3 ms·

"8 rentals not more than 6 months per year" seems just as arbitrary and ridiculous to me as the "under 30 days disallowed unless present" rule. So the problem i

by gojomo 13y ago

"8 rentals not more than 6 months per year" seems just as arbitrary and ridiculous to me as the "under 30 days disallowed unless present" rule. So the problem is "common sense regulation" varies a lot based on perspective. For me, the common sense rule would be: let people contract however they want. Let them talk out or complain/negative-review/sue for any actual abuses that develop. A parade of responsible short-term tenants incurs little negative impact, while a single bad tenant (or even house-guest) can be a disaster of crime of destruction. Let the right checks and balances evolve, rather than trying to dictate beforehand what formulas might work for wildly different tenants, properties, landlords and neighborhoods.

URSpider94 13y ago
For me, the common sense rule would be: let people contract however they want. Let them talk out or complain/negative-review/sue for any actual abuses that develop. First of all, NYC landlord-tenant law is so far past the "let people contract however they want" phase that it would be laughable to let AirBnB operate under these rules. Nearly 50% of the apartments in New York are rent-stabilized, meaning that the tenants can't be evicted except for non-payment of rent, and are guaranteed a below-market-rate rent with government-dictated annual increases. It's ridiculously unfair to landlords to allow rent-stabilized tenants to re-rent their apartments at market rate and pocket the difference. Second, have you ever actually tried to sue someone? It's incredibly difficult, time-consuming and expensive. Third, there's the issue of moral hazard. A renter whose AirBnB tenant burns down the building is unlikely to have the resources to pay for the damages to the property of the landlord or the other tenants (and is unlikely to even have insurance to cover those costs). Upside always looks better when you know you'll be able to walk away from the downside.
- xixi77 13y ago
  First of all, NYC landlord-tenant law is so far past the "let people contract however they want" phase that it would be laughable to let AirBnB operate under these rules. Nearly 50% of the apartments in New York are rent-stabilized, meaning that the tenants can't be evicted except for non-payment of rent, and are guaranteed a below-market-rate rent with government-dictated annual increases. It's ridiculously unfair to landlords to allow rent-stabilized tenants to re-rent their apartments at market rate and pocket the difference. All of these are horrible things (particularly rent-controls). Perhaps instead of crusading against AirBnB it would be better to focus your efforts on changing this system? Sometimes the only way to bring a bad system (an it is a very, very bad system) down is to abuse it to the extent possible.
- gojomo 13y ago
  That NYC makes my "common-sense" rule so hard to implement supports my larger point: you can't just make an exasperated appeal to "common-sense", because people (and existing legal regimes) differ so much on what's sensible/fair. (My "common-sense" solution to the unfairness of tenants subletting for more than the controlled rate would be to phase out rent-control, and do so immediately if there's evidence of tenant-subletting at a higher-rate.) The lawsuit is also what the regulated system relies upon, in the end, to enforce its judgements. It's a last resort, but always part of the balance when other discussion and leverage fails. Why would an AirBnb tenant be more likely to burn down a building, or less likely to compensate after negligence, than any other leaseholder-tenant or houseguest? I suspect AirBnb tenants are less of a risk: they're paying a market rate, unprotected by laws which shield problematic tenants, vetted by the reputation system, and backed by AirBnb's guarantees. A landlord and neighbors seem equally (or more) at risk of uncompensated damages from all other kinds of occupants.

by gojomo 13y ago

URSpider94 13y ago

For me, the common sense rule would be: let people contract however they want. Let them talk out or complain/negative-review/sue for any actual abuses that develop. First of all, NYC landlord-tenant law is so far past the "let people contract however they want" phase that it would be laughable to let AirBnB operate under these rules. Nearly 50% of the apartments in New York are rent-stabilized, meaning that the tenants can't be evicted except for non-payment of rent, and are guaranteed a below-market-rate rent with government-dictated annual increases. It's ridiculously unfair to landlords to allow rent-stabilized tenants to re-rent their apartments at market rate and pocket the difference. Second, have you ever actually tried to sue someone? It's incredibly difficult, time-consuming and expensive. Third, there's the issue of moral hazard. A renter whose AirBnB tenant burns down the building is unlikely to have the resources to pay for the damages to the property of the landlord or the other tenants (and is unlikely to even have insurance to cover those costs). Upside always looks better when you know you'll be able to walk away from the downside.

xixi77 13y ago
First of all, NYC landlord-tenant law is so far past the "let people contract however they want" phase that it would be laughable to let AirBnB operate under these rules. Nearly 50% of the apartments in New York are rent-stabilized, meaning that the tenants can't be evicted except for non-payment of rent, and are guaranteed a below-market-rate rent with government-dictated annual increases. It's ridiculously unfair to landlords to allow rent-stabilized tenants to re-rent their apartments at market rate and pocket the difference. All of these are horrible things (particularly rent-controls). Perhaps instead of crusading against AirBnB it would be better to focus your efforts on changing this system? Sometimes the only way to bring a bad system (an it is a very, very bad system) down is to abuse it to the extent possible.
gojomo 13y ago
That NYC makes my "common-sense" rule so hard to implement supports my larger point: you can't just make an exasperated appeal to "common-sense", because people (and existing legal regimes) differ so much on what's sensible/fair. (My "common-sense" solution to the unfairness of tenants subletting for more than the controlled rate would be to phase out rent-control, and do so immediately if there's evidence of tenant-subletting at a higher-rate.) The lawsuit is also what the regulated system relies upon, in the end, to enforce its judgements. It's a last resort, but always part of the balance when other discussion and leverage fails. Why would an AirBnb tenant be more likely to burn down a building, or less likely to compensate after negligence, than any other leaseholder-tenant or houseguest? I suspect AirBnb tenants are less of a risk: they're paying a market rate, unprotected by laws which shield problematic tenants, vetted by the reputation system, and backed by AirBnb's guarantees. A landlord and neighbors seem equally (or more) at risk of uncompensated damages from all other kinds of occupants.