19 ms·

DIY B&B

114 points by scarmig 14y ago

cciesquare 14y ago
For my friend's wedding, we stayed at such a place. I had a long conversation with the owner, who lived in a side room. It looked like an extension he built on the house. He told me he was running into issues with the city. Not from hotels or what not, but complaints from neighbors. They did not like the fact that strangers were constantly going in and out. BUT he said that he had heard hotels and motels were not happy about the popularity, especially from other short-term vacation home owners. It's going to be a two front battle, one side from big business, and the other from neighbors. In the end my guess is that the city will license it, and heavily tax it, in other words the cities win.
- gcb 14y ago
  The point about neighbors is moot. i hate all of mine. But the hotels have nothing against them. so i will have to live with them. that's life. If you could choose neighbors... the world would be very empty because everyone would be living alone.
luismmontielg 14y ago
Im getting OperationalError at /v1/complete/google-oauth2/ FATAL: too many connections for role "ruwdncbzdkulsh" Request Method: GET Request URL: http://api.collections.me/v1/complete/google-oauth2/?code=4/jagXxm_UPSk8P9omPYEDRhxFlX2y.Ao-8d6zmaUIbuJJVnL49Cc80GYQEcQI http://api.collections.me/v1/complete/google-oauth2/?code=4/... Django Version: 1.4 Exception Type: OperationalError Exception Value: FATAL: too many connections for role "ruwdncbzdkulsh" Seems django debug is ON
DenisM 14y ago
I foresee a social-media thingamajig that lets you stay with friends [of friends]*, and the stayovers being arranged similar to how linkedin introductions work.
mvkel 14y ago
Thanks for answering the question in the headline! Now I don't need to read the article.
tokenadult 14y ago
From the article: "For more than a year now, New York City has been enforcing a new state law that makes it illegal for homeowners like Hogan to rent out their house or apartment for less than a month. All across the city, police raids have shut down hundreds of similar informal bed-and-breakfast establishments, with nearly 1,900 different violations issued in under twelve months. Often, the fees associated with the citations stretch into tens of thousands of dollars. Hogan was threatened with a $25,000 fine—all for marketing the empty rooms in his house. . . . . "The crackdown in New York is similar to ones happening in several major European cities. Paris, for instance, passed a law in 2005 banning the rental of any residential property for less than a year, and began enforcing that law in 2010. London is now engaging in a wave of enforcement in the run-up to the 2012 Summer Olympics." This is the first journalistic report I have seen of such widespread, persistent enforcement actions. Is this the general experience of HN participants (and, especially, Airbnb participants) in your part of the world? What is your rating of the risk of being cited for a local law violation if you list your place as a short-term rental online?
- blaines 14y ago
  I had to take my couch offline because my HOA threatened to fine me. No more visitors, no more foreign friends. :( It seems the first wave of enforcement has come from HOAs, I've heard of various people having to remove their listing for that reason. [1] Now it appears, according to the article above, municipal authorities are pushing back. Could this be a result of lobbying from hotels? Vacation rentals is not a new concept, and couchsurfing has been around for years as well. It seems that just because couchsurfing/vacation rentals are getting a wider audience that it's now suddenly a problem. I personally don't want my HOA or government telling me who I can or can not have over to stay. Their place is not in my home. 1: http://betabeat.com/2011/05/airbnb-takes-manhattan-with-2k-bookings-a-night-but-many-listings-may-be-illegal/ http://betabeat.com/2011/05/airbnb-takes-manhattan-with-2k-b...
  - makmanalp 14y ago
    HOAs make me want to puke. Why did you agree to join anyway?
btipling 14y ago
These laws seems to curb an efficient market process, which I don't like if true. Also I think the government loses out on special taxes from Hotel business, but maybe those taxes could also be collected from these B&B type operations? Hotels have no business using the law to fight a competitive threat, in my opinion anyway. Does not seem to make sense to me.
- rprasad 14y ago
  The competition is not homeowners. As noted many times by others, the competition is "home owners" who use AirBNB to run undeclared hotels out of their buildings, evading the costs and taxes associated with a declared hotel. This obviously hurts other hotels, who cannot compete with such costs. Over time, this can (but not necessarily will) drive down hotel investment in upgrades and maintenance, making the city less attractive to visitors. This also hurts renters--rooms that would otherwise be rented out to long-term tenants (monthly or longer) are now instead "rented" out to transient visitors. This decreases the available supply of units to renters, driving up prices across the board.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- olefoo 14y ago
  This looks like a classic example of regulatory capture, where the regulator becomes an effective barrier to new entrants to the market. Factor in the concentrated nature of the hotel industry (fewer of them, more at stake) and you can see why they are motivated and able to put pressure on the bureaucracy. The whole thing does strike me as morally irresponsible in that a city with a persistent and undealt with homeless problem should not be limiting the availability of housing units until the blatant market failure has been dealt with.
  - jtbigwoo 14y ago
    The whole thing does strike me as morally irresponsible in that a city with a persistent and undealt with homeless problem should not be limiting the availability of housing units until the blatant market failure has been dealt with. Red herring. These people are not inviting the homeless into their homes. They are operating a hotel/B&B without following any registration, safety, health, or tax rules.
sadga 14y ago
The startup opportunity here is to streamline the process of registering a legal and proper B&B. AirBnB should be doing this already to clear the cloud around their business, but doing so would be an admission that their current practices are abetting illegal activity.
- tgrass 14y ago
  Agreed. And AirBnB would be wise to get involved politically on that front. There are the armchair ideals of unregulated markets, and then there is the reality of politically connected interests pushing legislation.
jemfinch 14y ago
The title of this submission is unnecessarily sensational and editorializing. Using your home as an ad hoc bed and breakfast is not the same as renting it out.
- scarmig 14y ago
  I'll change the title to be a bit better.
DanielBMarkham 14y ago
Just about every year for as long as I can remember, my family has taken a summer vacation at a beach about 300 miles away. We always stay in a hotel. Over time, the beach has gotten tacky. Big billboards. Lots of nightlife. Amusement park rides. All kinds of things that reek of Las Vegas, but not so much a relaxing family vacation. So this year we decided to try something different. I got onto VRBO online and picked out a beach house 1000 miles away in Florida. The owner included pictures, and there were lots of references and reviews for me to assess risk beforehand. I sent them a check -- which they could have cashed and absconded with -- and we drove down on the day scheduled. It was the best beach vacation we've ever had. In addition, it was half or a third as much as our previous vacations. Vested interests can fight as much as they want, but this is a done deal: people own their stuff and they're damn well liable to do what they want to with it. If I can sell you a 8-passenger airplane without warranty, you can certainly come stay at my house for an night or two. Laws which were used to increase the quality of hotel stays back in 1890 have extremely little applicability today. I don't know if we're going to use the same house again this year -- the owner was magnificent, and I'm not about to share where it was! -- but I know that we'll be sticking to this model for a good while.
- DanBC 14y ago
  > people own their stuff and they're damn well liable to do what they want to with it. You own your car. You are not allowed to set up as a cab service without some kind of insurance and registration. You own your home; you own the kitchen. You could not set up as a restaurant without a bunch of paperwork. > Laws which were used to increase the quality of hotel stays back in 1890 have extremely little applicability today. I want there to be an effective fire escape in case the building burns down. Is that law irrelevant? I want the hotel to have a clean kitchen. Is that law irrelevant? I would agree that perhaps there's too much paperwork for businesses. (http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/02/confiscating-your-ice-cream-cones/ http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/02/confiscating-your-ice-cream-...)
  - sopooneo 14y ago
    I would argue that your very sensible demands, for a sanitary kitchen and proper fire escape, can be seen to by market forces. Only rent AirBnB places whose reviews convince you they are appropriate. You can not be the only one who feels as you do. And with a new market like this, where people would not reasonably expect the automatic protection they ostensibly enjoy at traditional hotels, it is all the more plausible that they will select and review places sufficiently.
dmk23 14y ago
This is a classic example of anti-competitive market fixing, masquerading as a "regulation to protect consumers" or somesuch. There is no legitimate justification to infringe on a contract between a willing buyer and a willing seller, but to actually fight these crackdowns you have to spend lots of $$$ on local political campaigns in every municipality. Easier said than done. Unless that massive lobbying investment (or at least a publicity campaign, like SOPA boycotts) happen the entrenched interests win by default and lots of peer-to-peer transactions will move to gray/black market. Prohibition always creates speakeasies and the organized crime to protect them. EDIT: To address "devil advocates", yes, most regulation mandated and enforced by government is a terrible imposition. Self-regulation that preserves consumer choice is a much better idea. You want to pay extra $$$ for a better level of service / protection /etc? Make it an optional line item with explicit cost.
- hell0_th3r3 14y ago
  There is no legitimate justification to infringe on a contract between a willing buyer and a willing seller this was a common refrain of slave holders - it was a pure market mechanism, the buyer and seller agreed on a price, why does the govt care?
- vaksel 14y ago
  yeah if they only cared about protecting consumers, instead of fines, they'd let you pay a few bucks to get your house inspected.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- digitalengineer 14y ago
  Agreed. Low service, high price and no (affordable) rooms available during high-traffic events caused competition like AirBnB. The hotels can't win by competing, so now they'll try to change the law. Not save for guests huh? Entire families with kids live in those houses. They were build by the usual and strict building safety-standards. A sprinkler in every room? What regular house has that? The hotel-lobby using politicians and politicians using FUD to do their bidding.
will_work4tears 14y ago
Maybe AirBnB's solution to this is some kind of timeshare setup for cities with the time-limit laws. You purchase the joint right to use the house x/365 days a year, but your "lease" is a month/year long. Might not get around the safety type laws though.
robomartin 14y ago
This is really troubling and sickening. It's your property and you should be able to do as you please with it. What is the value of ownership if what you own is under government and HOA control? Disgusting. The fact that we allow government to get involved in our personal lives at this level should scare everyone. They are telling some of these people that they can't earn money to make-up for the fact that they fell upon hard times by using the one asset that they work so hard to acquire. You can't even rent your couch? This isn't right. As for the hotel industry. Well, offer a better product at good prices with exceptional service and you'll keep your customers. In other words: Compete.
- rprasad 14y ago
  Try to run a pig farm on your home and see how far you get with that. The law of "nuisance" has existed for hundreds of years. Your right to use your property extends only as far as the limits of your property. If any of the effects spill over to your neighbors, they have the right to limit what you can do with your property (to the extent of the "spill over"). This has been basic American/British property law for centuries.
  - robomartin 14y ago
    No disagreement with that at all. How does that relate to renting my couch or a room?
- raganwald 14y ago
  It's your property and you should be able to do as you please with it. What if you decide to start charging strangers to eat dinner at your house. Does the government have a right to start inspecting your kitchen? What if you take children in during the day. Should the givernment have any say in your qualifications as a day care operator or the conditions of your property? Corruption is a problem that should be solved. Regulation of business to enforce standards of health and safety is exactly what the government is supposed to be doing.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
cletus 14y ago
I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the negative reaction to this here. The HN demographic is presumably tilted towards young men. What those criticisms seem to be neglecting is that those--particularly for apartment buildings--these temporary visitors impact beyond just you. In Australia, for example, one useful metric used by people when assessing apartment buildings to buy in is to look at the ratio of owner-occupiers vs renters. Generally the more owner-occupiers, the better the building. Renters don't tend to look after properties, tend to be less mindful of behaviour that impacts the neighbours (parties, etc), etc. This goes even moreso for really short-term tenants. There have been examples of this already (like the woman who had her house trashed in SF after renting it out on AirBnB). Such extreme examples aside, you are raising the risk of damage or theft to the property of others by bringing a stream of strangers into your home. Yes most of the time it works out just fine but sometimes it doesn't and your neighbours didn't sign up for you opening a hotel. Would people feel the same way if someone was operating a brothel in their house or apartment? After all, it's their property and they can do with it as they please right? What about operating a bar or a club? This is not as one-sided as some suggest.
- barmstrong 14y ago
  You're right that short term renters change the value of a property, but you still have all your work ahead of you to show why it should actually be illegal (having the police come raid people). What you described is handled quite well by regular contracts between tenants/landlords. If a tenant signs a lease where short term rentals aren't allowed and violates it then they can be evicted, lose their deposit, etc. Similarly, landlords who don't allow it could face slightly lower rents by losing tenants who want more flexibility. In other words, it reaches a balance as people negotiate contracts. There is a big difference between violating a lease and making something illegal.
  - tptacek 14y ago
    I think 'cletus is using "apartment" in its generic sense. There's no question that most leases are done on boilerplate contracts that forbid Airbnb-type arrangements, often by spelling out by name each of the occupants, but at the least almost invariably specifying that the landlord gets reasonable approval over any sublessor. I'm sure there are pinholes to be poked in this point but I think as a general rule of thumb we can stipulate: apartment renters cannot lawfully put their apartments up on Airbnb, and the simplest remedy to them doing so is indeed to evict and then sue them. But getting back to 'cletus point: focus your attention on those "apartments" we call "condos". If your association contracts are good, there are remedies for Airbnb abuse here too, but they're nowhere nearly as clean as the remedies for apartment renters. Or, here's another wrinkle: go back to the apartment rental scenario, but stipulate that the landlord doesn't care to assert their right to curb Airbnb abuse. What recourse do the other renters in the building have now? They probably do have some; for instance, they can break their lease. But this is messy.
jtbigwoo 14y ago
Despite the touching stories about financial ruin, the government has a legitimate interest in making sure B&B's are minimally safe and operate without disturbing neighbors. All of these "It's my property!" arguments are supremely disingenuous.
- hell0_th3r3 14y ago
  and in any case you are not even legally a owner you are a TENANT. before downvoting me, go and look at your deed. find the term "owner" anywhere on it. yes folks, the county has permitted you to enter into an agreement to make improvements on the land and resell that right to others. the county "owns" the land. most first-time home buyers are surprised to find out that they actually are only considered tenants
  - sureshv 14y ago
    You still own the improvements (Home or other structures), if any on the land - hence homeowner...
    - hell0_th3r3 14y ago
      yes, you own the improvements, but the point of stipulating you as a TENANT is to permit the county to make and enforce rules, since your improvement is ultimately on their land. not much to argue here, counties have been making and enforcing rules for centuries, there is no loophole to exploit this is why, for example, foreclosure evictions often involve the sheriff's office - the county is protecting their own property rights. also, mineral rights, right to dispose of hazardous waste, etc etc
      - sureshv 14y ago
        'Tenant' is not mentioned anywhere in my deed but perhaps California limits what the government can claim about my property. Were I to own a home on land restricted by a lease then perhaps you would have a legitimate point. I pay property tax and parcel tax on property assigned to me by the deed; the deed assigns ownership to me not the state.
anamax 14y ago
In some vacation places, such as Monterey, it's illegal to rent a house/apartment for less than a month without a hotel license. These laws predate AirBnB by decades.
- gav 14y ago
  In some vacation spots the law is even tougher. Long Beach, NY is worried about people renting a house and having all their friends stay: Not more than two (2) persons not related to each other by blood, adoption or marriage, living and cooking together in a single dwelling unit. A lot of towns also expect you to get a rental permit too.
- sureshv 14y ago
  Doesn't seem too difficult to get a 'free' license and pay the occupancy tax. I've stayed in various beach rentals along the California coast for 2 weeks at a time and have been charged occupancy tax. http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/taxcollector/TOT.html http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/taxcollector/TOT.html
  - anamax 14y ago
    At that link, you'll see "Monterey County Planning and Building Inspection Department requires Homeowners wishing to pursue short term residential rentals (7-30 days) to obtain an Administrative Permit." In other words, you can't just pay the tax. On http://www.mcar.com/montereycounty.html http://www.mcar.com/montereycounty.html, we find: County of Monterey Non-Coastal: Administrative permit required for rentals less than 30 days in R-1 zoning district Minimum rental period 7 days Zoning Ordinance 21.64.280 Coastal: Contact: Planning and Building Inspection Department (831) 883-7500 I'd guess that the county is easier to deal with on this than the various cities (where the hotels and the bulk of the housing are).
tgrass 14y ago
Short term Tourist Homes have a historical precedence in this country. http://www.arkansaspreservation.com/historic-properties/_search_nomination_popup.aspx?id=2607 http://www.arkansaspreservation.com/historic-properties/_sea...
fra 14y ago
While I would be the last one to shed a tear for the hotel industry that's seeing it's too-old business model disrupted by airBnB and the likes, I feel like more regulation of the temporary hosting industry is needed. What's to stop someone from acquiring a bunch of property in, say, Paris and put it all up on airBnB? "What's the problem with that?" you ask? Well, this makes housing more expensive (you now have to compete with that industry), further gentrifies residential neighborhoods, and pushes the middle class further away from the desirable spots. I haven't thought all of this through, but perhaps a rule requiring lodgers to live at least 1mo/year full time in the place for rent would be useful?
geebee 14y ago
I remember an article about this problem in the nytimes a while back... here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/07/travel/escapes/07backlash.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/07/travel/escapes/07backlash.... There's a wide range of opinions on this topic, and a lot of it probably comes down to personality. I'm sympathetic to people who don't really want their neighborhood to become a revolving door of short term residents, even if those residents are respectful and quiet. Some people would happily give up the right to rent out their own property short term in exchange for a neighborhood with less turnover, where you get to meet, know, and become long term friends with the people around you. Other people not only disagree, but are appalled, even angered, that anyone would presume to make this decision for someone else - if their tenants are quiet and respectful, what right does someone else have to regulate what they do with their own property? This is the sort of issue that reminds me of an interesting branch of libertarianism that actually supports highly restrictive laws provided that these laws are kept very local and decentralized. For instance, religious communities would have the right to demand everyone wear certain clothes, as long as people can easily leave and they promise not to try to enforce their dress code on the next township over. I see some value in that point of view here. I do think neighborhoods, on a very local level, should be allowed to enforce strict laws on vrbos and short term rentals. I wouldn't want to see these laws state-wide (or even city wide), but at the neighborhood level, I don't think I have any objection (and I would prefer to live in a neighborhood with these restrictions).
josephs 14y ago
As an Airbnb host I would add that there's more to renting out your home than just the money. You can really see how you're helping people travel or visit their family or company headquarters (we've had all of these and more). We can give them a great home, show them all the great stores, restaurants, cafes, and see the huge appreciation for this kind of experience. It's life in another city as people in that city live it. Also remember that here in San Francisco almost all of the hotels are downtown or around Union Square so we can bring people to all the other neighborhoods of the city. I've also been an Airbnb guest and it's amazing as well. It's wonderful to support local people and get great advice about where to go. The site has fundamentally changed the way I think about travel. People have been renting out their homes to visitor for a long time but what Airbnb has done by creating a central marketplace is incredible. It feels as important as Amazon reinventing online purchases. Like many of the great internet companies Airbnb is ruffling a lot of feathers from intrenched businesses and changing the way people think about their private space. What other company has been so successful at fostering connections between people who have never met in the real world?
marcojgm 14y ago
I have rented out my place (which I own) numerous times. I pay my income taxes through the 1099 Airbnb issues. Since I've started renting, I've made numerous friends I keep in touch with, have had invitations to visit Turkey, Singapore... it has helped me pay my bills... and I've never had a disturbance, nor have my neighbors ever had a problem. I realize not all cases are like this, but Airbnb has truly made my life easier, made me a proud host and broadened my horizons. As a guest I have gotten under the skin of neighborhoods in a matter of days (one time I ate at 3 fancy restaurants in a weekend all of which had month long reservation lists because my host is embedded in the local community) The beauty of Airbnb and other community marketplaces is that I'm incentivized to make sure things go well. If my neighbors complain, it will become hard to host. If my guests complain, it will become hard to host. If I complain at a hotel? No one cares. I would happily pay a flat yearly tax to register as a short term rental host. I won't however spend 10s of hours working through ridiculous paperwork, spending thousands of $s to get onside of this antiquated system. We should be thankful of companies like Airbnb, like SideCar, Uber, TaskRabbit, Exec, pushing our outdated world forward. Just my $.02
joebottherobot 14y ago
I've been a host since I joined Airbnb as an engineer two years ago. During my interview I had an "AHA!" moment when I saw a letter pinned on the wall. It was from someone affected by the financial crisis who had been able to avoid foreclosure by renting their place on Airbnb. The letter expressed unending gratitude for how Airbnb had helped her through the most difficult time of her life. It completely changed how I thought about the company and ultimately led me to join. Since then I've realized that the positive impact goes far deeper. For example, as a host I tell every guest about my favorite local establishments. Not only am I exposing my guests to true San Francisco flavor, I'm also helping local businesses that don't traditionally see tourism dollars. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't hear about how we've helped someone, both travelers and hosts.
- jquery 14y ago
  Well, here's a counterpoint. A bunch of people in my building use AirBnB to rent out units. These transient tenants are often noisy, dirty, and in one recent case, outright frightening, threatening long-term tenants (security had to kick him out of the building). Hotels are zoned differently than residential units for good reasons, it's not just big business squeezing out the small fries. That's not to say I don't have full respect for you as a company. Just want you to be aware there is a counterpoint, and that people using your service should be following local regulations and leases. When they don't, it creates headaches for neighbors and resentment towards your company.
eps 14y ago
Here we go again... Who changed the post title? Two hours into the discussion. pg, please do something about this. It is getting absolutely out of hand.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
urza 14y ago
...the hotel industry took its cause to city officials, who, in turn, lobbied Democrats in the state legislature. In 2010 New York passed a law.. Wow this is just plain wrong. The laws were meant to be made for citizens not for any one industry. As was the case with SOPA, PIPA and other bills, the law making process in USA is clearly broken and needs to be changed. It is a problem you (Americans) need to fix.
gojomo 14y ago
The original submitted headline was more representative of the article's content. I used to understand headline corrections on HN, especially when they made changes away from blatantly abusive headlines. Now it seems they're done indiscriminately.
gcb 14y ago
This reminds me when everyone was driving drunk, and there was already laws that made that illegal, but the limit was something like 3 glasses of beer. instead of simply enforcing it, they changed the law to be zero limit AND enforced it. this is the same idiocy. trashing a place is already illegal. Disturbing the peace is already illegal. Reducing your neighbor property value is already illegal (our intern complains he keep getting citations for not cutting the grass ...a $300 fine) Name ONE thing this law does that wasn't illegal before. ONE. I challenge you.

114 points by scarmig 14y ago

For my friend's wedding, we stayed at such a place. I had a long conversation with the owner, who lived in a side room. It looked like an extension he built on the house. He told me he was running into issues with the city. Not from hotels or what not, but complaints from neighbors. They did not like the fact that strangers were constantly going in and out. BUT he said that he had heard hotels and motels were not happy about the popularity, especially from other short-term vacation home owners. It's going to be a two front battle, one side from big business, and the other from neighbors. In the end my guess is that the city will license it, and heavily tax it, in other words the cities win.

gcb 14y ago
The point about neighbors is moot. i hate all of mine. But the hotels have nothing against them. so i will have to live with them. that's life. If you could choose neighbors... the world would be very empty because everyone would be living alone.

luismmontielg 14y ago

Im getting OperationalError at /v1/complete/google-oauth2/ FATAL: too many connections for role "ruwdncbzdkulsh" Request Method: GET Request URL: http://api.collections.me/v1/complete/google-oauth2/?code=4/jagXxm_UPSk8P9omPYEDRhxFlX2y.Ao-8d6zmaUIbuJJVnL49Cc80GYQEcQI http://api.collections.me/v1/complete/google-oauth2/?code=4/... Django Version: 1.4 Exception Type: OperationalError Exception Value: FATAL: too many connections for role "ruwdncbzdkulsh" Seems django debug is ON

DenisM 14y ago

I foresee a social-media thingamajig that lets you stay with friends [of friends]*, and the stayovers being arranged similar to how linkedin introductions work.

mvkel 14y ago

Thanks for answering the question in the headline! Now I don't need to read the article.

tokenadult 14y ago

From the article: "For more than a year now, New York City has been enforcing a new state law that makes it illegal for homeowners like Hogan to rent out their house or apartment for less than a month. All across the city, police raids have shut down hundreds of similar informal bed-and-breakfast establishments, with nearly 1,900 different violations issued in under twelve months. Often, the fees associated with the citations stretch into tens of thousands of dollars. Hogan was threatened with a $25,000 fine—all for marketing the empty rooms in his house. . . . . "The crackdown in New York is similar to ones happening in several major European cities. Paris, for instance, passed a law in 2005 banning the rental of any residential property for less than a year, and began enforcing that law in 2010. London is now engaging in a wave of enforcement in the run-up to the 2012 Summer Olympics." This is the first journalistic report I have seen of such widespread, persistent enforcement actions. Is this the general experience of HN participants (and, especially, Airbnb participants) in your part of the world? What is your rating of the risk of being cited for a local law violation if you list your place as a short-term rental online?

blaines 14y ago
I had to take my couch offline because my HOA threatened to fine me. No more visitors, no more foreign friends. :( It seems the first wave of enforcement has come from HOAs, I've heard of various people having to remove their listing for that reason. [1] Now it appears, according to the article above, municipal authorities are pushing back. Could this be a result of lobbying from hotels? Vacation rentals is not a new concept, and couchsurfing has been around for years as well. It seems that just because couchsurfing/vacation rentals are getting a wider audience that it's now suddenly a problem. I personally don't want my HOA or government telling me who I can or can not have over to stay. Their place is not in my home. 1: http://betabeat.com/2011/05/airbnb-takes-manhattan-with-2k-bookings-a-night-but-many-listings-may-be-illegal/ http://betabeat.com/2011/05/airbnb-takes-manhattan-with-2k-b...
- makmanalp 14y ago
  HOAs make me want to puke. Why did you agree to join anyway?

btipling 14y ago

These laws seems to curb an efficient market process, which I don't like if true. Also I think the government loses out on special taxes from Hotel business, but maybe those taxes could also be collected from these B&B type operations? Hotels have no business using the law to fight a competitive threat, in my opinion anyway. Does not seem to make sense to me.

rprasad 14y ago
The competition is not homeowners. As noted many times by others, the competition is "home owners" who use AirBNB to run undeclared hotels out of their buildings, evading the costs and taxes associated with a declared hotel. This obviously hurts other hotels, who cannot compete with such costs. Over time, this can (but not necessarily will) drive down hotel investment in upgrades and maintenance, making the city less attractive to visitors. This also hurts renters--rooms that would otherwise be rented out to long-term tenants (monthly or longer) are now instead "rented" out to transient visitors. This decreases the available supply of units to renters, driving up prices across the board.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
olefoo 14y ago
This looks like a classic example of regulatory capture, where the regulator becomes an effective barrier to new entrants to the market. Factor in the concentrated nature of the hotel industry (fewer of them, more at stake) and you can see why they are motivated and able to put pressure on the bureaucracy. The whole thing does strike me as morally irresponsible in that a city with a persistent and undealt with homeless problem should not be limiting the availability of housing units until the blatant market failure has been dealt with.
- jtbigwoo 14y ago
  The whole thing does strike me as morally irresponsible in that a city with a persistent and undealt with homeless problem should not be limiting the availability of housing units until the blatant market failure has been dealt with. Red herring. These people are not inviting the homeless into their homes. They are operating a hotel/B&B without following any registration, safety, health, or tax rules.

sadga 14y ago

The startup opportunity here is to streamline the process of registering a legal and proper B&B. AirBnB should be doing this already to clear the cloud around their business, but doing so would be an admission that their current practices are abetting illegal activity.

tgrass 14y ago
Agreed. And AirBnB would be wise to get involved politically on that front. There are the armchair ideals of unregulated markets, and then there is the reality of politically connected interests pushing legislation.

jemfinch 14y ago

The title of this submission is unnecessarily sensational and editorializing. Using your home as an ad hoc bed and breakfast is not the same as renting it out.

scarmig 14y ago
I'll change the title to be a bit better.

DanielBMarkham 14y ago

Just about every year for as long as I can remember, my family has taken a summer vacation at a beach about 300 miles away. We always stay in a hotel. Over time, the beach has gotten tacky. Big billboards. Lots of nightlife. Amusement park rides. All kinds of things that reek of Las Vegas, but not so much a relaxing family vacation. So this year we decided to try something different. I got onto VRBO online and picked out a beach house 1000 miles away in Florida. The owner included pictures, and there were lots of references and reviews for me to assess risk beforehand. I sent them a check -- which they could have cashed and absconded with -- and we drove down on the day scheduled. It was the best beach vacation we've ever had. In addition, it was half or a third as much as our previous vacations. Vested interests can fight as much as they want, but this is a done deal: people own their stuff and they're damn well liable to do what they want to with it. If I can sell you a 8-passenger airplane without warranty, you can certainly come stay at my house for an night or two. Laws which were used to increase the quality of hotel stays back in 1890 have extremely little applicability today. I don't know if we're going to use the same house again this year -- the owner was magnificent, and I'm not about to share where it was! -- but I know that we'll be sticking to this model for a good while.

DanBC 14y ago
> people own their stuff and they're damn well liable to do what they want to with it. You own your car. You are not allowed to set up as a cab service without some kind of insurance and registration. You own your home; you own the kitchen. You could not set up as a restaurant without a bunch of paperwork. > Laws which were used to increase the quality of hotel stays back in 1890 have extremely little applicability today. I want there to be an effective fire escape in case the building burns down. Is that law irrelevant? I want the hotel to have a clean kitchen. Is that law irrelevant? I would agree that perhaps there's too much paperwork for businesses. (http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/02/confiscating-your-ice-cream-cones/ http://www.jwz.org/blog/2012/02/confiscating-your-ice-cream-...)
- sopooneo 14y ago
  I would argue that your very sensible demands, for a sanitary kitchen and proper fire escape, can be seen to by market forces. Only rent AirBnB places whose reviews convince you they are appropriate. You can not be the only one who feels as you do. And with a new market like this, where people would not reasonably expect the automatic protection they ostensibly enjoy at traditional hotels, it is all the more plausible that they will select and review places sufficiently.

dmk23 14y ago

This is a classic example of anti-competitive market fixing, masquerading as a "regulation to protect consumers" or somesuch. There is no legitimate justification to infringe on a contract between a willing buyer and a willing seller, but to actually fight these crackdowns you have to spend lots of $$$ on local political campaigns in every municipality. Easier said than done. Unless that massive lobbying investment (or at least a publicity campaign, like SOPA boycotts) happen the entrenched interests win by default and lots of peer-to-peer transactions will move to gray/black market. Prohibition always creates speakeasies and the organized crime to protect them. EDIT: To address "devil advocates", yes, most regulation mandated and enforced by government is a terrible imposition. Self-regulation that preserves consumer choice is a much better idea. You want to pay extra $$$ for a better level of service / protection /etc? Make it an optional line item with explicit cost.

hell0_th3r3 14y ago
There is no legitimate justification to infringe on a contract between a willing buyer and a willing seller this was a common refrain of slave holders - it was a pure market mechanism, the buyer and seller agreed on a price, why does the govt care?
vaksel 14y ago
yeah if they only cared about protecting consumers, instead of fines, they'd let you pay a few bucks to get your house inspected.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
digitalengineer 14y ago
Agreed. Low service, high price and no (affordable) rooms available during high-traffic events caused competition like AirBnB. The hotels can't win by competing, so now they'll try to change the law. Not save for guests huh? Entire families with kids live in those houses. They were build by the usual and strict building safety-standards. A sprinkler in every room? What regular house has that? The hotel-lobby using politicians and politicians using FUD to do their bidding.

will_work4tears 14y ago

Maybe AirBnB's solution to this is some kind of timeshare setup for cities with the time-limit laws. You purchase the joint right to use the house x/365 days a year, but your "lease" is a month/year long. Might not get around the safety type laws though.

robomartin 14y ago

This is really troubling and sickening. It's your property and you should be able to do as you please with it. What is the value of ownership if what you own is under government and HOA control? Disgusting. The fact that we allow government to get involved in our personal lives at this level should scare everyone. They are telling some of these people that they can't earn money to make-up for the fact that they fell upon hard times by using the one asset that they work so hard to acquire. You can't even rent your couch? This isn't right. As for the hotel industry. Well, offer a better product at good prices with exceptional service and you'll keep your customers. In other words: Compete.

rprasad 14y ago
Try to run a pig farm on your home and see how far you get with that. The law of "nuisance" has existed for hundreds of years. Your right to use your property extends only as far as the limits of your property. If any of the effects spill over to your neighbors, they have the right to limit what you can do with your property (to the extent of the "spill over"). This has been basic American/British property law for centuries.
- robomartin 14y ago
  No disagreement with that at all. How does that relate to renting my couch or a room?
raganwald 14y ago
It's your property and you should be able to do as you please with it. What if you decide to start charging strangers to eat dinner at your house. Does the government have a right to start inspecting your kitchen? What if you take children in during the day. Should the givernment have any say in your qualifications as a day care operator or the conditions of your property? Corruption is a problem that should be solved. Regulation of business to enforce standards of health and safety is exactly what the government is supposed to be doing.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

cletus 14y ago

I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the negative reaction to this here. The HN demographic is presumably tilted towards young men. What those criticisms seem to be neglecting is that those--particularly for apartment buildings--these temporary visitors impact beyond just you. In Australia, for example, one useful metric used by people when assessing apartment buildings to buy in is to look at the ratio of owner-occupiers vs renters. Generally the more owner-occupiers, the better the building. Renters don't tend to look after properties, tend to be less mindful of behaviour that impacts the neighbours (parties, etc), etc. This goes even moreso for really short-term tenants. There have been examples of this already (like the woman who had her house trashed in SF after renting it out on AirBnB). Such extreme examples aside, you are raising the risk of damage or theft to the property of others by bringing a stream of strangers into your home. Yes most of the time it works out just fine but sometimes it doesn't and your neighbours didn't sign up for you opening a hotel. Would people feel the same way if someone was operating a brothel in their house or apartment? After all, it's their property and they can do with it as they please right? What about operating a bar or a club? This is not as one-sided as some suggest.

barmstrong 14y ago
You're right that short term renters change the value of a property, but you still have all your work ahead of you to show why it should actually be illegal (having the police come raid people). What you described is handled quite well by regular contracts between tenants/landlords. If a tenant signs a lease where short term rentals aren't allowed and violates it then they can be evicted, lose their deposit, etc. Similarly, landlords who don't allow it could face slightly lower rents by losing tenants who want more flexibility. In other words, it reaches a balance as people negotiate contracts. There is a big difference between violating a lease and making something illegal.
- tptacek 14y ago
  I think 'cletus is using "apartment" in its generic sense. There's no question that most leases are done on boilerplate contracts that forbid Airbnb-type arrangements, often by spelling out by name each of the occupants, but at the least almost invariably specifying that the landlord gets reasonable approval over any sublessor. I'm sure there are pinholes to be poked in this point but I think as a general rule of thumb we can stipulate: apartment renters cannot lawfully put their apartments up on Airbnb, and the simplest remedy to them doing so is indeed to evict and then sue them. But getting back to 'cletus point: focus your attention on those "apartments" we call "condos". If your association contracts are good, there are remedies for Airbnb abuse here too, but they're nowhere nearly as clean as the remedies for apartment renters. Or, here's another wrinkle: go back to the apartment rental scenario, but stipulate that the landlord doesn't care to assert their right to curb Airbnb abuse. What recourse do the other renters in the building have now? They probably do have some; for instance, they can break their lease. But this is messy.

jtbigwoo 14y ago

Despite the touching stories about financial ruin, the government has a legitimate interest in making sure B&B's are minimally safe and operate without disturbing neighbors. All of these "It's my property!" arguments are supremely disingenuous.

hell0_th3r3 14y ago
and in any case you are not even legally a owner you are a TENANT. before downvoting me, go and look at your deed. find the term "owner" anywhere on it. yes folks, the county has permitted you to enter into an agreement to make improvements on the land and resell that right to others. the county "owns" the land. most first-time home buyers are surprised to find out that they actually are only considered tenants
- sureshv 14y ago
  You still own the improvements (Home or other structures), if any on the land - hence homeowner...
  - hell0_th3r3 14y ago
    yes, you own the improvements, but the point of stipulating you as a TENANT is to permit the county to make and enforce rules, since your improvement is ultimately on their land. not much to argue here, counties have been making and enforcing rules for centuries, there is no loophole to exploit this is why, for example, foreclosure evictions often involve the sheriff's office - the county is protecting their own property rights. also, mineral rights, right to dispose of hazardous waste, etc etc
    - sureshv 14y ago
      'Tenant' is not mentioned anywhere in my deed but perhaps California limits what the government can claim about my property. Were I to own a home on land restricted by a lease then perhaps you would have a legitimate point. I pay property tax and parcel tax on property assigned to me by the deed; the deed assigns ownership to me not the state.

anamax 14y ago

In some vacation places, such as Monterey, it's illegal to rent a house/apartment for less than a month without a hotel license. These laws predate AirBnB by decades.

gav 14y ago
In some vacation spots the law is even tougher. Long Beach, NY is worried about people renting a house and having all their friends stay: Not more than two (2) persons not related to each other by blood, adoption or marriage, living and cooking together in a single dwelling unit. A lot of towns also expect you to get a rental permit too.
sureshv 14y ago
Doesn't seem too difficult to get a 'free' license and pay the occupancy tax. I've stayed in various beach rentals along the California coast for 2 weeks at a time and have been charged occupancy tax. http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/taxcollector/TOT.html http://www.co.monterey.ca.us/taxcollector/TOT.html
- anamax 14y ago
  At that link, you'll see "Monterey County Planning and Building Inspection Department requires Homeowners wishing to pursue short term residential rentals (7-30 days) to obtain an Administrative Permit." In other words, you can't just pay the tax. On http://www.mcar.com/montereycounty.html http://www.mcar.com/montereycounty.html, we find: County of Monterey Non-Coastal: Administrative permit required for rentals less than 30 days in R-1 zoning district Minimum rental period 7 days Zoning Ordinance 21.64.280 Coastal: Contact: Planning and Building Inspection Department (831) 883-7500 I'd guess that the county is easier to deal with on this than the various cities (where the hotels and the bulk of the housing are).

tgrass 14y ago

Short term Tourist Homes have a historical precedence in this country. http://www.arkansaspreservation.com/historic-properties/_search_nomination_popup.aspx?id=2607 http://www.arkansaspreservation.com/historic-properties/_sea...

fra 14y ago

While I would be the last one to shed a tear for the hotel industry that's seeing it's too-old business model disrupted by airBnB and the likes, I feel like more regulation of the temporary hosting industry is needed. What's to stop someone from acquiring a bunch of property in, say, Paris and put it all up on airBnB? "What's the problem with that?" you ask? Well, this makes housing more expensive (you now have to compete with that industry), further gentrifies residential neighborhoods, and pushes the middle class further away from the desirable spots. I haven't thought all of this through, but perhaps a rule requiring lodgers to live at least 1mo/year full time in the place for rent would be useful?

geebee 14y ago

I remember an article about this problem in the nytimes a while back... here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/07/travel/escapes/07backlash.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/07/travel/escapes/07backlash.... There's a wide range of opinions on this topic, and a lot of it probably comes down to personality. I'm sympathetic to people who don't really want their neighborhood to become a revolving door of short term residents, even if those residents are respectful and quiet. Some people would happily give up the right to rent out their own property short term in exchange for a neighborhood with less turnover, where you get to meet, know, and become long term friends with the people around you. Other people not only disagree, but are appalled, even angered, that anyone would presume to make this decision for someone else - if their tenants are quiet and respectful, what right does someone else have to regulate what they do with their own property? This is the sort of issue that reminds me of an interesting branch of libertarianism that actually supports highly restrictive laws provided that these laws are kept very local and decentralized. For instance, religious communities would have the right to demand everyone wear certain clothes, as long as people can easily leave and they promise not to try to enforce their dress code on the next township over. I see some value in that point of view here. I do think neighborhoods, on a very local level, should be allowed to enforce strict laws on vrbos and short term rentals. I wouldn't want to see these laws state-wide (or even city wide), but at the neighborhood level, I don't think I have any objection (and I would prefer to live in a neighborhood with these restrictions).

josephs 14y ago

As an Airbnb host I would add that there's more to renting out your home than just the money. You can really see how you're helping people travel or visit their family or company headquarters (we've had all of these and more). We can give them a great home, show them all the great stores, restaurants, cafes, and see the huge appreciation for this kind of experience. It's life in another city as people in that city live it. Also remember that here in San Francisco almost all of the hotels are downtown or around Union Square so we can bring people to all the other neighborhoods of the city. I've also been an Airbnb guest and it's amazing as well. It's wonderful to support local people and get great advice about where to go. The site has fundamentally changed the way I think about travel. People have been renting out their homes to visitor for a long time but what Airbnb has done by creating a central marketplace is incredible. It feels as important as Amazon reinventing online purchases. Like many of the great internet companies Airbnb is ruffling a lot of feathers from intrenched businesses and changing the way people think about their private space. What other company has been so successful at fostering connections between people who have never met in the real world?

marcojgm 14y ago

I have rented out my place (which I own) numerous times. I pay my income taxes through the 1099 Airbnb issues. Since I've started renting, I've made numerous friends I keep in touch with, have had invitations to visit Turkey, Singapore... it has helped me pay my bills... and I've never had a disturbance, nor have my neighbors ever had a problem. I realize not all cases are like this, but Airbnb has truly made my life easier, made me a proud host and broadened my horizons. As a guest I have gotten under the skin of neighborhoods in a matter of days (one time I ate at 3 fancy restaurants in a weekend all of which had month long reservation lists because my host is embedded in the local community) The beauty of Airbnb and other community marketplaces is that I'm incentivized to make sure things go well. If my neighbors complain, it will become hard to host. If my guests complain, it will become hard to host. If I complain at a hotel? No one cares. I would happily pay a flat yearly tax to register as a short term rental host. I won't however spend 10s of hours working through ridiculous paperwork, spending thousands of $s to get onside of this antiquated system. We should be thankful of companies like Airbnb, like SideCar, Uber, TaskRabbit, Exec, pushing our outdated world forward. Just my $.02

joebottherobot 14y ago

I've been a host since I joined Airbnb as an engineer two years ago. During my interview I had an "AHA!" moment when I saw a letter pinned on the wall. It was from someone affected by the financial crisis who had been able to avoid foreclosure by renting their place on Airbnb. The letter expressed unending gratitude for how Airbnb had helped her through the most difficult time of her life. It completely changed how I thought about the company and ultimately led me to join. Since then I've realized that the positive impact goes far deeper. For example, as a host I tell every guest about my favorite local establishments. Not only am I exposing my guests to true San Francisco flavor, I'm also helping local businesses that don't traditionally see tourism dollars. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't hear about how we've helped someone, both travelers and hosts.

jquery 14y ago
Well, here's a counterpoint. A bunch of people in my building use AirBnB to rent out units. These transient tenants are often noisy, dirty, and in one recent case, outright frightening, threatening long-term tenants (security had to kick him out of the building). Hotels are zoned differently than residential units for good reasons, it's not just big business squeezing out the small fries. That's not to say I don't have full respect for you as a company. Just want you to be aware there is a counterpoint, and that people using your service should be following local regulations and leases. When they don't, it creates headaches for neighbors and resentment towards your company.

eps 14y ago

Here we go again... Who changed the post title? Two hours into the discussion. pg, please do something about this. It is getting absolutely out of hand.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

urza 14y ago

...the hotel industry took its cause to city officials, who, in turn, lobbied Democrats in the state legislature. In 2010 New York passed a law.. Wow this is just plain wrong. The laws were meant to be made for citizens not for any one industry. As was the case with SOPA, PIPA and other bills, the law making process in USA is clearly broken and needs to be changed. It is a problem you (Americans) need to fix.

gojomo 14y ago

The original submitted headline was more representative of the article's content. I used to understand headline corrections on HN, especially when they made changes away from blatantly abusive headlines. Now it seems they're done indiscriminately.

gcb 14y ago

This reminds me when everyone was driving drunk, and there was already laws that made that illegal, but the limit was something like 3 glasses of beer. instead of simply enforcing it, they changed the law to be zero limit AND enforced it. this is the same idiocy. trashing a place is already illegal. Disturbing the peace is already illegal. Reducing your neighbor property value is already illegal (our intern complains he keep getting citations for not cutting the grass ...a $300 fine) Name ONE thing this law does that wasn't illegal before. ONE. I challenge you.