There’s a conversation that doesn’t happen often enough in the retreat world, and that’s the reality of what it actually means when the FCDO suddenly advises against travel to a destination. Most people assume it’s something that only happens in far-off, war-torn places, to other people, in situations completely removed from their own carefully curated retreat plans. It feels like something you’d read about on the news, not something that could land in your inbox two weeks before you fly. But the way the world is right now, with political tension, conflict, freak weather events, natural disasters, airline chaos and a general sense that anything can change overnight, the chances of a destination slipping onto that “avoid travel” list aren’t as remote as people like to believe. Just ask the thousands of travellers whose New York trips were derailed by the recent snowstorm. Or anyone who’s watched global politics unfold lately and thought, “Honestly, nothing would surprise me at this point.” When a US president is accused of kidnapping a foreign leader, it’s fair to say we’re not living in predictable times. And we’ve experienced it ourselves.

The Zanzibar retreat that didn’t happen

Earlier this month, we should have been welcoming guests to Zanzibar for a retreat we had spent months preparing. Everything was lined up: flights booked, guests excited, itinerary finalised. Then the political situation changed almost overnight. The FCDO updated its advice and suddenly travel to the region was considered unsafe. One day we were arranging airport transfers and the next we were cancelling the entire retreat. That’s how quickly the ground can shift. Technically, nothing would have stopped us from boarding the plane. But what many people don’t realise is that the moment you travel somewhere the FCDO advises against, your travel insurance becomes completely void. There’s no grey area. Every risk, whether medical, legal or logistical, becomes yours to carry alone. And if you’ve booked through a retreat host who isn’t compliant, the responsibility falls on them too, whether they’re prepared for that or not. Thankfully, we were protected Because we’re fully PTR compliant, the whole situation (while disappointing and frustrating) wasn’t financially damaging for anyone involved. Our guests received full refunds without stress, back-and-forth or uncertainty. We were disappointed, of course. Cancelling a retreat is the last thing any host wants to do. But financially, the impact was zero for both us and our guests. That’s exactly how the system is designed to work when retreats are sold safely and legally.

So what’s the risk for guests booking with non-compliant hosts?

This is the part that gets avoided because it isn’t glamorous and it doesn’t fit the dreamy Instagram aesthetics. But it’s the reality. If your retreat host isn’t compliant, then legally they shouldn’t be running the retreat at all. Compliance isn’t a nice extra; it is a requirement. Without it, you lose the protection you are legally entitled to as a customer. Imagine you’ve booked a retreat in Morocco. Everything looks idyllic. Two weeks before you travel, the FCDO updates its guidance. Suddenly parts of the country become higher risk. Legally, you can request a full refund. But if your retreat host has already spent your money, which is shockingly common when there’s no trust account in place, then they simply don’t have the funds to return it to you. They may be facing suppliers who refuse to refund them, large deposits already paid out, and potentially tens of thousands of pounds in personal liability. And what if you decide to travel anyway? If the retreat wasn’t set up correctly, your insurance may reject any claims even if the destination wasn’t red-listed at the time you booked. Insurance companies operate on legal definitions, not good intentions. If the retreat doesn’t meet the legal criteria of a protected travel package, the insurer isn’t obliged to cover you.

This isn’t about fear, it’s about realism.

Retreats often get spoken about as though they exist outside the rules of normal travel, as if there’s a different set of expectations because it’s “wellness” or “community” or “transformation.” They don’t. Retreats are travel. Travel is regulated. And the risks facing travel are increasing, not disappearing. The point isn’t to create anxiety or discourage people from hosting retreats. It’s simply to acknowledge that destinations can become unsafe overnight, and when that happens, your retreat host needs systems in place to protect you. Compliance might feel like admin. It might feel dull next to planning menus and yoga sessions and excursions. It might feel like unnecessary paperwork that nobody ever asks to see. But when a situation like Zanzibar unfolds and the FCDO changes its guidance without warning, that unglamorous admin becomes the difference between everyone being fully refunded and everyone being left in financial limbo.

A compliant retreat host can say, “You’re protected. We’ve got it covered.” A non-compliant host can only hope for the best. And hope, as we all know, isn’t a strategy. And hope won refund you if the retreat can’t go ahead. Y

ou don’t need to be perfect, you just need to be protected. If you want to strengthen your retreat, validate your processes or simply check you’re doing things right, the RSO accreditation is here for that.