How to Prove Short-Let Damage Is New (2026)
How to Prove Short-Let Damage Is New
With four properties: a condition before, one after, an independent timestamp and a seal.
A photo shows the damage but not when it arose. The question "was that there before the stay?" can only be answered by a before-and-after comparison, not by a single image.
Art. 41(2) eIDAS RegulationIn 60 seconds
Nearly every host photographs damage: most claims still fail, because a photo shows the damage but not when it arose.
Without a baseline, any damage "might have been there before"; only the comparison shows what is new.
The date in a photo's metadata can be changed and is not independent proof. A qualified eIDAS timestamp is issued by an independent body recognised across the EU.
A seal makes any later change visible and protects against an accusation of tampering, since the April 2026 Airbnb update excluding AI-edited photos, that verifiability is what counts.
Evidence is only as strong as its gaps: document only the visible damage and the objection remains that something elsewhere was missed.
What carries the timestamp
A qualified electronic time stamp enjoys the presumption of the accuracy of the date and time it indicates and of the integrity of the data linked to it. Unlike a file date, which can be changed, it comes from an independent, supervised body.
The four properties of sound evidence
| Property | Why it counts |
|---|---|
| Condition before the stay | Without a baseline, any damage "might have been there before" |
| Condition after the stay | Only the comparison shows what is new |
| Independent timestamp | Evidences when the image existed, not a changeable file date |
| Seal against editing | Makes any later change visible; protects against an accusation of tampering |
Completeness rather than a sample: "I think I got everything" becomes, through a measurable coverage figure, a number you can point at.
Why claims without this evidence are refused is in When AirCover does not pay; the reporting process in Reporting damage to AirCover.
Common mistakes
The objection remains that something elsewhere was missed. What counts is coverage: walls, floor and ceiling of every room.
Metadata can be changed; it is not independent proof.
Without a condition from before the stay, half of the comparison everything turns on is missing.
What to do next
Before the stay, scan the empty place with guided capture: about two minutes a room. Do it with BildProof, about two minutes a room →
After the stay, scan again; the new scan builds on the last, so every existing finding carries over.
For each finding you only answer: still there, fixed, or worse.
Whatever is new then sits in a window bearing the name of exactly one guest.
Frequently asked questions
What makes damage evidence hold up?
Four things: a documented condition before the stay, one after, an independent timestamp that fixes when the capture existed, and a seal that makes any later edit visible. Miss one of these and the evidence can be challenged. Usually with the claim that the damage was pre-existing or the photo altered afterwards.
Why isn't the date in a photo's metadata enough?
Because it can be changed. The capture date attached to an image file can be edited afterwards, so it doesn't count as independent proof. A qualified eIDAS timestamp, by contrast, is issued by an independent authority and records when the capture provably existed.
How do I show damage happened during a specific stay?
By comparing two points in time. Scan the property before the stay and after it. If a finding is absent on the before capture and visible on the after capture, it appeared in that window: the window with exactly one guest's name on it.
Do I have to document the whole apartment or just the damage?
The whole apartment. Only a complete baseline rules out the objection that damage elsewhere was overlooked. A guided capture that covers each room's walls, floor and ceiling and reports a coverage percentage makes that completeness measurable.
Does this kind of evidence count on Booking.com or Vrbo too?
Yes. The evidence is platform-independent: it establishes the condition at a point in time regardless of which platform the booking came through. That matters especially on Booking.com and Vrbo, which offer no AirCover-style protection: there the burden of proof sits even more squarely with you.
This page gives general information as at the date shown. It does not replace legal advice on an individual case.