Half of Overseas Accommodation Booking Platform Users Suffer Damages... From Dark Patterns to Refund Issues

Monitoring of Six Platforms and Consumer Perception Survey
Priority Display of Prices Excluding Taxes and Fees
City Requests Stronger Oversight from Fair Trade Commission and Other Authorities

A recent survey found that one out of every two users of overseas accommodation booking platforms has experienced damages due to unclear price displays and other issues. Problems related to refunds and penalty fees were also common, but only 10% of respondents were able to clearly resolve these issues.

The Seoul Metropolitan Government, in collaboration with the consumer organization 'Consumers Together', conducted monitoring of six major overseas accommodation booking platforms with a high market share in Korea, and on June 1 announced the results of a perception survey of 1,000 consumers who had used these platforms in the past three years.

Photo by Yongjun Cho jun21@

The platforms surveyed included Agoda, Airbnb, Expedia, Booking.com, Trip.com, and Hotels.com.

The monitoring revealed that some companies engaged in so-called 'dark patterns,' such as initially displaying prices excluding taxes and fees to attract consumers. At the payment stage, the final price ended up being higher than expected, raising concerns about consumer confusion.

There were also cases where important information for consumers, such as whether a cancellation penalty would apply or non-refundable conditions, was displayed in small print or in a way that was not easily noticeable.

When issues such as refunds or penalty fees arose during platform use, some platforms responded passively by advising consumers to resolve the matter directly with overseas accommodation providers. This approach, combined with language barriers and lack of information, often led consumers to give up on resolving disputes.

In the consumer perception survey, 41% of respondents said they were 'dissatisfied' or 'very dissatisfied' with their use of overseas accommodation booking platforms. The reasons for dissatisfaction were as follows: 26% cited 'false or exaggerated advertising where amenities did not match the advertised content,' 26% pointed to 'problems related to strictly non-refundable policies or penalty fees,' and 24% mentioned 'unclear price displays, such as showing amounts excluding taxes and fees.' Additionally, 55% of respondents said they had actually suffered damages, with 75% of these cases involving amounts less than 100,000 won or between 100,000 and 300,000 won.

When asked about the resolution of their damages, 64% answered that the issue was 'only partially resolved,' 26% said it was 'not resolved,' and only 10% said it was 'resolved.'

The Seoul Metropolitan Government plans to request the Fair Trade Commission and relevant platform registration authorities to strengthen their oversight and supervision. According to Article 20 of the Act on Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce, etc., online intermediaries are obligated to take prompt measures to address complaints or disputes resulting from cybermall use. The city also plans to propose the introduction of a 'Survey on the Status of Consumer Protection Obligations of Overseas Accommodation Booking Platforms' (tentative name), which would monitor and publicly disclose whether these platforms are fulfilling their consumer protection obligations.

Kim Myoungsun, Director of Fair Economy at the Seoul Metropolitan Government, said, "While the use of overseas accommodation booking platforms is increasing, the lack of clarity regarding who is responsible when disputes arise has resulted in repeated consumer damages. Based on this survey, we will recommend institutional improvements and encourage responsible management by the platforms to further strengthen the consumer safety net."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.