{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-11-07T02:12:58.140Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"london","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"2025","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":3,"coverage":{"cases":3,"countries":1,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":2,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":2,"contextualRelations":1,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2025-priceline-penny-chatbot-promised-refund-on-non-refundable-hotel-booking","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"It was a non-refundable booking, and I received a confirmation email from Priceline. It cost £386.91.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The reader held a non-refundable Priceline hotel booking costing £386.91.","causal_attribution":"Not a causal claim."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"There was no way of contacting Priceline except via its AI chatbot, which it calls Penny.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"I was in fact eligible for a full refund and it would be in my bank account within 10 working days.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"when it asked whether I wanted to go ahead, I said yes, and I received an email from Priceline confirming my cancellation.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"in which Penny said your hotel reservation was eligible for cancellation and that you could receive a refund of £386.91.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 28 October 2025 the only contact route the reader found was Priceline's AI chatbot Penny, which said the booking was eligible for a full refund, asked whether to proceed and, on the reader's agreement, the cancellation was confirmed by email.","causal_attribution":"The reader's account and the columnist's description of the reader's screenshot; the chat itself was not inspected."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"they said not only would I not receive a refund, as it went against their policy, but that they hadn’t even been informed of my cancellation.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"I went around in circles for about a month, with no one knowing who was responsible for looking into it.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"No refund arrived; the hotel said it would not refund and had not been told of the cancellation, and the reader spent about a month passed between Agoda and Priceline.","causal_attribution":"The reader attributes the cancellation to the chatbot's refund statement."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"I wouldn’t have cancelled the hotel if I hadn’t been led to believe I was eligible for a refund.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The reader says they would not have cancelled had the chatbot not said a refund was due.","causal_attribution":"The reader's own causal account."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"This was finally done last month, when you received £363.11, after foreign currency charges. The company also emailed you acknowledging that the chatbot had given you “misinformation”","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"After the columnist pressed the company, Priceline paid £363.11 after foreign-currency charges and emailed the reader acknowledging that the chatbot had given misinformation.","causal_attribution":"The columnist's account of Priceline's email; Priceline's acknowledgement supports the chatbot's error. The email was not inspected."}],"effects":[{"label":"non-refundable hotel booking cancelled on the chatbot's refund statement (reader account)","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"months of chasing a refund and a shortfall after currency charges (reader account)","claim_id":"c5","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/priceline-chatbot-lied-about-refund-and-now-hotel-wont-pay/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full from an Internet Archive capture of the Telegraph page (live page HTTP 402 paywall). Consumer column quoting the reader's letter and the columnist's dealings with Priceline; the screenshot and emails were not inspected.","independence_group":"telegraph-priceline-column"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://uk.news.yahoo.com/penny-chatbot-lied-refund-now-103431033.html","kind":"news_relay","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full from uk.news.yahoo.com (HTTP 200); a reprint of the same Telegraph column, so the same independence group.","independence_group":"telegraph-priceline-column"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["finance","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["The chatbot's full wording, beyond the quoted fragment and the columnist's description of the screenshot.","Whether the reader lost any other money, such as for the alternative accommodation.","The date of the £363.11 payment beyond 'last month' relative to the May 2026 column."],"geography":{"basis":"The letter is signed from north London. The chat took place online and the booked hotel was in Thailand; no source places the exchange itself, so the event country is left unknown.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["GB"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a concrete consumer account in a national newspaper's consumer column: a customer-service chatbot told a customer a non-refundable booking qualified for a refund, the customer cancelled on that basis, and the company later acknowledged the chatbot's misinformation. The reader is identified only by initials.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-06"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The reader says Priceline's AI chatbot Penny told them a non-refundable booking was eligible for a full refund, asked whether to proceed and, on their yes, the cancellation was confirmed; the columnist describes a screenshot of Penny promising a £386.91 refund. The reader says they cancelled only because of that statement, and Priceline later emailed acknowledging that the chatbot had given misinformation.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with","acted_on_behalf"]},"name":"Priceline's Penny chatbot told a customer a non-refundable booking qualified for a full refund; Priceline later admitted misinformation, Telegraph says","summary":"A reader of The Telegraph's consumer column, writing from north London, says that on 28 October 2025 Priceline's AI chatbot Penny, the only contact route the reader could find, said a non-refundable three-night hotel booking in Thailand costing £386.91 was eligible for a full refund. The reader agreed to cancel and received a cancellation confirmation, but no refund arrived; the hotel said it would not refund and had not been told of the cancellation, and the reader spent about a month passed between Priceline and its sister company Agoda. After the columnist pressed Priceline, it paid £363.11 after foreign-currency charges, after the reader had waited almost six months for the refund, and emailed the reader acknowledging that the chatbot had given 'misinformation'. The column was published on 18 May 2026.","incidentDate":"2025-10-28","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-05-18","aiSystem":"Penny, Priceline's AI travel assistant, which the reader says was the only contact route and which processed the cancellation","aiProduct":"Priceline Penny","aiCompany":"Priceline","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["financial_loss","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The customer cancelled a non-refundable £386.91 hotel booking after Priceline's chatbot said it qualified for a full refund, then waited almost six months and needed a newspaper columnist's intervention to recover £363.11 (reader's account in The Telegraph; Priceline acknowledged the chatbot's misinformation).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the reader who used the chatbot and cancelled the booking. No other person is described as affected.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","platformType":"chatbot","outcomeType":"media_coverage","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/priceline-chatbot-lied-about-refund-and-now-hotel-wont-pay/","primarySourceLabel":"The Telegraph, 18 May 2026: 'Priceline chatbot lied to me about a refund and now the hotel won't pay'","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-06T03:21:58.538498+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-06T03:21:58.538498+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["customer-service-chatbot","travel","refund","misinformation"]},{"id":"2025-gb-news-broadcaster-narinder-kaur-nudification-app-deepfake-images-x","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'One weekday morning last November, Narinder Kaur discovered she had been the victim of a shocking, humiliating crime.'; 'someone had screenshot photographs she’d shared on her Instagram account and removed her clothing using a so-called ‘nudification’ app'; 'Since that first image appeared on her X page last November, she has been tagged in messages containing at least 20 more deep-faked pictures and videos of her.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"In November 2025 the broadcaster Narinder Kaur found on X sexually explicit images of herself made from photographs she had shared on Instagram, using a nudification app; since then she has been tagged in messages containing at least 20 more deepfaked pictures and videos of her.","causal_attribution":"Her own account in a Daily Mail feature; the images are not reproduced and no other inspected source describes them."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'I felt such despair in the early weeks that I fell into a depression, not wanting to get out of bed.'; 'My family persuaded me to see my GP, who suggested antidepressants.'; 'I didn’t want to go down that route over this.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"She says she fell into a depression in the early weeks and her family persuaded her to see her GP, who suggested antidepressants, which she declined.","causal_attribution":"Her own account."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Almost as devastating as the images of me were the comments underneath, from people who believed they were real.'; 'suggesting I went to Epstein’s parties is also an attack on my integrity,'; 'thinking my teenage children might come across them online.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"She says commenters treated the images as real, that images linking her to Jeffrey Epstein attack her integrity, and that she fears her teenage children may see them.","causal_attribution":"Her own account."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Narinder has, meanwhile, reported each image and had numerous visits from the police but still none of the perpetrators has been identified.'; 'perpetrators hide behind anonymous online profiles and delete their accounts as soon as they are reported.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"She has reported each image and had numerous police visits, but no perpetrator has been identified because the accounts are anonymous and deleted when reported.","causal_attribution":"Her account as reported by the Daily Mail; no police statement is quoted."}],"effects":[{"label":"nude images made from her Instagram photographs with a nudification app were posted on X, followed by at least 20 more deepfaked pictures and videos tagged to her","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"says she fell into a depression and her GP suggested antidepressants","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"},{"label":"commenters believed the images were real, and some images linked her to Jeffrey Epstein, which she calls an attack on her integrity","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-16170493/deepfake-porn-women-TV-presenter-Labour-MP-lecturer.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read on 2026-10-01 from the live Daily Mail page (30 September 2026, updated 12:08 BST), a feature by Helen Carroll that quotes her at length; the same text is on dailymail.com. First-person account of the broadcaster.","independence_group":"daily-mail-kaur-feature"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["privacy","work","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["Which app or AI tool was used and who made or posted the images.","Which police force is involved and the status of its inquiry.","Whether X removed the posts."],"geography":{"basis":"The Daily Mail says she lives in north London. The images were posted on X by anonymous accounts whose location is unknown, so the event country is left unknown.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":["GB"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a core case (depicted_or_impersonated): a television broadcaster, a public figure speaking on record, gives the Daily Mail a first-person account of sexually explicit images made from her Instagram photographs with a nudification app and posted on X since November 2025, with depression, police reports and no identified perpetrator. Single-source first-person account; the imagery is not described in detail. Two other women in the same feature are separate cases (one already held).","reviewed_on":"2026-10-01"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Daily Mail reports that someone took photographs she had shared on Instagram and removed her clothing using a so-called nudification app, and describes deepfake pornography as using AI to alter images in sexually explicit ways. No tool is named and the perpetrators are unidentified.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["depicted_or_impersonated"]},"name":"London: the broadcaster Narinder Kaur says that since sexually explicit images made from her Instagram photographs with a nudification app appeared on X in November 2025 she has been tagged in at least 20 more deepfaked pictures and videos, and that she fell into a depression; no perpetrator has been identified (Daily Mail, 30 September 2026)","summary":"Narinder Kaur, a 54-year-old broadcaster and regular TV commentator, told the Daily Mail (30 September 2026) that one morning in November 2025 she opened X and found sexually explicit images of herself, made by taking photographs she had shared on Instagram and removing her clothing with a so-called nudification app. Since then she has been tagged in at least 20 more deepfaked pictures and videos, some linking her to Jeffrey Epstein. She says she fell into a depression in the early weeks and her GP suggested antidepressants, that commenters treated the images as real, and that she fears her teenage children will see them. She has reported each image and had numerous police visits, but no perpetrator has been identified because the accounts are anonymous and deleted when reported. She has joined the Stop AI Abuse campaign.","incidentDate":"2025-11-01","incidentKind":"ongoing_experience","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-09-30","aiSystem":"A so-called nudification app used to remove her clothing from photographs taken from her Instagram account, and other deepfaked pictures and videos posted on X (Daily Mail); no tool is named","aiProduct":"Unidentified image and video tool","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["exploitation_or_abuse","psychological_distress","reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"She says sexually explicit deepfake images made from her Instagram photographs, and at least 20 more deepfaked pictures and videos, were posted and tagged to her on X, leaving her degraded and depressed, and that commenters believed they were real (her account to the Daily Mail).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person, the broadcaster depicted in the images (Daily Mail). Her family is mentioned but not counted. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"GB","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"media_coverage","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-16170493/deepfake-porn-women-TV-presenter-Labour-MP-lecturer.html","primarySourceLabel":"Daily Mail, 30 September 2026: I never thought that as a married mother of two in my 50s I would become a victim of deepfake porn","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-01T03:18:08.323735+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-01T03:18:08.323735+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["deepfake","nudify","non-consensual-intimate-imagery","x-twitter","broadcaster","united-kingdom","depicted-or-impersonated"]},{"id":"2025-us-manhattan-airbnb-damage-claim-photos-disputed-as-manipulated-guest-refunded","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"the host told Airbnb that she had caused more than £12,000 worth of damage, and submitted pictures of an apparently cracked coffee table as part of his case.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Airbnb initially told her “after careful review of the photos”, she would have to reimburse the host a total of £5,314. She appealed against the decision.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The host told Airbnb the guest had caused more than 12,000 pounds of damage, submitted pictures including an apparently cracked coffee table, and Airbnb initially told the guest after reviewing the photos that she must reimburse 5,314 pounds.","causal_attribution":"The Guardian relays the guest's account of the host's claim and Airbnb's first decision. Airbnb's ruling and the photos were not inspected. New York Post and Fox Business rewrite this account."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"A close examination of two pictures of the coffee table appears to show differences in the damage, leading the woman to believe they were digitally manipulated or generated by AI.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"He did not respond to a request for comment.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Guardian reports that a close examination of two pictures of the coffee table appears to show differences in the damage, leading the guest to believe they were digitally manipulated or generated by AI. The host did not respond to the Guardian.","causal_attribution":"Guest's belief and the Guardian's description of her comparison. The photos were not inspected and no forensic finding was reported. Whether an AI tool was used is not established."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"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.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"We have taken action with the host, and we are reviewing the original handling of this case.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Airbnb told the host it could not verify the images he submitted, warned him for violating its terms and said he would be removed if there was another similar report.","causal_attribution":"Airbnb statements to the Guardian and to Fox Business. Airbnb did not state a finding that the images were AI-generated. The company's review of the photos is described only as 'careful review' with no mention of AI tools."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Five days after Guardian Money raised questions about the case with Airbnb, the woman was told it had accepted her appeal and credited her account with £500.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"the company offered an £854 refund – a fifth of the cost of her booking. She refused to accept this","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"was refunded the full cost (£4,269) of her booking, and a negative review that the host had placed on her profile was taken down.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Airbnb apologised and said there would be a review into how her case was handled.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"After Guardian Money asked Airbnb about the case, Airbnb accepted the appeal, credited 500 pounds, then refunded the full booking cost of 4,269 pounds after the guest refused a partial offer, the host's negative review on her profile was taken down (the Guardian does not say by whom), and Airbnb apologised.","causal_attribution":"The Guardian relays the guest's account and Airbnb's statements. The refund and review removal were not documented by Airbnb records seen here."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"experience fell below our usual high standards.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"assure them that they will not be charged for the reported damage","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Airbnb said the guest's experience fell below its usual standards and that she would not be charged for the reported damage.","causal_attribution":"Airbnb's own statement to Fox Business."}],"effects":[{"label":"Guest told to reimburse the host on the strength of photos she says were manipulated; reversed on appeal","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/aug/02/airbnb-guest-damage-claim-refund-photos","kind":"news","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"guardian-report"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://nypost.com/2025/08/06/lifestyle/airbnb-guest-accused-of-causing-16k-in-property-damage-claims-host-used-ai-to-create-fake-photos/","kind":"news","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"guardian-report"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/airbnb-apologizes-superhost-allegedly-ai-doctored-photos-claim-16k-fake-damages","kind":"news","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"airbnb-statement-to-fox"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["everyday_life","finance"],"unknowns":["Whether the host's photos were altered, and by what tool, is unknown: no forensic finding, host statement or Airbnb finding on AI is reported.","Airbnb's own review of the photos is described only as a 'careful review'. No source says Airbnb used an AI system to assess them.","The stay dates, the day of the damage claim and the outcome date are not stated beyond 'earlier this year' and the Guardian's 2 August 2025 date.","Whether the guest paid any part of the reimbursement before the appeal succeeded is not stated.","The US outlets give the claim as about 16,000 dollars (Fox Business) and the Guardian as more than 12,000 pounds. The inspected sources do not itemise the claim."],"geography":{"basis":"The Guardian places the apartment in Manhattan, New York, and describes the guest as London-based. Airbnb's location and the Guardian's publication are not used.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["GB"]},"publication":{"basis":"The Guardian report and two rewrites were read in full. The host and guest are not named and the apartment address is not given. The AI element rests on the guest's belief and Airbnb's statement that it could not verify the images. Claims stay at reported status.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The guest says differences between two photos of one table lead her to believe they were manipulated or AI-generated. Airbnb told the host it could not verify the images. The host did not respond, and no source shows an AI tool was used. Fox Business and the New York Post headlines state AI use more strongly than the Guardian body supports.","status":"suspected"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Manhattan Airbnb: guest says host's damage-claim photos were manipulated or AI-generated, Airbnb first ordered payment then refunded her","summary":"The Guardian reported on 2 August 2025 that a London-based academic who rented a Manhattan apartment through Airbnb in 2025 was accused by the host of more than 12,000 pounds of damage, supported by photos including a cracked coffee table. She says differences between two photos of the table show they were digitally manipulated or AI-generated. Airbnb first told her to reimburse 5,314 pounds after reviewing the photos, then, five days after Guardian Money asked about the case, accepted her appeal, credited 500 pounds and, after she refused an 854-pound offer, refunded her booking cost of 4,269 pounds, and the host's negative review of her was taken down. Airbnb apologised. Airbnb told the host it could not verify the images he submitted and warned him. The host did not respond to the Guardian. No source establishes that AI was used.","incidentDate":"2025-01-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2025-08-02","aiSystem":"None identified (guest suspects the host's damage-claim photos were digitally manipulated or AI-generated; no tool or forensic finding is reported)","aiProduct":"Unidentified image tool (suspected)","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["other_material_harm","reputational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The Guardian reports Airbnb initially told the guest to reimburse the host 5,314 pounds on the strength of the host's photos and the host placed a negative review on her profile; Airbnb later refunded her booking cost in full and the review was taken down.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One guest reported subjected to the damage claim. Other Airbnb customers who might face similar claims are not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","platformType":"other","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/aug/02/airbnb-guest-damage-claim-refund-photos","primarySourceLabel":"The Guardian (2 Aug 2025)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T13:28:51.915494+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:19.206649+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["historical-2025"]}]}