In July 2024, Jeff and Lynn of Portland, Oregon, reserved two apartments in Koloa, Hawaii, through the online travel platform Booking.com for a Christmas-week family vacation. The couple paid nearly $13,000 with their Bank of America credit card but canceled the reservation a few days later after finding a better option. Booking.com assured them that the full refund would come directly from the property within two weeks. Nearly two years later, the refund had not been received.
The couple’s attempts to recover the funds were met with difficulties. Calls to Dicasi Vacations, the company that supposedly processed the payment, went unanswered. Booking.com claimed that Dicasi had provided documentation showing the refund had been made, though Jeff and Lynn’s credit card statements indicated otherwise. A bank dispute failed when Dicasi submitted contradictory documents stating the couple had actually completed their stay, leading Bank of America to decline reversing the charge. A legal inquiry to Booking.com also went unanswered.
An investigation revealed that Dicasi Vacations, listed as based in Mexico City, may have never managed the properties in question. Booking.com acknowledged that Dicasi was removed from its platform in 2025 following an investigation that confirmed fraudulent activity. However, the payment for Jeff and Lynn’s reservation was handled directly by Dicasi rather than processed through Booking.com, limiting the company’s oversight of the transaction.
Booking.com’s policy permits some partners to process payments independently, a practice also common among competitors such as Vrbo. Airbnb, by contrast, processes all payments directly. Booking.com initially relied on documents provided by Dicasi claiming the refund was completed, despite the customer’s evidence showing no credit.
Further scrutiny showed Dicasi submitted forged documents to Bank of America, including a rental contract and receipt with falsified signatures and inconsistent dates that placed the stay months earlier and at a different location. The bank accepted these documents, leading to the denial of Jeff and Lynn’s dispute.
Booking.com later admitted that fraudulent documents had been submitted with falsified signatures and payment records, apologizing for the slow response in resolving the case. A company spokesperson noted that the property listing was new at the time of booking and was removed in 2025.
Efforts to contact Dicasi Vacations were unsuccessful as phone numbers were inactive, emails went unanswered, and the company’s website had disappeared. An associated Facebook page also vanished shortly after outreach attempts.
Booking.com highlighted that fraudulent activity is a concern throughout the short-term rental industry and suggested travelers exercise caution by reviewing property listings thoroughly, avoiding wire transfers, and being wary of pressure to book quickly. The company advises using reputable platforms but acknowledged it could improve in identifying questionable partners and vetting listings.
This case underscores challenges consumers face when booking vacation rentals through third-party platforms, particularly when payments are processed off-platform, which can complicate dispute resolution and expose travelers to potential fraud.