A warning if you are looking to book a hotel room through a third party app called Snaptravel – don’t do it, particularly if your travel plans may change. Kayak and the hotel share some of the blame as well.
Snaptravel Scam: Bait-And-Switch Hotel Booking
An Award Expert client wanted to spend a night at the Villa Kennedy in Frankfurt, a hotel that I love. We booked his flight and he did not even mention he needed a hotel…until after he got shafted.
I realize we live in a world transformed by the pandemic, but hotels and third-party booking platforms must do a better job of clearly outlining the amenities actually available at hotels and resorts. Just like disclosing all fees upfront, this transparency is vital in helping consumers make informed choices when reserving overnight accommodations.
My client began on Kayak and searched for the Rocco Forte Villa Kennedy. A list of rates appeared, with the standard rate being $331, but a cheaper $281 rate appearing from Snaptravel. Snaptravel is a messaging-based travel app that partners with Kayak.
On Kayak, there was no indication any of the amenities would not be available due to COVID-19:
Same story on the Villa Kennedy website – a big section on COVID-19 with nothing about closures:
So he booked it. Instead of receiving a confirmation from Snaptravel, he received one from DOTW (Destinations of the World), which appears to be a booking network with access to wholesale rates.
But when he showed up at the Villa Kennedy, he found a number of problems:
- Restaurant was closed
- Breakfast was not available
- Gym was closed
- Spa was closed
- On-site COVID-19 testing not available
That’s huge…you really don’t go the Villa Kennedy to sit in your room. Speaking of the room, this was the absolutely depressing room he was assigned:
With a drab room and no amenities, he asked to check out less than a half hour after arriving. The hotel agreed, noting that it had “released” the booking and it was eligible for a refund.
But when my client reached out to Snaptravel he was immediately denied a refund. He escalated to a supervisor and was again denied. They did not care. The rule, he was told, are that all sales are final.
I advised him to dispute the charge. Snaptravel could have refunded the stay and did not. It’s a shady way to act and a despicable example of customer service.
Kayak is also to blame, as is the hotel for not clearly disclosing what amenities were actually available. This, it seems to me, is exactly when a credit card company should step into protect their cardholders.
But there is no longer a reasonable expectation that amenities like restaurants and spas will not be open. Indeed, in Frankfurt most hotels have returned to full service.
CONCLUSION
Be very wary of doing business with Snaptravel. It appears their advantage is they take a much lower “cut” of hotel commissions in order to offer a more attractive rate. But when you book with Snaptravel, you’re locked in – even in bait-and-switch situations like what occurred to my client. Kayak and the Villa Kennedy must also do a better job of actually making clear which amenities are available and which are not, because that is a fundamental selling point of this hotel.
Did it say anywhere in the T+Cs on SnapTravel that the sales were final?
This one seems more to blame on the hotel with having bad information on their website. If their website is correct, then Kayak probably has correct information for their site.
I wouldn’t use scam to describe this issue.
I still see it as a scam. SnapTravel T&Cs do say that all sales are final.
I guess I have two comments on this. First, that room, which I know at Villa Kennedy after staying there for years and getting stuck in it a few times during high occupancy, is one of the annex rooms that are in distant hallway on each of the floors. They are indeed dismal and dark. But, these are exactly the rooms they and many other hotels assign to cheaper third party bookings. This is not some great mystery and most people know it and expect it. And why I never use third party sites. As far as the amenities, if one still must book at a third party site I would think you would at least check the room categories and current Covid offerings on the main hotel site. Again, why would you trust updated of current info on a third party site?
Sorry I wasn’t clear. The hotel’s own website did not indicate any closures. Agree on assigning the worst room to the bulk rates.
I thought for sure this article would be about him getting walked or the hotel not having any evidence of a booking – which apparently has happened to many folks. I suppose I’ve been extremely lucky in the few instances I’ve used SnapTravel not to have had any problems – but your title is not far off based on the horrible CS stories I’ve read about SnapTravel.
I think your broad declaration that “Snaptravel is a Scam” is overkill, and substantially lacking foundation based on your article. Your conclusion is based upon 1. Perceived inadequate disclosure regarding availability of hotel amenities, and 2. No refund after the guest checked out upon learning of the lack of available amenities.
Many, if not most, OTA’s lack the necessary detail to display with any level of precision what the covid shutdown situation is at any given hotel. Same goes for displaying amenities in general, various room types, etc. They just aren’t robust sites, in most cases. They can, however, offer good discounts for those willing to do independent research on the details that matter to them (tripadvisor, hotels own website, call the hotel, etc.). The aggrieved party apparently booked without doing any of this, or he would have been made aware of the situation “on the ground.”
Regarding the refund, snaptravel’s terms govern that. In my experience they’re pretty fair on cancellation terms, allowing for a full refund if canceled within 48 or 24 hours (I can’t remember which). While it’s unfortunate that the hotel staff essentially indicated that a refund was forthcoming, the guest should probably have been aware that the bargain basement OTA was going to be the primary hurdle.
I’ve made two successful bookings with snaptravel during the pandemic, and everything went off without a hitch. I took note that the interface doesn’t provide any great detail about the “goings on” at the hotel, did my own research, made a decision, and saved a good deal of money. Snaptravel served its purpose, though there’s a level of risk inherent in using it or any other OTA. If service and accountability are of primary import, then you gotta book direct.
I had a one night Snap Travel booking in Rome for March 2020. When Italy closed, I told them I couldn’t travel there. They insisted the booking was non refundable under any circumstance. It took a few months but I eventually got a refund. Snap travel is dead to me.
Sorry, what was baited and switched? This is Gary Leff level clickbait.
The beef is that the customer booked a non-refundable reservation via Snap Travel to save money and then they wouldn’t refund it when he didn’t stay at the hotel, correct?
Because they failed to provide the amenities advertised. The hotel did not offer what was advertised as main selling points for the hotel!
Confused still…does Snap Travel even show amenities. The screen shots seem to be from the hotel and from Kayak. Also, if the hotel is not communicating that amenities are closed, how would a third party provider even know? Why isn’t the hotel at fault here?
The hotel is at fault, but it refunded the money (allegedly) by releasing the booking. SnapTravel should have done the same. Because this wasn’t a case of that customer changing his mind—it was a case of false advertising.
Pretty unforgiving bunch here. Matthew is highlighting the experience of an everyday person who booked through Kayak, one of the most popular booking sites online, which does not cater to the crowd who know the ins and outs of every OTA and hotel policy. For most people, booking through Kayak feels completely legit and if they’re presented a long list of booking sites, they feel comfortable booking with any of them since Kayak presumably has vetted their partners – not an unfair assumption to make for someone not in the weeds like we may be.
While I agree that OTAs, aggregators, hotel sites, etc should be held more responsible for misleading or missing information, the issue in this case is that the hotel took responsibility and agreed to the refund. Snaptravel not processing a refund that the hotel has agreed to provide is completely irresponsible and they should be held accountable. Kayak should remove them as a booking destination if they’re not going to follow basic consumer expectations.
People like us who know better should also be a bit more understanding when people out of our hobby make perfectly rational booking choices on sites that seem trusted and legit.
Why should the OTA have a higher burden on disclosure than the hotel itself? Also shouldn’t the guest read some TA reviews if he is not using a travel agent.
Seems like the scammer here is RF but as a fanboy I see you as hesitant to call them out as a scammer in your headline.
The OTA fulfilled its part of the bargain. RF didn’t. It’s clear who is the scammer.
I had a good experience with SnapTravel. I booked the OneHotel in Miami at a steep discount, and immediately called the hotel to confirm the booking, which they did. I was given several weeks, up until a few days prior to the reservation, to get a full refund. Upon arriving at the hotel, we, unsurprisingly, were given an undesirable room, and simply asked for a better one. The hotel accommodated our request.
SnapTravel is a scam. I lost 100% of a cancellable reservation in Vegas. Had to cancel. Called and got confirmation of cancel. When I didn’t get a confirm, I called again. I even called the hotel. They confirmed that the reservation was cancelled with no charge. I never got my refund. I travel 150,000 miles a year and I tell everyone to avoid this dishonest company.
I agree with others here who think its a bit much to call SnapTravel a “scam.” Clearly, their refund policy and poor customer service are a huge strike against it and this story made me not want to book through them, but that’s not uncommon among OTAs like SnapTravel (one of the reasons I don’t use them). The thing is though, the refund is the only thing that SnapTravel had any control over and unless they intentionally hid that from your client, that was the risk he took on at booking. Otherwise, the dingy room is always a risk with OTAs and the hotel doesn’t speak for SnapTravel regarding the refund (something specifically laid out in SnapTravel’s T&Cs. Additionally, as you even note, the failure to notify your client about the lack of services is Rocco Forte’s fault not SnapTravel’s. ST only knows as much information as the hotels give them, and it would be absurd to expect them to do the sort of due diligence that it would require to confirm amenities or lack thereof at every hotel. When you book a room through an OTA like ST, all they are responsible is providing you with a room, its the hotel’s job to provide correct information. To the extent RF didn’t notify your client or ST, that’s not ST’s fault, and doesn’t mean they are obligated to give your client a refund when he booked a non-refundable rate.
Don’t get me wrong, SnapTravel and their refund policy are sleazy, but this is the risk you take when booking through companies like them, especially when the savings weren’t all that huge. I would much rather have paid $50 for the peace of mind that I can get a more flexible cancellation policy and not get stuck in one of the worst rooms that are often assigned to 3rd party bookings from all OTAs. They are useful when you can get a big discount, but $50 isn’t worth it, especially with all the downsides that are built in to those bookings regardless of whether RF was honest about the reduction in services and amenities.
Your title that Snaptravel is a scam is way off the mark … this is nothing more than clickbait.
I’ve used snaptravel close on 20+ times with never a problem and saved thousands of dollars.
Yes – when booking with a third party agency there are always going to be problems – and yes, Snaptravels customer service could have done better here under the circumstances – but to label them a scam is just wrong.
You can do better.
I see it as a scam. No clickbait.
But how? Based on everything you laid out the main issue with ST is that they kept your client’s money even though the hotel refunded them the cost of the room. Unless they hid the fact that your client booked a non-refundable rate, their T&Cs give make it clear that they are not obligated to give refunds under any circumstances. There’s no carve out requiring them to offer refunds if the hotel refunds them. That’s poor customer service and certainly a reason not to book through them, but it’s not a scam.
Regarding the lack of amenities, that’s on Rocco Forte, not ST. They have to rely on what the hotels tell them and it would be unreasonable to require them to confirm that stuff with every hotel they offer (especially when RF themselves weren’t forthcoming about it on the hotel’s website). At best, they could threaten to remove hotels that are not honest when something like this happens, but aside from that they really are only obligated to provide the blanket warning that hotels modify their amenities due to COVID (which they do).
Didn’t the client realize that all the amenities were closed for his safety? The hotel cares about people, and their rigorous COVID protocols are for everyone’s protection. He should be thanking the hotel for acting so responsibly during the pandemic.
Won’t discuss about SnapTravel but the overall experience. That is exactly why I won’t travel for leisure with my family at all until this pandemic s..t is over. Nothing is really normal now and I don’t feel spending money on an experience that won’t deliver my expectations. I will just stay home. As for using apps that offer discounts to hotels and other travel related stuff, you get what you pay for. That is exactly why corporations won’t allow any employees to book anything outside their preferred booking system. If you want to save some money on your own that is your own risk.
I would think that as seasoned a traveler as Matthew would know to call a hotel ahead of time to confirm exactly what is offered and what is not by a property given the rapidly changing circumstances during the pandemic. I always call a property to confirm what is being offered and do not rely on what any website says. To expect a very accommodating customer service experience from a discounter like SnapTravel is wishful thinking.
Remember, this did not happen to me – it happened to a client and was reported to me after the fact. Still, I think a hotel’s own website should be crystal clear about the amenities offered.
I think the property is more to blame than SnapTravel. How can SnapTravel possibly monitor all the amenities and services being offered by all the properties it markets for? Any savvy traveler should know to verify what is on offer at a property during the pandemic. In any case, I hope a credit card chargeback will make the client whole.
I would agree with those that say that “scam” is an overstatement, but it remains that (1) OTAs will regularly result in your not being treated by the hotel as good as a regular customer, and (2) are almost impossible to deal with if anything goes wrong. I will often check prices on them, but it has been years since I have seen a rate that I couldn’t get some other way such as through signing in to their points program and/or using some discount when booking directly (AAA, for example).
A better article would be “Why never to use an OTA”. Could be bad for advertising, but I think most frequent travelers fall in that camp these days.
I usually agree with your takes on this blog, but I think calling ST a scam is a big stretch. Would you be calling it a scam if all amenities were offered, the traveler decided to cancel their stay, and ST would not issue a refund? Probably not—availability with amenities is not a reasonable stipulation for changing the (admittedly awful) cancellation policy. Online travel agencies are obligated to provide you with a room—any difference in amenities is really not their fault. In my opinion I think most of the fault here clearly lies with the hotel, as they did not disclose what was closed on their own website, let alone a OTA website. That information on third party sites is usually conveyed by the hotel to the OTA, so if the hotel had even just listed what was available on their own website, this “scam” could have been avoided. I’m sure the hotel is lovely during normal times, but I don’t think you can expect ST to make an exception to their policy over something that is not their fault.
Didn’t Kayak/SnapTravel simply repeat what was on the hotel’s website? Seems the hotel is at fault.
They did, and then released the reservation for refund. But then SnapTravel failed to do it’s part by refunding the bait-and-switch hotel.
Many times when a lower price for a hotel (or whatever), it is because the entity offering the lower price is taking a lower commission on the transaction. In order to offer this lower rate to all it has to enforce its non customer friendly policies such as all sales are final.
This is more obvious when reserving hotels saying: pay X$ and you can’t cancel; pay X$ +Y$ and you can. In this case you see $Y is charged for being able to cancel the reservation. Still you would not expect the amenities and services to be any different for both prices unless so stated.
Rico in his Covid letter implied all services would be available and the testing would be available. They weren’t. Rico is at fault.
Your client wanted a nicer room (which might have been available if requested) and the services and amenities which weren’t in any event. Your client should have requested a better room if this was the main issue. I wonder if other hotels in the area were offering all their services and amenities.
SnapT did their part. They did not refund the reservation as they said they would.