When browsing Tripadvisor for a hotel, holidaymakers now see an AI-generated summary at the top of the page. These overviews are meant to offer quick, digestible information, but a recent investigation by UK consumer watchdog Which? reveals they often mask serious safety concerns, including food poisoning, hygiene failures, and sexual harassment.
Glowing Summaries, Grim Reality
Which? examined several hotels where Tripadvisor's AI summaries painted a rosy picture, while recent guest reviews told a starkly different story. At the five-star, all-inclusive Riu Palace Santa Maria in Cape Verde, the AI summary describes the property as 'popular with many travellers', with 'spacious rooms', 'diverse restaurants' earning 'rave reviews', and cleanliness summarised as 'spotless'. Yet recent reviews report 'exceptionally poor hygiene', 'no basic cleaning or hygiene standards', and food that was 'awful, bland, unsafe and inedible'. One guest was served raw chicken; another shared photos of flies and birds in the buffet; a third spotted 'dead little roasted mice by the sitting area'. A guest whose whole family fell ill wrote: 'This place will destroy holidays, and [has the] potential to take lives.'
When Which? checked in March 2026, there were 102 mentions of food poisoning at the Riu Palace. The resort had 32 one- and two-star reviews posted between December 2025 and April 2026, 14 of which reported at least one party member falling seriously ill with food poisoning. Many were hospitalised, some flew home early, and one guest died this year. The hotel is now involved in a group legal action representing at least 412 holidaymakers who say they became ill after staying there, with seven deaths reported since 2023.
Tripadvisor's AI chatbot, Ollie, also failed to warn users. When asked directly about the risk of food poisoning at the Riu Palace, Ollie said it was 'quite unlikely' and that the resort had a 'strong reputation for high hygiene standards'.
Pattern Across Resorts
The Riu Palace is not an isolated case. At the Garza Blanca resort in Cancun, several guests who stayed in the past 12 months reported falling ill, including a wedding party. Yet the AI summary describes 'immaculate cleanliness' and says dining options 'earn [it] positive feedback'. At the Occidental Caribe in the Dominican Republic, recent reviewers called it a 'disaster and disturbing' as recently as March 2026. One guest said her room smelled of sewage and that half of the 68-person wedding party she'd travelled with fell ill. Another reported the whole hotel smelled of mould, and several mentioned a lack of running water—one guest resorted to showering with bottled water. The AI summary, however, talks about the hotel's 'abundant' amenities, with only a vague nod to 'inconsistent' cleanliness and 'maintenance issues'.
More disturbingly, at Kaia Coracesium on the Antalya coast in Turkey, several reviewers who visited last summer wrote they felt unsafe due to repeated sexual harassment from male hotel staff, including inappropriate jokes, gestures, and repeated requests to connect on social media. Two different guests reported that a male staff member followed their daughters to request social media details; in one case, a restaurant worker followed a guest up the stairs to her room. The Tripadvisor AI summary describes the service as 'friendly', with the closest reference to these allegations being: 'Lapses [in service] noted by a few.'
AI's Limitations and Accountability
Which? notes that the AI system appears capable of identifying and referencing these allegations, recognising that concerns raised by even a minority of reviewers may warrant inclusion. However, questions remain about why such references do not appear consistently and, when they do, why the language minimises their significance. Tripadvisor told Which! that its summaries 'use large language models and natural language processing to read recent reviews, identify the most common themes and then turn those themes into short, plain-English overviews', with the goal of making content 'as easy as possible to digest' while capturing the 'broad spectrum of positive and negative opinion'. It added that summaries are updated monthly based on the previous 12 months of reviews, and that reviews are treated equally regardless of rating.
For comparison, Which? looked at rival platforms' approaches. Google's AI summaries handle context far better, though the investigation did not provide full details. The findings raise broader questions about the reliability of AI-generated content in travel planning, especially as platforms like Tripadvisor increasingly rely on such tools. For European travellers, who often book holidays through these platforms, the implications are significant: a glowing AI summary may hide risks that could affect health and safety. The UK's Competition and Markets Authority has already probed other travel industry practices, such as Ryanair's family seating fees, highlighting ongoing scrutiny of consumer protections in the sector.
As AI summaries become more common, the onus is on platforms to ensure they do not mislead. For now, Which? advises holidaymakers to scroll past the AI overview and read recent guest reviews carefully—especially those that mention health and safety. The watchdog also recommends checking official hygiene ratings and travel advisories before booking. In an era where EU digital regulations aim to increase transparency, such failures underscore the gap between policy and practice.
