5 ms·

>The use of a service like AirBnB would seem to place a rental act squarely within this limitation, and thus outside of the exception. I don't think it would b

by jasode 10y ago

>The use of a service like AirBnB would seem to place a rental act squarely within this limitation, and thus outside of the exception. I don't think it would be. The extra verbiage about a "broker/agent" is more of a secondary definition to help the law pin down properties that are "commercial". In other words, if you're paying the high price of contracting a broker, you're 99.99% likely not to be renting out a personal bedroom. The homeowner's use of Airbnb is more analogous to listing in the "newspaper classifieds" rather than contracting a human broker. As far as I can tell, very few people including states' general attorneys or Federal courts interpret Airbnb's situation as a broker service that is therefore subject to those limitations.

dragonwriter 10y ago
> The extra verbiage about a "broker/agent" is more of a secondary definition No, its not. Its an express limitation on the applicability of the homeowner exception, and applies to any use of any rental (or sale) services of a broker, agent, or person in the business of renting (or selling) real estate in support of a discriminatory rental, after December 31, 1969. Its only legal (since 1970) under the federal fair housing act to discriminate, even as a homeowner renting their own home, if the rental is arranged without the use of some commercial rental-arrangement service. (And even them it may be illegal under state fair housing laws.) > The homeowner's use of Airbnb is more analogous to listing in the "newspaper classifieds" rather than contracting a human broker. That's certainly the argument a discriminating owner using AirBnB (or possible AirBnB themselves) would try to make, but AirBnB's financial and substantive involvement in the transaction is very different than that of a hands-off listing service like a newspaper classified section, so I don't think that argument would fly. If AirBnB actually acted like a newspaper classified service, that argument might be valid, but that's not what AirBnB does (if we were talking, instead, about Craigslist, that would be a good argument.)
- jasode 10y ago
  >No, its not. Its an express limitation on the applicability of the homeowner exception, [...] To be clear, my response was not disagreeing with this part.
runako 10y ago
>homeowner's use of Airbnb is more analogous to listing in the "newspaper classifieds" rather than contracting a human broker. Except that AirBnB: - collects money and acts as a financial intermediary - provides some measure of insurance to both sides of the transaction - provides some measure of support before/during/after a stay - more? Basically, it's nothing like a newspaper classified.
- Spooky23 10y ago
  That's more AirBnb's issue than the homeowner. The whole business is illegal.

by jasode 10y ago

dragonwriter 10y ago

> The extra verbiage about a "broker/agent" is more of a secondary definition No, its not. Its an express limitation on the applicability of the homeowner exception, and applies to any use of any rental (or sale) services of a broker, agent, or person in the business of renting (or selling) real estate in support of a discriminatory rental, after December 31, 1969. Its only legal (since 1970) under the federal fair housing act to discriminate, even as a homeowner renting their own home, if the rental is arranged without the use of some commercial rental-arrangement service. (And even them it may be illegal under state fair housing laws.) > The homeowner's use of Airbnb is more analogous to listing in the "newspaper classifieds" rather than contracting a human broker. That's certainly the argument a discriminating owner using AirBnB (or possible AirBnB themselves) would try to make, but AirBnB's financial and substantive involvement in the transaction is very different than that of a hands-off listing service like a newspaper classified section, so I don't think that argument would fly. If AirBnB actually acted like a newspaper classified service, that argument might be valid, but that's not what AirBnB does (if we were talking, instead, about Craigslist, that would be a good argument.)

jasode 10y ago
>No, its not. Its an express limitation on the applicability of the homeowner exception, [...] To be clear, my response was not disagreeing with this part.

runako 10y ago

>homeowner's use of Airbnb is more analogous to listing in the "newspaper classifieds" rather than contracting a human broker. Except that AirBnB: - collects money and acts as a financial intermediary - provides some measure of insurance to both sides of the transaction - provides some measure of support before/during/after a stay - more? Basically, it's nothing like a newspaper classified.

Spooky23 10y ago
That's more AirBnb's issue than the homeowner. The whole business is illegal.