3 ms·

I live in NYC, and while I think AirBnB is decent idea, I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a building where the landlord - or another tenet - were renting

by jawngee 16y ago

I live in NYC, and while I think AirBnB is decent idea, I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a building where the landlord - or another tenet - were renting out their spot like a hotel or hostel. At the point you are doing that with any sort of regularity you should be subject to licensing, insurance, etc.

jawngee 16y ago
This is exactly why I'm growing tired of social news sites too. Instead of responding in disagreement, you get downvoted. The whole thing is cowardly and/or lazy. Whomever downvoted me, you are telling me that you wouldn't mind a constant rotation of complete strangers taking residence in the apartment across the hall from you with no recourse for liability?
- kiba 16y ago
  There's no reason to license and regulate if you can fine people with noise pollution and other negative externalities that come out of their property. If you disrupt the neighbors with loud musics, wild partying, etc, you will pay a fine. All the neighbors have to do is sue you in court and it should be easy to prove it so. That will kill many birds with one stone and eliminate vectors that allows people to choose winner and losers for political reasons.
  - kgrin 16y ago
    "All the neighbors have to do is sue you in court..." Even for small claims court, it's a pretty big burden to file suit. This regulation may not be the best answer, but let's not pretend that short-term rentals don't engender problems for the neighbors, or that all those problems can be ameliorated with more lawsuits.
    - chopsueyar 16y ago
      I am quite certain this legislation was not passed because bands of 'neighbors' grouped together to stop the problems engendered by short-term renters. Also, why is this problem engendered by only short-term renters? Can long-term renters, and even property owners be rude, loud, or obnoxious? This law will do nothing to protect you from 'those' types. You support increased government regulation, when there exists an existing legal process to handle such "problems". A pretty big burden? It is small claims court for a reason. If you are intelligent enought to post and read HN, you should not be burdened by filing a small claims lawsuit. At least now there is a process in place to deal with the owner of the property. Wait until the owner loses the property and vagrant squatters take residence. Begin the burden, here: http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/nyc/smallclaims/startingcase.shtml http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/nyc/smallclaims/startingcase....
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
    - kiba 16y ago
      Even for small claims court, it's a pretty big burden to file suit. Then make it less of a burden to file a lawsuit, and make it easy for people to prove and disprove that there was indeed noise pollution or whatever. Of course, the state have a monopoly on the court system, so that might be a difficult problem. We don't need new laws, as that will make more things complicated in a land that filled with overly complicated unclear laws. Make it so that laws are as simple and understandable to the average citizen as possible. Make it so that competent judges are selected. Make it so that the system is efficient in handling out appropriate and fair judgement. Then make laws that make sense without allowing people to convert their dollars to political power. In the first place, people shouldn't use the laws as solutions to every single problems that they might have.
  - mikecane 16y ago
    >>>If you disrupt the neighbors with loud musics, wild partying, etc, you will pay a fine. All the neighbors have to do is sue you in court and it should be easy to prove it so. You have never had experience in NYC Housing Court. I have. Keep dreaming, though.
    - kiba 16y ago
      You have never had experience in NYC Housing Court. I have. Keep dreaming, though. It might be rather difficult to fix the courts, but it's lot better than adding regulations that probably benefit the entrenched business interests.
      - mikecane 16y ago
        Yes, I totally agree with you there. I'm just saying that expecting recourse from NYC Housing Court in regard to neighbors is not something that's bound to happen. And let me just say that as a tenant, there have been times that Court has given me the slack I needed when rent fell behind years ago, so I'm not wholly against it!
  - mikecane 16y ago
    By the way, noisy neighbors: http://tenant.net/Rights/Noise/index.html http://tenant.net/Rights/Noise/index.html
- mattmillr 16y ago
  I haven't downvoted you, but would like to point out that there is a very large middle ground for disagreement without taking the absurd position of "you wouldn't mind a constant rotation of complete strangers..." Your argument is just as lazy.
richcollins 16y ago
If you don't want to live someplace that allows short term rentals, make sure it's in the contract that you sign when you buy the place. No regulation required.
- jonknee 16y ago
  You already did, unlicensed hotels aren't legal to run out of your home. This law just makes that easier to enforce.
  - richcollins 16y ago
    That isn't a contract its a law. A law that I'm arguing against in favor of contracts.
- rg 16y ago
  Contracts like you suggest are common and working today in other cities. When I bought a condo in central London, my contract with the association of all other owners in the building specifically forbade short-term sublets, and forbade any sublets without the written approval of the association. When one condo owner started renting out on weekends through web advertising, the association had its lawyer bring that clause to the owner's attention and the practice was stopped immediately. No law needed. (BTW, these contracts for UK condo property take the form of "leases" for hundreds of years, which can be sold like other property.)

by jawngee 16y ago

jawngee 16y ago

This is exactly why I'm growing tired of social news sites too. Instead of responding in disagreement, you get downvoted. The whole thing is cowardly and/or lazy. Whomever downvoted me, you are telling me that you wouldn't mind a constant rotation of complete strangers taking residence in the apartment across the hall from you with no recourse for liability?

kiba 16y ago
There's no reason to license and regulate if you can fine people with noise pollution and other negative externalities that come out of their property. If you disrupt the neighbors with loud musics, wild partying, etc, you will pay a fine. All the neighbors have to do is sue you in court and it should be easy to prove it so. That will kill many birds with one stone and eliminate vectors that allows people to choose winner and losers for political reasons.
- kgrin 16y ago
  "All the neighbors have to do is sue you in court..." Even for small claims court, it's a pretty big burden to file suit. This regulation may not be the best answer, but let's not pretend that short-term rentals don't engender problems for the neighbors, or that all those problems can be ameliorated with more lawsuits.
  - chopsueyar 16y ago
    I am quite certain this legislation was not passed because bands of 'neighbors' grouped together to stop the problems engendered by short-term renters. Also, why is this problem engendered by only short-term renters? Can long-term renters, and even property owners be rude, loud, or obnoxious? This law will do nothing to protect you from 'those' types. You support increased government regulation, when there exists an existing legal process to handle such "problems". A pretty big burden? It is small claims court for a reason. If you are intelligent enought to post and read HN, you should not be burdened by filing a small claims lawsuit. At least now there is a process in place to deal with the owner of the property. Wait until the owner loses the property and vagrant squatters take residence. Begin the burden, here: http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/nyc/smallclaims/startingcase.shtml http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/nyc/smallclaims/startingcase....
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - kiba 16y ago
    Even for small claims court, it's a pretty big burden to file suit. Then make it less of a burden to file a lawsuit, and make it easy for people to prove and disprove that there was indeed noise pollution or whatever. Of course, the state have a monopoly on the court system, so that might be a difficult problem. We don't need new laws, as that will make more things complicated in a land that filled with overly complicated unclear laws. Make it so that laws are as simple and understandable to the average citizen as possible. Make it so that competent judges are selected. Make it so that the system is efficient in handling out appropriate and fair judgement. Then make laws that make sense without allowing people to convert their dollars to political power. In the first place, people shouldn't use the laws as solutions to every single problems that they might have.
- mikecane 16y ago
  >>>If you disrupt the neighbors with loud musics, wild partying, etc, you will pay a fine. All the neighbors have to do is sue you in court and it should be easy to prove it so. You have never had experience in NYC Housing Court. I have. Keep dreaming, though.
  - kiba 16y ago
    You have never had experience in NYC Housing Court. I have. Keep dreaming, though. It might be rather difficult to fix the courts, but it's lot better than adding regulations that probably benefit the entrenched business interests.
    - mikecane 16y ago
      Yes, I totally agree with you there. I'm just saying that expecting recourse from NYC Housing Court in regard to neighbors is not something that's bound to happen. And let me just say that as a tenant, there have been times that Court has given me the slack I needed when rent fell behind years ago, so I'm not wholly against it!
- mikecane 16y ago
  By the way, noisy neighbors: http://tenant.net/Rights/Noise/index.html http://tenant.net/Rights/Noise/index.html
mattmillr 16y ago
I haven't downvoted you, but would like to point out that there is a very large middle ground for disagreement without taking the absurd position of "you wouldn't mind a constant rotation of complete strangers..." Your argument is just as lazy.

richcollins 16y ago

If you don't want to live someplace that allows short term rentals, make sure it's in the contract that you sign when you buy the place. No regulation required.

jonknee 16y ago
You already did, unlicensed hotels aren't legal to run out of your home. This law just makes that easier to enforce.
- richcollins 16y ago
  That isn't a contract its a law. A law that I'm arguing against in favor of contracts.
rg 16y ago
Contracts like you suggest are common and working today in other cities. When I bought a condo in central London, my contract with the association of all other owners in the building specifically forbade short-term sublets, and forbade any sublets without the written approval of the association. When one condo owner started renting out on weekends through web advertising, the association had its lawyer bring that clause to the owner's attention and the practice was stopped immediately. No law needed. (BTW, these contracts for UK condo property take the form of "leases" for hundreds of years, which can be sold like other property.)