Which? creates fake 10 Downing Street listing on Booking.com to test security

Unbiased summary

Consumer group Which? said it successfully created a fake Booking.com listing for 10 Downing Street on 18 June, advertising a '1 bedroom apartment in the heart of London' with the PM's address and a photo of the front door. The listing was not openly bookable except during a brief window when a researcher processed a payment for a week-long stay. Which? also posted a fake review referencing 'hanging out with Larry the Cat' that appeared immediately despite a moderation notice. Researchers used the platform's messaging system to send an external URL requesting credit card details. Booking.com removed the listing on 27 August. The company stated that because the listing was not live for the full period, some fraud controls were not triggered, and defended its verification measures. Which? said the incident revealed security failures endangering consumers.

Generated with deepseek-ai/deepseek-v4-flash-0731 (NIM)

Coverage by outlet

The Mirror centre-left

Angle Condemns Booking.com's safeguards as glaringly flawed, focusing on consumer risk and chatbot shortcomings.

Bias Emphasises the ease of setup and the ineffective AI chatbot, while omitting Booking.com's specific explanation about the closed listing not triggering fraud controls. Frames the issue as a systemic failure with strong language like 'glaring security flaws' and 'exposed' rather than merely 'tested'. Downplays the fact that the listing was not publicly bookable for most of the period.

No 10 Downing Street advertised as holiday let in fake listing on travel giant Booking.com

BBC News centre-left

Angle Balanced reporting that includes both Which? allegations and Booking.com's defence, with a neutral tone.

Bias Provides the most even-handed account, quoting Booking.com's response directly and clarifying that the listing was not live except for a 20-minute window. Notes the company's claim of AI removing most fraud within 24 hours. Does not omit key facts but still foregrounds the 'unfit' accusation from Which? without endorsing it. Minimal editorial slant.

Fake 10 Downing Street listing exposes 'unfit' Booking.com, says consumer group

The Independent centre-left

Angle Highlights 'systemic security failures' and the risk of financial loss to holidaymakers, with a critical stance.

Bias Emphasises that Booking.com processed a payment and that funds had not been returned after six weeks, a detail that suggests negligence. Omits Booking.com's explanation about the listing's inactive status, making the failure seem more absolute. Uses the term 'systemic' without qualification, and frames the URL request as a further vulnerability. Less balanced than the BBC.

Fake 10 Downing Street listing set up ‘within minutes’ on Booking.com

The Sun right

Angle Presents the story as a consumer watchdog exposing a scam risk, with a tabloid tone but similar to Independent.

Bias Nearly identical to The Independent's content, but with more sensationalised wording (e.g., 'highlight holiday scammers'). Omits Booking.com's response entirely, making the company look guilty. Focuses on the payment not being refunded and the fake review, but drops the context of the listing being closed. Adopts an anti-corporate stance typical of tabloid consumer stories.

Watchdog set up fake Booking.com listing for the PM’s home to highlight holiday scammers