6 ms·

If the landlords are willing to indemnify the tenants for subletting via AirBnB I'd call it a win-win.

by Canada 11y ago

tptacek 11y ago
How is that a win-win? All the other tenants in the building have to deal with a small, unregulated hotel being opened in it.
- brewdad 11y ago
  Well the incentives will be aligned such that soon the tenants will have a large, unregulated hotel to deal with.
- otterley 11y ago
  How is that practically different from how any modern beehive apartment complex operates today? In a building with hundreds of units, neighbor tenant stability is rarely found.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    The apartment building and its tenants have recourse against abusive tenants: they can break the lease and eject the tenant. That recourse doesn't exist with short-term renters, who are going to leave soon anyways.
    - otterley 11y ago
      Tenants have no direct recourse against bad neighbors - their only recourse is to complain to management and pray they do something about it. As for management, they'll have similar, if not identical, recourse in the form of (a) deposit withholding and (b) negative feedback on AirBNB. The ability to provide negative feedback actually gives them greater power, incidentally, than the power innkeepers typically have over ill-behaving guests.
      - tptacek 11y ago
        I do not believe feedback on renters does anything to meaningfully curb abuse, especially because abusive renters will be the ones least likely to groom a profile of positive reviews.
        kamaal 11y ago
        Every thing you say about Airbnb can be applied to uber too. Why should there be unregulated cab drivers all over the city? What are legal means for handling abuse by drivers? Why should other cars on the roads deal with every car being a potential taxi? But its funny how this free market thing works though, the hypocrisy is the same people who scream innovation and disruption when it comes to Uber are crying disgust and malpractice when it comes to Airbnb. You can't have these selectively applied to what you like and dislike. If disrupting taxi unions and license issuers was fair, so is this.
        tptacek 11y ago
        It very much is a problem with Uber!!!
        Canada 11y ago
        You completely missed his point.
        tptacek 11y ago
        No, I completely dis-missed his point.
        otterley 11y ago
        I don't follow your logic. If abusive renters are not "groom[ing] a profile of positive reviews," and offerers are rejecting their applications as a consequence, that suggests to me that the system is working as we'd like it to.
        11y ago
    - Canada 11y ago
      Even when there's no such thing as AirBNB, tenants who rent have absolutely, positively ZERO recourse against bad neighbors. Zilch. Nada. Absolutely nothing. They can accept it, or find somewhere else. It's great that a landlord is saying, fine, you can sublease the place short term. But we have to regulate that, you have to pay us to do so, and if you can't hold up your end we have the right to put an end to it. This is the only reasonable way I can see to solve the problem of short term rentals.
      - tptacek 11y ago
        You seem very certain about this, but I don't think you've done much research on it. Not only do boilerplate leases include "quiet enjoyment" clauses that contractually bind landlords into ensuring that tenants aren't disruptive, but state laws also include implied covenants of quiet enjoyment, meaning that there are large areas where it doesn't even matter if you edit that out of your lease. A landlord that fails to ensure quiet enjoyment can be sued by their tenants.
        otterley 11y ago
        Yes, those laws exist. Do they protect the tenant's interest more effectively than penalties against short-term renters? Difficult to say; the verdict isn't in yet and data is scarce. Your mere beliefs are not sufficient. Even with the laws and implied covenants, it takes a significant amount of time to go through eviction proceedings in many states. In California it can take months (unless you stop paying rent altogether, in which case there's a fast-track procedure). Yes, a tenant can sue their landlord as well. Again, however, that can take months and significant expense. When considering these things, we must take into account the actual reality of how rights are exercised, not merely what rights exist in law.
        JVMsOfGor 11y ago
        Completely agree here. At least in California, there are strong laws that protect a tenant from their landlord. The only way to be evicted quickly is if you commit a serious violent felony, a sex crime ( I guess that IS a serious felony ), or you stop paying rent ( Ask me how I know !) In just about every other situation, there is a list of 16 reasons you can evict someone, and all of them can lead to a lengthy expensive trial, in which at the end the landlord has spent a significant amount of money and probably regrets every doing anything with their life. https://www.sftu.org/justcauses/ https://www.sftu.org/justcauses/
- xiaoma 11y ago
  It's a win-win because the renter wins and the landlord wins. If the neighbors also won, it would be a win-win-win.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- zeveb 11y ago
  > All the other tenants in the building have to deal with a small, unregulated hotel being opened in it. Is that particularly worse than tenants having to deal with Section 8 tenants in their midst?
  - tptacek 11y ago
    What the fuck would make you write something like that? I live on a block with S8 renters. They're real people with families who want a safe bed and decent schools for their kids just like everyone else.
    - zeveb 11y ago
      > What the fuck would make you write something like that? Your own comment some time ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10623102 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10623102 Why do you think that short-term middle-to-upper-class renters are preferable neighbours to medium-to-long-term lower-class renters? I saw your comment elsethread about ease of punishment, which makes some sense, but in my experience small landlords simply don't care. Living above a pair of end-stage alcoholics who importuned people on the sidewalk and called the ambulance for health care every few weeks was far, far more annoying than the flophouse a few doors down. Then there was the poor family with 9 people in a two-bedroom unit, with a couple of teenagers who vandalised and may have been thieves as well (not that upper-class teenagers aren't hoodlums, of course: many of them are too). Then there was the prostitute with the shady clientele. You appear to be opposed to short-term renters, but appear to applaud Section 8. Why the difference?
      - tptacek 11y ago
        Yes, that is exactly what I think, and also what the zoning commissioners in virtually every city think, which is why cities have limitations on short-term rentals in residential properties and special zoning rules for where you can put hotels!
  - wglb 11y ago
    I think you are way out of line here. I have family that lives in Section 8 housing. They are a danger or annoyance to no one.
- Canada 11y ago
  If the neighbors are harmed, a landlord with means accepts responsibility for either stopping the harm or compensating them in exchange. That's way better than the current situation. What are the neighbors going to get from a tenant who sub leases in violation of the lease agreement? It's the landlord who offers (within the limits of local law) the terms of the lease. I've never seen a lease agreement that allows subleasing without at least right of refusal on reasonable grounds by the landlord. The landlord is within its rights prohibit the tenant from entering into any kind of sub lease entirely. It could (again, within the limits of local law) evict the tenant for even advertising a possible sublease without its written permission. But no, the landlord is very graciously offering to actively support subleasing via AirBnB. If the landlord executes properly, that's a win for the tenant, a win for the landlord, and a win for the neighbors.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    You've lost me. Exactly how do I benefit as the neighbor of someone who has turned their apartment into a small unregulated hotel?
    - Canada 11y ago
      Saying the neighbor is ipso facto harmed by short term subleasing is like saying that the value of currency is ipso facto damaged by creating more or it so that the share value of a company is ipso facto damaged by issuing more shares. It's certainly true that if these things are done irresponsibly then bad things happen. And bad things do often happen, I'll give you that. But it's not necessarily true. How it's managed is what determines whether the outcome is good or bad and for whom. When short term renters well behaved, then the neighbors aren't harmed at all. If any lease holder has the ability to sublet easily with support of the landlord then that is something of value. A landlord that gets involved like this is going to create an environment with incentives for good short term tenants. I'd rather lease from a company that allows me to do that and also supports me in doing so. I'd rather lease from a company that actively manages subleases than one that sticks its head in the sand that pretends that isn't happening all the time. Short term subleases are here to stay. Trying to stop them is like trying to stop piracy or illicit drug use. It's just not going to happen. edit: also: To call what happens on airbnb an "unregulated hotel" is profoundly misguided. Have you ever lived for a significant period of time out of airbnb??

If the landlords are willing to indemnify the tenants for subletting via AirBnB I'd call it a win-win.

by Canada 11y ago

If the landlords are willing to indemnify the tenants for subletting via AirBnB I'd call it a win-win.

How is that a win-win? All the other tenants in the building have to deal with a small, unregulated hotel being opened in it.

brewdad 11y ago
Well the incentives will be aligned such that soon the tenants will have a large, unregulated hotel to deal with.
otterley 11y ago
How is that practically different from how any modern beehive apartment complex operates today? In a building with hundreds of units, neighbor tenant stability is rarely found.
- tptacek 11y ago
  The apartment building and its tenants have recourse against abusive tenants: they can break the lease and eject the tenant. That recourse doesn't exist with short-term renters, who are going to leave soon anyways.
  - otterley 11y ago
    Tenants have no direct recourse against bad neighbors - their only recourse is to complain to management and pray they do something about it. As for management, they'll have similar, if not identical, recourse in the form of (a) deposit withholding and (b) negative feedback on AirBNB. The ability to provide negative feedback actually gives them greater power, incidentally, than the power innkeepers typically have over ill-behaving guests.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      I do not believe feedback on renters does anything to meaningfully curb abuse, especially because abusive renters will be the ones least likely to groom a profile of positive reviews.
      - kamaal 11y ago
        Every thing you say about Airbnb can be applied to uber too. Why should there be unregulated cab drivers all over the city? What are legal means for handling abuse by drivers? Why should other cars on the roads deal with every car being a potential taxi? But its funny how this free market thing works though, the hypocrisy is the same people who scream innovation and disruption when it comes to Uber are crying disgust and malpractice when it comes to Airbnb. You can't have these selectively applied to what you like and dislike. If disrupting taxi unions and license issuers was fair, so is this.
        tptacek 11y ago
        It very much is a problem with Uber!!!
      - Canada 11y ago
        You completely missed his point.
        tptacek 11y ago
        No, I completely dis-missed his point.
      - otterley 11y ago
        I don't follow your logic. If abusive renters are not "groom[ing] a profile of positive reviews," and offerers are rejecting their applications as a consequence, that suggests to me that the system is working as we'd like it to.
        11y ago
  - Canada 11y ago
    Even when there's no such thing as AirBNB, tenants who rent have absolutely, positively ZERO recourse against bad neighbors. Zilch. Nada. Absolutely nothing. They can accept it, or find somewhere else. It's great that a landlord is saying, fine, you can sublease the place short term. But we have to regulate that, you have to pay us to do so, and if you can't hold up your end we have the right to put an end to it. This is the only reasonable way I can see to solve the problem of short term rentals.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      You seem very certain about this, but I don't think you've done much research on it. Not only do boilerplate leases include "quiet enjoyment" clauses that contractually bind landlords into ensuring that tenants aren't disruptive, but state laws also include implied covenants of quiet enjoyment, meaning that there are large areas where it doesn't even matter if you edit that out of your lease. A landlord that fails to ensure quiet enjoyment can be sued by their tenants.
      - otterley 11y ago
        Yes, those laws exist. Do they protect the tenant's interest more effectively than penalties against short-term renters? Difficult to say; the verdict isn't in yet and data is scarce. Your mere beliefs are not sufficient. Even with the laws and implied covenants, it takes a significant amount of time to go through eviction proceedings in many states. In California it can take months (unless you stop paying rent altogether, in which case there's a fast-track procedure). Yes, a tenant can sue their landlord as well. Again, however, that can take months and significant expense. When considering these things, we must take into account the actual reality of how rights are exercised, not merely what rights exist in law.
        JVMsOfGor 11y ago
        Completely agree here. At least in California, there are strong laws that protect a tenant from their landlord. The only way to be evicted quickly is if you commit a serious violent felony, a sex crime ( I guess that IS a serious felony ), or you stop paying rent ( Ask me how I know !) In just about every other situation, there is a list of 16 reasons you can evict someone, and all of them can lead to a lengthy expensive trial, in which at the end the landlord has spent a significant amount of money and probably regrets every doing anything with their life. https://www.sftu.org/justcauses/ https://www.sftu.org/justcauses/
xiaoma 11y ago
It's a win-win because the renter wins and the landlord wins. If the neighbors also won, it would be a win-win-win.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
zeveb 11y ago
> All the other tenants in the building have to deal with a small, unregulated hotel being opened in it. Is that particularly worse than tenants having to deal with Section 8 tenants in their midst?
- tptacek 11y ago
  What the fuck would make you write something like that? I live on a block with S8 renters. They're real people with families who want a safe bed and decent schools for their kids just like everyone else.
  - zeveb 11y ago
    > What the fuck would make you write something like that? Your own comment some time ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10623102 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10623102 Why do you think that short-term middle-to-upper-class renters are preferable neighbours to medium-to-long-term lower-class renters? I saw your comment elsethread about ease of punishment, which makes some sense, but in my experience small landlords simply don't care. Living above a pair of end-stage alcoholics who importuned people on the sidewalk and called the ambulance for health care every few weeks was far, far more annoying than the flophouse a few doors down. Then there was the poor family with 9 people in a two-bedroom unit, with a couple of teenagers who vandalised and may have been thieves as well (not that upper-class teenagers aren't hoodlums, of course: many of them are too). Then there was the prostitute with the shady clientele. You appear to be opposed to short-term renters, but appear to applaud Section 8. Why the difference?
    - tptacek 11y ago
      Yes, that is exactly what I think, and also what the zoning commissioners in virtually every city think, which is why cities have limitations on short-term rentals in residential properties and special zoning rules for where you can put hotels!
- wglb 11y ago
  I think you are way out of line here. I have family that lives in Section 8 housing. They are a danger or annoyance to no one.
Canada 11y ago
If the neighbors are harmed, a landlord with means accepts responsibility for either stopping the harm or compensating them in exchange. That's way better than the current situation. What are the neighbors going to get from a tenant who sub leases in violation of the lease agreement? It's the landlord who offers (within the limits of local law) the terms of the lease. I've never seen a lease agreement that allows subleasing without at least right of refusal on reasonable grounds by the landlord. The landlord is within its rights prohibit the tenant from entering into any kind of sub lease entirely. It could (again, within the limits of local law) evict the tenant for even advertising a possible sublease without its written permission. But no, the landlord is very graciously offering to actively support subleasing via AirBnB. If the landlord executes properly, that's a win for the tenant, a win for the landlord, and a win for the neighbors.
- tptacek 11y ago
  You've lost me. Exactly how do I benefit as the neighbor of someone who has turned their apartment into a small unregulated hotel?
  - Canada 11y ago
    Saying the neighbor is ipso facto harmed by short term subleasing is like saying that the value of currency is ipso facto damaged by creating more or it so that the share value of a company is ipso facto damaged by issuing more shares. It's certainly true that if these things are done irresponsibly then bad things happen. And bad things do often happen, I'll give you that. But it's not necessarily true. How it's managed is what determines whether the outcome is good or bad and for whom. When short term renters well behaved, then the neighbors aren't harmed at all. If any lease holder has the ability to sublet easily with support of the landlord then that is something of value. A landlord that gets involved like this is going to create an environment with incentives for good short term tenants. I'd rather lease from a company that allows me to do that and also supports me in doing so. I'd rather lease from a company that actively manages subleases than one that sticks its head in the sand that pretends that isn't happening all the time. Short term subleases are here to stay. Trying to stop them is like trying to stop piracy or illicit drug use. It's just not going to happen. edit: also: To call what happens on airbnb an "unregulated hotel" is profoundly misguided. Have you ever lived for a significant period of time out of airbnb??