Lawyers say that TripAdvisor.co.uk may be defaming scores of hotels, including some five-star London favourites.
TripAdvisor, the world’s second biggest travel website with 20 million visitors a month, runs more than 5 million reviews, posted by members of the public who fill out online forms that give ratings out of five, running from “terrible”, through to “OK, but some problems” to “excellent”. It will not run reviews that contain “profanity or threats, personal insults, or hearsay”.
The website says that it offers “independent reviews” and stresses that all opinions are subjective and not held by the owners of the website.
However, top libel lawyers contacted by Times Travel say this may not be a strong enough defence where reviewers have defamed a hotel by making unfounded claims that could affect its reputation.
Comments such as “the staff are a waste of space... everything in the place is dirty and worn out... what a dump... the security is terrible... it smells old” in reference to five-star hotels might well be libellous, lawyers said.
David Engel, partner for Addleshaw Goddard, a London-based libel specialist, said: “It seems to me that TripAdvisor is sailing very close to the wind so far as English libel law is concerned, and it would only take one aggrieved hotelier who has the benefit of some cutting edge cyber-libel advice to make life pretty uncomfortable for them.”
He said that if reviewers are not checked to see if they stayed at a hotel, there could be doubts over whether an interested party is posting comments for ulterior motives.
At the moment TripAdvisor reviewers simply need to give their e-mail address and postcode to register on the website. But lawyers believe it would be better if people gave full addresses, credit card details and some form of proof that they stayed at the hotel they reviewed.
Kate Macmillan, solicitor-advocate and partner at Taylor Macmillan, another libel specialist, said: “A company that considers it has been defamed should always complain to anyone involved in publication — the website or internet service provider — about the defamatory material. A complaint from a respected libel practitioner is often enough to get the material taken down or amended.”
TripAdvisor, which was set up in 2000, listed the “Top 10 Dirtiest Hotels in the UK” in a recent press release, basing its list on reviews from members of the public. Descriptions of hotels included: “disgusting... absolutely filthy... a fleapit... a hovel... for the love of God stay away!” Times Travel would not publish this list for legal reasons.
Ian Rumgay, European communications manager for TripAdvisor, which is owned by Expedia and is based in the United States, said: “I am not a lawyer but as I understand it, we are not liable for libel. We run independent reviews. We are threatened from time to time by hotels that feel hard done by.”
He added: “If a property believes they have been wronged they should tell us. We will investigate the claim and if there is the slightest suspicion we will immediately remove the posting.”
TripAdvisor has a “zero tolerance” policy for “fake reviews”, he said.
Details: Addleshaw Goddard (www.addleshawgoddard.com), Taylor Macmillan (www.tmlaw.co.uk ).
Dishing the dirt...
“Rubbish... it is not a nice place to stay, unless you are a real snob.”
“Shabby... management need to sort out their act if the hotel has any chance.”
“Service? What service? That’s something this elegant, prestigious, famed [hotel] knows nothing about.”
“The staff were shockingly aloof and arrogant, quite patronising and clearly disinterested in anything other than how their hair looked or whether they could stiff you for a few extra quid.”
“Everything in the place is dirty and worn out.”
“Cold room, cold staff, cold experience.”
Source: TripAdvisor.co.uk hotel reviews.
