Over 300 hotels are now involved in a potential legal action against TripAdvisor, a figure which has doubled in just four days after the initial group was first revealed.
The group is considering the action on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean after growing increasingly concerned about alleged defamatory reviews appearing on hotel pages on the user generated content-driven site.
A British reputation management service KwikChex is fronting the action on behalf of the hotels and confirmed today that over 300 had now applied to join its service, a prerequisite for getting support for any action against TripAdvisor as part of a larger group.
KwikChex CEO Chris Emmins says the company will be carrying out “some background checking” before taking on a business or submitting a grievance, “but the signs are good”.
TripAdvisor stated earlier this week that it would not comment on “threatened or pending litigation”.
The identities of the hotels in the group are currently undisclosed but the majority are believed to be located in the UK and the US, thus the reason for a dual action in both countries.
The subsequent publicity around the issue since earlier this week KwikChex and a string of articles and broadcasts due to appear in the coming days in UK and US media is expected to see an “increasing surge” of interest, Emmins claims.
A process is now in place to identify what KwikChex believes are the most serious incidences of defamation ahead of formal contact being made with TripAdvisor within days.
Emmins says:
“We have decided to present TripAdvisor with a list of the worst specific cases, plus a general call to correct certain aspects next week, together with a formal notice of action which means that we will add to the list as we clear them.”
Many hoteliers, despite TripAdvisor’s policy of allowing a hotel the right to reply, are angry because they believe comments in reviews are untrue and damaging to their business, or “legally unsubstantiated”.
Emmins has a string of additional complaints against TripAdvisor which may be incorporated into the potential legal action, including a demand to see the algorithm behind the rating system for hotels and issues around a bulletin titled Hotel Horror Stories which reproduces negative reviews of hotels and circulates to TripAdvisor members.
Am sure Kwikchex would love to see the algorithm — it would certainly be helpful in providing ongoing “reputation management services” to their 195 pound per year paying customers.
Not much word so far on those fake positive reviews written by the hotels themselves though, that often painfully mislead consumers. Fake reviews do go both ways.
The key word here is FAKE!!! Whether positive or negative the point here is that this site is in no way a real reflection of the truth!!!! “Real reviews by real travelers” – HARDLY!!!
Try a site like booking.com. ONLY guests that have actually been confirmed as stayed and booked through the site can review a hotel.
Why can’t TA set right it’s process once for all? They need to add a ‘stay-verification’ step, before posting any review – good or bad.
Any new review posted would first go into that hotel’s admin area(while the actual review remains invisible). If the hotel verifies ok, the review goes Live.
This would help solve the issue – hotels cannot complain of fake reviews, when they have verified the stay already. Yes, it might lead to delay in taking the review live, but it would add that extra touch of authenticity – which would also help TA improve the trust factor & grow faster.
The reason why this doesn’t work is because hotels will be given too much room to deny a negative review – there’s clearly a fine line between a wrong & fake review…that said, you can’t give the individual property a chance to decline a terrible (but often true) review…or else reviews will be heavily skewed to the positive and wonderful side. Then what’s the point of a review in the first place…might as well call the hotel and ask them if they’re worth coming to.
Booking.com has the right idea. Guests book through the site and hotels verify their stay when settling commission fees monthly. Guest contact details are stored in a database and these guests are then asked to rate the hotel. It is one of the only true reviewing systems I have seen for hotels online!!!
Whilst agreeing with Anil about stay verification, the potential issue with this is that hotel/guest house/b&b owners who know they are likely to get a bad review from an unhappy guest, will be reluctant or even refuse (hiding under privacy of information) to confirm that the guest has stayed. How would you propose that Trip Advisor deal with that? I suppose one way would be to say that a review will be posted within 7 days, unless they are told that the reviewer did not stay.
I however, do not agree that the establishment should be able to see the review prior to it being posted, as this will create so many queries to Trip Advisor that they’d never be able to post anything!
Really don’t agree on the stay verification count.
For starters what about places that cannot be booked online or don’t have email access? How is TA supposed to verify these stays? Or is the idea just to disenfranchise ma & pa guesthouses/hostels who don’t have the means/knowhow to manage their “online reputation” — perhaps they should engage Kwikchex to do so!
Secondly, it puts the onus on hotels to confirm a guest’s stay — I’d say that is fraught with issues that would be difficult to deal with in a transparent basis.
Lastly, and, in my opinion most importantly, one shouldn’t need to stay in a place to review it as some places are so fricken awful you just turn around and walk out again.
The example I always like to use in this regard (on personal experience) is a certain 4-star international chain hotel in Chiang Mai in northern Thailand. Delayed by a broken down bus, when I arrived at 2am to checkin, the night officer was getting a blow job under the front desk. Needless to say I turned around and walked out, but I’d like to think that is worth mentioning on TripAdvisor!
An easy solution is for TA to give properties a more equitable right of reply in which they can address individual commenters personally. A negative review dealt with in a transparent and professional manner often does far more for a property then ten over the top glowing reviews (half of which were probably written by the hotel anyway).
The Trip Advisor stay verification is a non-starter. Agree with you Stuart that a “more equitable right of reply” would be a simple solution that would also provide a better TI user experience.
On another note, this “class action” is clearly just a marketing ruse and I will eat my hat if it ever goes ahead. Frankly, the entire kwikchex proposition looks a bit of a charade: you purchase the right to display an ‘Outstanding Business Certificate’ giving ‘reassurance for your visitors and customers’?
I think we can safely assume that users of said service are in need of managing a poor reputation, so one might in fact conclude that organisations displaying this “certificate” are actually intrinsically *Not* Outstanding Businesses. Taking it one step further, today’s savvy buyer might draw the same conclusions and actively avoid staying anywhere that participates: a job made easier since they are all listed in an, ahem, “Trusted Website Database”.
Non? Or am I being unfair?
Having a stay verification process will do nothing to address the problem of hotels posting their own fake glowing reviews. Any suspect review good or bad should be removed until verification is proven by the poster with Tripadvisor (ie; credit card receipts, airline ticket for those dates, passport stamp to prove they were in that country, receipt from establishment, something to that effect.) Also, there should be NO ratings. Just post what legit people have to say, and even more important……mix it up every couple of weeks so the listing order changes, then hotels are not so motivated to post fake reviews to try to stay in the top ten (ie; first page results). Just a thought!
A start to this problem would be to at least integrate with hotels and their confirmation/reservation number conventions and require reviewers to enter a unique confirmation/reservation number before writing a review.
“Having a stay verification process will do nothing to address the problem of hotels posting their own fake glowing reviews.”
What about the problem of rival properties getting people to write fake negative reviews of their rival? Or even actual guests who had an axe to grind that wasn’t directly related at all to the supposed issue they were complaining about, but were using Tripadvisor as a payback? I’ve talked to more than one hotelier who had ongoing problems along those lines, and could make an educated guess about who the probable perpetrators were.
“Fake reviews do go both ways”
Yes indeed they do, Stuie, much like fake assertions about people’s online identities, something you and your pals are expert at propagating. But I digress somewhat. The impetus for this action isn’t really about the theoretical fake positive review but the perceived damage to a proprietor’s reputation from unfiltered reviews that aren’t substantiated in any way. They have a perfectly valid point and that’s for the courts – not you – to discount or dismiss.
“Yes indeed they do, Stuie, much like fake assertions about people’s online identities, something you and your pals are expert at propagating. ”
What?
@stuart/hal – What, and digression indeed?! keep it straight and on-topic.
I believe reviewers should be allowed the right to reply to a hotel’s comments – I have seen a number of reviews where the hotel management belittle a guest / guest’s review and there is no right to reply.
Oh I geddit — you’re referring to where you were caught out pretending to be a woman having a go at a few bloggers. I remember now. But I digress somewhat.
So what you’re saying is it is perfectly ok for a hotel to pen a fake review about themselves which may mislead consumers, but is totally reasonable to race to court to deal with consumer reviews that belittle a hotel.
Nah, you don’t geddit at all, putting words into people’s mouths as usual, in addition to attributing false id’s. Suggest you go look up the word “substantiated” – whether in regard to me, hotels, or what I said here about hotels. Never said anything about it being “okay” to pen fake reviews – quite the contrary. And how on earth could they be dealing with “consumer reviews that belittle a hotel”? They’d be dealing with just one entity which is a forum for such reviews. Reviews good and bad will always exist whatever the outcome. You fail as usual, and no digression there either.
Its just that easy> Make people happy when they stay in your hotel and they won’t complain. Yes, some guests suck, but the majority doesn’t. What KwikChex is doing is to open pandoras box. Do they really want to have a public discussion about hotels and the quality of service? If so, have fun, it will be a nightmare for them. People felt sick after the stayed there? Everyone had this experience and everyone can judge, if this was a simple accident. Having 20 complains about it, means you should talk to you chef. So my guess is KwikChex want to make some money from a lawsuit.
Not sure what your main points are here, since if it’s true that “some guests suck, but the majority doesn’t”, then I could also just as essily assert that some hotels suck, but “the majority don’t”. I think personally and professionally, having first been raised in a hotel and with hoteliers among our family friends during my early life, and then later as a travel writer having met some fine hoteliers with a legacy they are proud of, that there is no “us vs. them” situation here — at least in terms of independent hoteliers with a good reputation, who genuinely want to make every guest stay a high quality experience. I also think even in the digital age, the best form of communication to resolve a guest issue is some version of the traditional one-on-one form of communication. You outline your complaints exactly and directly to the main office, you receive a response and resolution. But, creating a reality-show-style drama for millions on the internet to follow along with? Not so much — not professional, not civil, not the way you yourself would like to be treated, surely, and probably not the way that’s going to really get the same resolution for you. Sure, there is room for posting valid warnings on travel sites like TA about places that are the total pits, and deserve to be called out. That’s not the issue here. The issue, to my thinking, is what is motivating you in how you seek resolution – meaning, if you (a) genuinely want resolution for yourself or (b) just a drama to entertain your “community” with.
“Do they really want to have a public discussion about hotels and the quality of service?”
I’m assuming you’re referring to the discussion that might ensue from any legal action taken by this KwikChex on behalf of its 300 plus hotel collaborators? I think they already considered that – and I also suspect that probably the majority of that 300 feel with some justification that they’ve been on the short end of unfair and/or unfounded criticism, with TA being the enabling entity. They considered that, and they consider the consequences of any discussion worthwhile because they have nothing to worry about, in their overall industry ratings or how travel professionals perceive them. TA and its counsel have probably always been aware that this day would arrive. What’s interesting is that however this particular instance with KwikChex plays out, it now sets a precedent for hoteliers to consider how they can respond in future when they believe they’ve received the short end of the stick for too long and in unwarranted instances. In the free marketplace, everyone has a right to self defense, not just one party, but it doesn’t have to reach that level – it really depends, again, on motive and priority: do you want a fair resolution, or do you just want a drama?
I say all power to the TA community with the reviews good and bad – it is the consumers turn to tell it how is after all those years of glossy brochures that are downright lies. So as for the “perceived damage to a proprietor’s reputation from unfiltered reviews that aren’t substantiated” – I say it is tough luck – it is our turn as consumers to set the record straight.
The good proprietors will always be ok – even if they get a few fake reviews – this action is all about a law firm making money and the bad establishments trying to get away with what they have done for so long – tell us huge fibs.
I love trip advisor and the reviews it provides – but it is buyer beware and do your homework and get in touch with reviewers if you are not sure it is kosher. I think the highest rated establishments should be top of the list. I certainly would not have known about some of the fabulous places I have stayed in without Trip Advisor – I also would have paid a lot more.
I think a guest should have a right of reply to a proprietors response to a negative review – I have seen some shockers where again the proprietor is mocking the person and giving bald face lies!
People power – I love Trip Advisor and what it has done to change the travel industry for those of us who do not want to be feed the same sterile hotel environment or disappointing accommodation experience.
In most cases comments are genuine online but companies can set up fake profiles and post comments to hurt their competitors. The Advertising Standards Authority are going to govern what companies say on social media but governing what individuals say is going to be a tough one.
If someone makes a false comment on your site then challenge it or provide a link to a page with the truth. You can often oust the fakes pretty easily and get them barred from the site.
Lots of companies like British Gas are using social media monitoring software (these are often free) to identify negative comments online immediately and then they deal with those comments or concerns via social media straight away.
The way we communicate is changing there is no doubt about it.
I own a small motel, RV Park and Campground. I don’t post fake good reviews. My customers either tell me to my face, use our comment box, reply to a follow-up e-mail we send them asking for input, or participate in a third-party survey that is sent out to a percentage of our guests for franchiser review of franchisee compliance. Some of our guests participate in on-line review/opinion forums. After 12 years, this is the lesson I have learned: People who are angry are more motivated to comment in any one of those venues than are people who are happy. People expect you to make them happy and thus, when they are made happy, they got what they paid for and have little motivation to comment. People who are angry are the people with the motivation to participate. Now, of the angry people, about half have legitimate gripes. The other half have what I call unreasonable subjective dissatisfaction. But in the end, I have chosen not to fight the complainers. Life is too short. Why spend it in a pissing contest with a moron? Any why would *you* trust some stranger’s opinion on the internet about another stranger, especially when he’s drawn from a pool of unknown size? Call the BBB instead. Or the COC. If I have two or three whiners, what does that tell you when I have 4,000 guest nights per year but you don’t know that? Out of any 4,000 people I bet you wouldn’t trust more than a few with the money you would spend at my motel. My good guests love us and return and make up a huge part of our business and we cultivate them with discounts and incentives. The real answer is not litigation. Rather, if if weren’t for the cut-throat competition among businesses, the motels should start a public forum listing of all the asshole guests who disobey the rules of the establishment. End rant.
A hotel review system that allows all-comers to review a hotel is undoubtedly vulnerable to abuse. From envious competitors to disgruntled employees to the thousands of individuals sadly online with malicious intent to the genuine guests, such a review system cannot discriminate fact from fiction.
Although there are databases of hotel reviews that can guarantee that their content is the genuine opinion of real guests. I’ve booked with Hotel Direct and they only invite departing guests to submit hotel reviews by email. You cannot submit a review on their website.
Here is an example: http://www.hoteldirect.co.uk/hotelreview878.htm.
User generated content is a wonderful thing although there are times where more control and due diligence is required. And sometimes, as in the case of this article, there is a fine line in the balance of responsibility and openness for guests to share views.
how does one file a legal case against booking.com? I have had a terrible experience with them wherein they confirmed my hotel stay and then later said that the hotel mislead them on availability – now i am stranded and i wish to make them pay damages.
Is there any new information on this development? I’ve had a few of my posts on T.A. removed for one reason or another.
I just wanted to know how this was going to fall.
pros and cons of having an open review system.