Airbnb has apologised to a woman after an apartment host falsely claimed she had caused thousands of pounds’ worth of damage and used images she says were digitally manipulated to back up his allegations.

The London-based academic was refunded almost £4,300, and an internal review of how the case was dealt with has been launched at the short-term accommodation rental company.

The incident highlights how cheap and easily available artificial intelligence software is now being used to manipulate images to give false evidence of what has happened in consumer complaints, according to one security expert.

all 28 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 121 points 1 year ago (6 children)

How was this just a refund case and not a fraud prosecution?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Probably because it falls under the binding arbitration clause in AirBnb's terms of service.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 67 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Fraud is a criminal charge and AirBnB’s arbitration clause is for civil disputes. Original commenter is saying police should be investigating this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Ah, you forget that the guest and the host are not doing business with each other; both are dealing with AirBnB which means AirBnB is the only party with standing to file a criminal complaint against the host. And that their TOS binds the guest. Given how completely they caved to the guest, I'm guessing even an arbitration hearing would have gone her way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Police don't need someone to file charges, if they believe fraud has taken place they can prosecute regardless of the victims wishes.

    Otherwise people could be blackmailed into not pressing charges against murder and the like.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    In fact, in many places ordinary citizens can’t file criminal charges even if they wanted to; it’s often reserved for state (polity or part of) prosecutors. But pressing charges is different, it’s just an agreement to cooperate with the investigation.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 130 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Airbnb said he had been warned for violating its terms and told he would be removed if there was another similar report. The company told him that it could not verify the images he submitted as part of his complaint.

    Um, yes you can, those are verifiably altered images and this is verifiably criminal fraud. Now stop beating around the bush, grow a spine and take some direct action. Cowards.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 47 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago

    I love how the "crack" in the coffee table doesn't even follow the grain.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    If it was real, why would they have such expensive and easily breakable furniture in their apartment? It’s just asking for trouble.

    There should be a maximum repair fee for individual furniture.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I had simular experience,these platforms are not interested in professional investigation or any investigation,they just lock you in using contract clasule and sometimes you can not even sue platform for contract violations because of their umbrella agreement

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Gladly i never try Airbnb, always hotels or motels

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    How can I see the whole article?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (5 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Well the first couple times I clicked it would not show me the whole article just the first 20 or so lines of text. I could not see any images.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    the guardian have a cookie wall which is against GDPR, you probably have blockers to stop seeing it.

    I have raised a case to the ICO (uk authority in charge if upholding GDPR) but that will take up to 16 weeks to be actioned.

    Eventually the cookie wall will go away because it's clearly against GDPR but not quickly

  • source
  • parent