6 ms·

Man, the more I read stories like this about AirBnB the more I want them to fail. People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand

Man, the more I read stories like this about AirBnB the more I want them to fail. People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason. Beyond that though, what I despise is that AirBnB seems to reap all the profits and accept none of the blame. They fought to avoid paying taxes and whined when they lost, they refuse to take down listings when presented with evidence of them being illegal, they purposefully make complying with authorities difficult, they got their start by effectively breaking the terms of agreement on craigslist and spamming people like crazy to kickstart traffic to their site. I love the idea of sharing homes. I just hate how AirBnB is doing it, and the more I read about them (obviously the media is writing articles to get clicks, so I'm sure it's somewhat biased) the more I think we'd be better off without them.

danaris 9y ago
> Beyond that though, what I despise is that AirBnB seems to reap all the profits and accept none of the blame. I dunno; it seems to me that in these cases, the people who are really to blame are the "tenants" who are actually breaking both laws and rental agreements. I'm puzzled as to why the property owners aren't suing them to recover all the money they lost. I mean, yeah, lawsuits cost money, too, but when you're talking a $20k fine, I would imagine there's at least a good chance of recovering more than you pay...and it didn't sound like any of the mentioned owners were attempting to do anything to the bad-faith tenants. I totally agree that AirBnB has some serious legal issues looming in its future in most if not all of the jurisdictions it operates in, but I honestly don't see these particular issues as being representative of them.
- FICO 9y ago
  I'm sure many of them will try to sue later on but that's not an overnight process, it can take years for a lawsuit to make it's way through court. Plus the property owners don't even fully know what their full losses are yet, it's way too soon, the dust hasn't settled. $20,000 is too much for small claims court so it's going to be a big production. Furthermore, these scumbags are the type of people to say "LOL" to a legal judgement instead of paying it. That means more time in court to get wage and bank account garnishments (if they are even working). If they don't have the $20,000+ or a well paying job or assets then the judgement is worth as much as the paper it is written on, you can't get blood from a stone. If you get a wage garnishment you may collect your $20,000 in 10 years if you're lucky. (Ignoring the fact it's a several months process to even evict a tenant in many states in the first place.) You can't let AirBnB off the hook here, they have the moral, if not legal, responsibility to prevent the most egregious abuses of their platform.
- mark212 9y ago
  Because these tenants have no money. If they did, they'd likely be buying properties and listing them instead of doing these illegal sublets. The landlords in the area will likely drastically increase the rental deposit (unless it's limited by state or local law to some multiple of the monthly rent). That's the only real security against a tenant.
  - greendata 9y ago
    Exactly, the landlord will win in court but never collect from the tenant. The landlord should sue Airbnb directly in small claims court.
- scarface74 9y ago
  I'm puzzled as to why the property owners aren't suing them to recover all the money they lost. I mean, yeah, lawsuits cost money, too, but when you're talking a $20k fine, I would imagine there's at least a good chance of recovering more than you pay...and it didn't sound like any of the mentioned owners were attempting to do anything to the bad-faith tenants. It sounds like you have never been a landlord. It's a five step process that takes at least two months just to evict someone in my landlord friendly state. I've heard it's worse in many other states. After that, it's possible to sue someone but that costs money and time and even after you do win it can take years to actually get your money and go through garnishment procedures once you track down their income. It's seldom worth the effort. Yes most of the fault lies with AirBnb but being a distant landlord without a local property manager is crazy anyway. I sold my properties because the expense of getting a property manager or the hassle of managing it myself from across town wasn't worth it.
  - edibleEnergy 9y ago
    The lack of a property manager also struck me as crazy and I've never been a landlord. Plenty of rentals have gotten trashed and city fines accrued long before airbnb existed. Doesn't sound like this stuff happened overnight.
  - eh78ssxv2f 9y ago
    So, it seems that regulations governing the relationship between the landlord and tenants is the real problem here. If it was easier to recover money from the tenants, and kick them off the property, this would not be a problem.
    - scarface74 9y ago
      Given a choice between protecting the rights of the tenants and protecting the rights of the landlord, I think we should be very careful about leaning on the side of the tenants and I'm saying that as a former landlord. The landlord may lose money but the tenant could be homeless and living in unsafe conditions if you veer too much in the landlord's favor. As far as making it easier to recover money. Since it is just another civil case, it would take a complete overhaul of civil court.
sliverstorm 9y ago
People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason I love this quote: Which is funnier: tech bros innovating their way to public transit, or bitcoin folks slowly reinventing financial regulation? AirBnB, of course, is on a similar path. I'm with you though, Uber, AirBnB, both seem to be good new age examples of the business strategy privatize the gains, socialize the risk/losses. Usually the company passes the taxpayer the bill; here, instead, a new patsy has been found.
nailer 9y ago
Yep. Doing this five meters away from my front door, where my house and neighbors share a hallway. The carpet outside is covered in barbecue oil from a guest lugging a barbecue to the rooftop. We've had multiple drunk people try and break into the house. We've had a rooftop party with a couple of hundred teenagers. The owner is absentee and doesn't care, Airbnb won't even help you find the listing when you know the address (exactly like the article). Ultimately it's our time and the police's time that handled things (and the taxpayer), while Airbnb reap the profits.
- toomuchtodo 9y ago
  Can't report to your HOA or other management org?
techsupporter 9y ago
> Man, the more I read stories like this about AirBnB the more I want them to fail. People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason. Frankly, I feel the same about every single one of the prominent "sharing economy" / "gig economy" companies. Uber/Lyft and AirBnB just seem to be the worst of them because they're the most visible of the visible. All of them appear to delight in exploiting the fact that enforcement of codes and rules isn't (and can't be) 100% universal so it's a "go under the radar until caught" model. Meanwhile, the rest of us get to live with the obnoxiousness with no effective way to push back. Uber/Lyft "drivers" seem to have zero recognition of traffic laws (stopping in a bus lane during rush hour is practically a given these days), AirBnB "hosts" look at property rental rules as an irritating nuisance that impedes their quick buck. Even food companies like DoorDash flout labor laws and "freshly-prepared meals to your door" companies seem to think that commercial food handling rules are just dumb. I get that lots of people love having the conveniences of life available at the tap of an icon--I do, too, even though I flatly refuse to use any of those services above--but, damn, couldn't we do it while also being considerate of those around us?
- criddell 9y ago
  > All of them appear to delight in exploiting the fact that enforcement of codes and rules isn't (and can't be) 100% universal so it's a "go under the radar until caught" model. This is true, but in some ways I think it's been a good shock to the system. For example, I think taxi regulation is being rethought and that wouldn't have happened without Uber.
- aidos 9y ago
  I'm interested to hear more about how Uber behaviour is inconsiderate. Don't get me wrong, I don't like the company itself - but the experience itself seems to be all round good. In the U.K. the drivers need to be registered for private hire and pay the appropriate insurance. In my experience the drivers abide by the law, are friendly and have nice clean cars. The service itself is miles better than traditional minicabs or black cabs. And it's cheaper too. As far as I can tell, it's just generally a better taxi service and nobody is getting hurt (though I welcome insights on where that's wrong). Having discussed it with black cab drivers, the best they've come up with (other than the destruction of their market) is that the uber drivers register in London and then drive in the other parts of the country. Apparently that's bad somehow, but I'm not sure why.
gumby 9y ago
> People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason. Just quoted this part because it's so important. Most (but not 100%) of regulation complaints are of the "waah waah" sort.
- carapace 9y ago
  "If a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged, a liberal is a conservative who's been arrested." ~ Thomas Wolfe
- cookiecaper 9y ago
  I agree that there is usually a "good reason" behind many regulations. The issue is that the law applies with unbending force. Regulations would be both less necessary and less onerous if we could conceive of a more flexible, fluid legal system. It's not necessarily a valid implicit assumption that the regulations that apply to professional hoteliers should be applicable to individuals taking on short-term boarders. Justice is very slow and very expensive under our current model. I understand that there are a lot of complex mostly-good historical reasons why things became that way. But we need more legal fluidity and better legal accessibility.
djrogers 9y ago
> People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason. In this specific case, it’s clear that this a) happened in spite of regulations, and b) is much more difficult to clean up due to regulations (specifically over-reaching tenant protections).
mahyarm 9y ago
The regulation is what is screwing the owner in this case. It's a simple ban on short term renting. If it didn't exist then it would just be a civil lease agreement violation and far less painful. AirBnB went wrong in this case because they don't have a good property owner support channel to remove bad properties like this.
- x0x0 9y ago
  At first blush, allowing the owner to exclude addresses from rental seems reasonable. But if an airbnb host is willing to violate their lease, why isn't that person willing to fake ownership? How far should airbnb be required to go to verify ownership, and what happens when ownership changes? To be honest, these people sound like shitty, lazy landlords who deserve their bad tenants. They 1 - didn't do a reference check; 2 - didn't swing by occasionally (even every couple months) to verify the condition of their property; 3 - were renting property out and hadn't bothered to provide neighbors their contact info in case of problems; 4 - quite possibly (this is highly variable / city by city) hadn't notified the city they were renting these units, or the city would have sent the fines to them rather than (presumably) to the tenants. (I say this as a landlord). They feel they are entitled to take out a mortgage then collect checks without any work. It isn't that easy...
  - bdcravens 9y ago
    > How far should airbnb be required to go to verify ownership, and what happens when ownership changes? Isn't this a matter of public record? Tons of solutions for verifying identity exist and are used in other industries.
  - FICO 9y ago
    Property ownership is public information that can be verified with the town. Furthermore, I didn't see any reason to jump to such conclusions given in the article. These people seem like professional swindlers so they could have presented false documents when signing the lease.
    - 9y ago
gruez 9y ago
>they got their start by effectively breaking the terms of agreement on craigslist and spamming people like crazy to kickstart traffic to their site. startup-speak: "growth hacking"
mirimir 9y ago
How come Airbnb doesn't require proof of ownership? I mean, few rental contracts even allow subletting without owner approval.

danaris 9y ago

> Beyond that though, what I despise is that AirBnB seems to reap all the profits and accept none of the blame. I dunno; it seems to me that in these cases, the people who are really to blame are the "tenants" who are actually breaking both laws and rental agreements. I'm puzzled as to why the property owners aren't suing them to recover all the money they lost. I mean, yeah, lawsuits cost money, too, but when you're talking a $20k fine, I would imagine there's at least a good chance of recovering more than you pay...and it didn't sound like any of the mentioned owners were attempting to do anything to the bad-faith tenants. I totally agree that AirBnB has some serious legal issues looming in its future in most if not all of the jurisdictions it operates in, but I honestly don't see these particular issues as being representative of them.

FICO 9y ago
I'm sure many of them will try to sue later on but that's not an overnight process, it can take years for a lawsuit to make it's way through court. Plus the property owners don't even fully know what their full losses are yet, it's way too soon, the dust hasn't settled. $20,000 is too much for small claims court so it's going to be a big production. Furthermore, these scumbags are the type of people to say "LOL" to a legal judgement instead of paying it. That means more time in court to get wage and bank account garnishments (if they are even working). If they don't have the $20,000+ or a well paying job or assets then the judgement is worth as much as the paper it is written on, you can't get blood from a stone. If you get a wage garnishment you may collect your $20,000 in 10 years if you're lucky. (Ignoring the fact it's a several months process to even evict a tenant in many states in the first place.) You can't let AirBnB off the hook here, they have the moral, if not legal, responsibility to prevent the most egregious abuses of their platform.
mark212 9y ago
Because these tenants have no money. If they did, they'd likely be buying properties and listing them instead of doing these illegal sublets. The landlords in the area will likely drastically increase the rental deposit (unless it's limited by state or local law to some multiple of the monthly rent). That's the only real security against a tenant.
- greendata 9y ago
  Exactly, the landlord will win in court but never collect from the tenant. The landlord should sue Airbnb directly in small claims court.
scarface74 9y ago
I'm puzzled as to why the property owners aren't suing them to recover all the money they lost. I mean, yeah, lawsuits cost money, too, but when you're talking a $20k fine, I would imagine there's at least a good chance of recovering more than you pay...and it didn't sound like any of the mentioned owners were attempting to do anything to the bad-faith tenants. It sounds like you have never been a landlord. It's a five step process that takes at least two months just to evict someone in my landlord friendly state. I've heard it's worse in many other states. After that, it's possible to sue someone but that costs money and time and even after you do win it can take years to actually get your money and go through garnishment procedures once you track down their income. It's seldom worth the effort. Yes most of the fault lies with AirBnb but being a distant landlord without a local property manager is crazy anyway. I sold my properties because the expense of getting a property manager or the hassle of managing it myself from across town wasn't worth it.
- edibleEnergy 9y ago
  The lack of a property manager also struck me as crazy and I've never been a landlord. Plenty of rentals have gotten trashed and city fines accrued long before airbnb existed. Doesn't sound like this stuff happened overnight.
- eh78ssxv2f 9y ago
  So, it seems that regulations governing the relationship between the landlord and tenants is the real problem here. If it was easier to recover money from the tenants, and kick them off the property, this would not be a problem.
  - scarface74 9y ago
    Given a choice between protecting the rights of the tenants and protecting the rights of the landlord, I think we should be very careful about leaning on the side of the tenants and I'm saying that as a former landlord. The landlord may lose money but the tenant could be homeless and living in unsafe conditions if you veer too much in the landlord's favor. As far as making it easier to recover money. Since it is just another civil case, it would take a complete overhaul of civil court.

sliverstorm 9y ago

People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason I love this quote: Which is funnier: tech bros innovating their way to public transit, or bitcoin folks slowly reinventing financial regulation? AirBnB, of course, is on a similar path. I'm with you though, Uber, AirBnB, both seem to be good new age examples of the business strategy privatize the gains, socialize the risk/losses. Usually the company passes the taxpayer the bill; here, instead, a new patsy has been found.

nailer 9y ago

Yep. Doing this five meters away from my front door, where my house and neighbors share a hallway. The carpet outside is covered in barbecue oil from a guest lugging a barbecue to the rooftop. We've had multiple drunk people try and break into the house. We've had a rooftop party with a couple of hundred teenagers. The owner is absentee and doesn't care, Airbnb won't even help you find the listing when you know the address (exactly like the article). Ultimately it's our time and the police's time that handled things (and the taxpayer), while Airbnb reap the profits.

toomuchtodo 9y ago
Can't report to your HOA or other management org?

techsupporter 9y ago

> Man, the more I read stories like this about AirBnB the more I want them to fail. People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason. Frankly, I feel the same about every single one of the prominent "sharing economy" / "gig economy" companies. Uber/Lyft and AirBnB just seem to be the worst of them because they're the most visible of the visible. All of them appear to delight in exploiting the fact that enforcement of codes and rules isn't (and can't be) 100% universal so it's a "go under the radar until caught" model. Meanwhile, the rest of us get to live with the obnoxiousness with no effective way to push back. Uber/Lyft "drivers" seem to have zero recognition of traffic laws (stopping in a bus lane during rush hour is practically a given these days), AirBnB "hosts" look at property rental rules as an irritating nuisance that impedes their quick buck. Even food companies like DoorDash flout labor laws and "freshly-prepared meals to your door" companies seem to think that commercial food handling rules are just dumb. I get that lots of people love having the conveniences of life available at the tap of an icon--I do, too, even though I flatly refuse to use any of those services above--but, damn, couldn't we do it while also being considerate of those around us?

criddell 9y ago
> All of them appear to delight in exploiting the fact that enforcement of codes and rules isn't (and can't be) 100% universal so it's a "go under the radar until caught" model. This is true, but in some ways I think it's been a good shock to the system. For example, I think taxi regulation is being rethought and that wouldn't have happened without Uber.
aidos 9y ago
I'm interested to hear more about how Uber behaviour is inconsiderate. Don't get me wrong, I don't like the company itself - but the experience itself seems to be all round good. In the U.K. the drivers need to be registered for private hire and pay the appropriate insurance. In my experience the drivers abide by the law, are friendly and have nice clean cars. The service itself is miles better than traditional minicabs or black cabs. And it's cheaper too. As far as I can tell, it's just generally a better taxi service and nobody is getting hurt (though I welcome insights on where that's wrong). Having discussed it with black cab drivers, the best they've come up with (other than the destruction of their market) is that the uber drivers register in London and then drive in the other parts of the country. Apparently that's bad somehow, but I'm not sure why.

gumby 9y ago

> People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason. Just quoted this part because it's so important. Most (but not 100%) of regulation complaints are of the "waah waah" sort.

carapace 9y ago
"If a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged, a liberal is a conservative who's been arrested." ~ Thomas Wolfe
cookiecaper 9y ago
I agree that there is usually a "good reason" behind many regulations. The issue is that the law applies with unbending force. Regulations would be both less necessary and less onerous if we could conceive of a more flexible, fluid legal system. It's not necessarily a valid implicit assumption that the regulations that apply to professional hoteliers should be applicable to individuals taking on short-term boarders. Justice is very slow and very expensive under our current model. I understand that there are a lot of complex mostly-good historical reasons why things became that way. But we need more legal fluidity and better legal accessibility.

djrogers 9y ago

> People hate regulations until they get screwed, and suddenly they understand that sometimes regulations exist for a reason. In this specific case, it’s clear that this a) happened in spite of regulations, and b) is much more difficult to clean up due to regulations (specifically over-reaching tenant protections).

mahyarm 9y ago

The regulation is what is screwing the owner in this case. It's a simple ban on short term renting. If it didn't exist then it would just be a civil lease agreement violation and far less painful. AirBnB went wrong in this case because they don't have a good property owner support channel to remove bad properties like this.

x0x0 9y ago
At first blush, allowing the owner to exclude addresses from rental seems reasonable. But if an airbnb host is willing to violate their lease, why isn't that person willing to fake ownership? How far should airbnb be required to go to verify ownership, and what happens when ownership changes? To be honest, these people sound like shitty, lazy landlords who deserve their bad tenants. They 1 - didn't do a reference check; 2 - didn't swing by occasionally (even every couple months) to verify the condition of their property; 3 - were renting property out and hadn't bothered to provide neighbors their contact info in case of problems; 4 - quite possibly (this is highly variable / city by city) hadn't notified the city they were renting these units, or the city would have sent the fines to them rather than (presumably) to the tenants. (I say this as a landlord). They feel they are entitled to take out a mortgage then collect checks without any work. It isn't that easy...
- bdcravens 9y ago
  > How far should airbnb be required to go to verify ownership, and what happens when ownership changes? Isn't this a matter of public record? Tons of solutions for verifying identity exist and are used in other industries.
- FICO 9y ago
  Property ownership is public information that can be verified with the town. Furthermore, I didn't see any reason to jump to such conclusions given in the article. These people seem like professional swindlers so they could have presented false documents when signing the lease.
  - 9y ago

gruez 9y ago

>they got their start by effectively breaking the terms of agreement on craigslist and spamming people like crazy to kickstart traffic to their site. startup-speak: "growth hacking"

mirimir 9y ago

How come Airbnb doesn't require proof of ownership? I mean, few rental contracts even allow subletting without owner approval.