA to address any outstanding questions they might have.’
Source link
CHECK OUT: Top Travel Destinations
READ MORE: Travel News
