Airbnb has apologised to a woman after an apartment host falsely claimed she had caused thousands of pounds’ worth of damage and used images she says were digitally manipulated to back up his allegations.

The London-based academic was refunded almost £4,300, and an internal review of how the case was dealt with has been launched at the short-term accommodation rental company.

The incident highlights how cheap and easily available artificial intelligence software is now being used to manipulate images to give false evidence of what has happened in consumer complaints, according to one security expert.

The woman, who is based in London, had booked the one-bedroom apartment in New York’s Manhattan for two-and-a-half months earlier this year to stay in while she was studying, but she decided to leave early after feeling unsafe in the area.

Shortly after she left, 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. His allegations included that she had stained a mattress with urine, and damaged a robot vacuum cleaner, a sofa, a microwave, a TV and an air conditioner.

The woman denied any damage had been done to the apartment. She said she left it in good condition and had only two visitors during the seven weeks she stayed. 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. She says the host was retaliating because she ended her tenancy early.

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.

“I informed them that I can provide testimony from an eyewitness who was with me during checkout and can attest under oath to the condition in which the property was left: clean, undamaged, and in good order,” she says. “I also clearly demonstrated visual discrepancies in images of the same object (wooden table) provided by the host that show clear signs of fabrication.”

She adds: “These inconsistencies are simply not possible in genuine, unedited photographs of the same object. This should have immediately raised red flags and discredited the host’s claims if the evidence had been reviewed with even basic scrutiny, but Airbnb not only failed to identify this obvious manipulation, they entirely ignored my explanations and clear evidence that the material was fabricated.”

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. When she then said she was not going to rebook with Airbnb again, the company offered an £854 refund – a fifth of the cost of her booking. She refused to accept this and 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.

“My concern is for future customers who may become victims of similar fraudulent claims and do not have the means to push back so much or give into paying out of fear of escalation,” the woman says.

“Given the ease with which such images can now be AI-generated and apparently accepted by Airbnb despite investigations, it should not be so easy for a host to get away with forging evidence in this way.”

The man who complained about her is listed as a “superhost” on Airbnb, which the site says is someone who is experienced and highly rated. He did not respond to a request for comment.

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.

Airbnb apologised and said there would be a review into how her case was handled. “We take damage claims seriously – our specialist team reviews all available evidence to reach proportionate outcomes for both parties, and to help ensure a fair approach, decisions can be appealed.”

Serpil Hall, the director of economic crime at the management consultants Baringa, said that manipulating images and videos was now “easier than ever”, and software to do so was cheap, widely available and required little skill to use.

In one recent case an insurance company found there had been an increase in false claims on vehicles and home repairs using photos that had been manipulated.

“Recently, many companies have decided images can’t be taken at face value any more [during disputes], and there is a need for forensic tools and fraud intelligence models to validate them.”