4 ms·

Personally, I see no problem with Airbnb and I think the government forcing you to be licensed is bad. Airbnb has a review system for a reason. If it’s a shitt

Personally, I see no problem with Airbnb and I think the government forcing you to be licensed is bad. Airbnb has a review system for a reason. If it’s a shitty place, you write a review and other people will be less inclined to rent. I’ve been in hotels that were shitty and licensed. I’ve been in airbnb rentals that were cheaper and better taken care of. I’ve also been in great hotels and shitty Airbnb’s. How is suing two property owners a win for city licensed landlords? Are they getting the 2+million? No? Oh the city is getting it for “reasons” and calling it a win. Stupid.

ppeetteerr 8y ago
There was a case made that Airbnb rentals are subsidized by the local residents through higher rent. So if you travel to Paris, you're paying less for an Airbnb rental there. In your own city, Airbnb rentals are rising the cost of buying and renting. The outcome is that your costs end up the same: higher property at home, lower price of renting abroad. This is, of course, purely theoretical. There are many other factors in play: regulation, your propensity to travel, desirability of your home neighborhood, etc.
bobthepanda 8y ago
The licensing is not to ensure quality, the licensing is to restrict supply of hotel units. Not to keep hotels in business, but because people simply do not like having short-term visitors as neighbors or floormates. It's not a win for city licensed landlords. It's a win for residents. Residents are ultimately voters. And AirBnB is bad for the vast majority of residents.
- baddox 8y ago
  > people simply do not like having short-term visitors as neighbors or floormates. That's a commonly provided explanation, but I find it very hard to believe that existing laws and leasing rules can't/don't already easily solve this. If too many instances of noise complaints, property damage, improper trash disposal, etc. occur from your property, you (the owner or renter) get fined or evicted. It's obviously not an excuse to say that you rented out your unit on AirBnb. Surely these laws and rules have always existed, since that problem is not unique to short-term rentals. What am I missing?
  - coryrc 8y ago
    I've been dealing with a neighbor with a barking dog for months. Good neighbor laws are essentially unenforced in the USA.
    - baddox 8y ago
      Okay, then that seems like the problem. Why would short-term rentals laws be enforced any better? Unless, of course, the incentive to enforce those laws is provided by special interests like the hotel industry. Shocking.
  - bobthepanda 8y ago
    People want zero short-term visitors as neighbors, and the law reflects that. Landlords, under existing US law, are only really liable for tenant nuisance if they should have known that the nuisance was likely (e.g., an aggressive dog in the apartment.) It's hard to really argue that you could tell anything about noisy short-term visitors, since fine upstanding members of society on a weekend trip may turn out to be party animals at night. Short-term rentals are even more difficult to enforce against just because there is a shortage of police and inspector manpower in most major cites; by the time one is able to get to you the visitor may have left already. And first offence is generally just a warning, but a warning is of little use to people taking a plane out the next day.
    - baddox 8y ago
      I don’t think simply not wanting short-term visitors in your neighborhood is a legitimate desire that should be respected. It’s fine to desire a lack of specific symptoms like noise or damage. If a landlord or property owner allows guests that cause problems I don’t see why they’re any less liable than if they cause the problems themselves.
sokoloff 8y ago
I use AirBnB all over the place and love it. That said, I don't have a problem with a reasonable government licensing requirement. I want my AirBnBs to have smoke detectors (and CO detectors where relevant). I want them to have safe means of egress in a fire. These are not things that ratings/reviews/stars are going to capture.

ppeetteerr 8y ago

There was a case made that Airbnb rentals are subsidized by the local residents through higher rent. So if you travel to Paris, you're paying less for an Airbnb rental there. In your own city, Airbnb rentals are rising the cost of buying and renting. The outcome is that your costs end up the same: higher property at home, lower price of renting abroad. This is, of course, purely theoretical. There are many other factors in play: regulation, your propensity to travel, desirability of your home neighborhood, etc.

bobthepanda 8y ago

The licensing is not to ensure quality, the licensing is to restrict supply of hotel units. Not to keep hotels in business, but because people simply do not like having short-term visitors as neighbors or floormates. It's not a win for city licensed landlords. It's a win for residents. Residents are ultimately voters. And AirBnB is bad for the vast majority of residents.

baddox 8y ago
> people simply do not like having short-term visitors as neighbors or floormates. That's a commonly provided explanation, but I find it very hard to believe that existing laws and leasing rules can't/don't already easily solve this. If too many instances of noise complaints, property damage, improper trash disposal, etc. occur from your property, you (the owner or renter) get fined or evicted. It's obviously not an excuse to say that you rented out your unit on AirBnb. Surely these laws and rules have always existed, since that problem is not unique to short-term rentals. What am I missing?
- coryrc 8y ago
  I've been dealing with a neighbor with a barking dog for months. Good neighbor laws are essentially unenforced in the USA.
  - baddox 8y ago
    Okay, then that seems like the problem. Why would short-term rentals laws be enforced any better? Unless, of course, the incentive to enforce those laws is provided by special interests like the hotel industry. Shocking.
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  People want zero short-term visitors as neighbors, and the law reflects that. Landlords, under existing US law, are only really liable for tenant nuisance if they should have known that the nuisance was likely (e.g., an aggressive dog in the apartment.) It's hard to really argue that you could tell anything about noisy short-term visitors, since fine upstanding members of society on a weekend trip may turn out to be party animals at night. Short-term rentals are even more difficult to enforce against just because there is a shortage of police and inspector manpower in most major cites; by the time one is able to get to you the visitor may have left already. And first offence is generally just a warning, but a warning is of little use to people taking a plane out the next day.
  - baddox 8y ago
    I don’t think simply not wanting short-term visitors in your neighborhood is a legitimate desire that should be respected. It’s fine to desire a lack of specific symptoms like noise or damage. If a landlord or property owner allows guests that cause problems I don’t see why they’re any less liable than if they cause the problems themselves.

sokoloff 8y ago

I use AirBnB all over the place and love it. That said, I don't have a problem with a reasonable government licensing requirement. I want my AirBnBs to have smoke detectors (and CO detectors where relevant). I want them to have safe means of egress in a fire. These are not things that ratings/reviews/stars are going to capture.