4 ms·

One of my friends said that their friend bought a unit at Divisidero and Fell and then another one in the same location a few years later, and AirBNB both for o

by steven2012 12y ago

One of my friends said that their friend bought a unit at Divisidero and Fell and then another one in the same location a few years later, and AirBNB both for over $5000/month. I asked why they don't just rent it out, and they said it's easier to rent it out vs getting a tenant and being subject to draconian SF rent-control laws.

wavefunction 12y ago
Does your friend pay hotel/occupancy or visitor taxes on the rentals? I'm guessing not, if they're opposed to following rental tenancy laws. I guess a whole new reason to dislike the "AirBnB effect" on housing in America.
geebee 12y ago
I'm guessing that these are rentals for less than 30 days? If so, your friend is making a lot of money by breaking the law. Your friend may have contempt for this particular law, so in this case, this profit is an assumption of risk. Illegal activities tend to be quite profitable because they are higher risk. Honestly, though, I doubt there's all that much risk to this. Maybe even less than renting out to a permanent tenant (who has powerful rights in SF). Unfortunately, SF seems to be unusually good at passing restrictive laws with low enforcement, encouraging people to test the limits and profit, and making chumps of people who follow the rules. I just paid over $8k for permits (hell, I paid a few hundred in permit fees to replace my windows and furnace with energy efficient ones). In response, SF wouldn't allow me to put a sink in my laundry room "to make sure that I'm not putting in an illegal in-law". Meanwhile, there are illegal in-laws left and right, all done with zero permits, and no apparent enforcement. Here's the thing, I don't have contempt for the law. I think that a structural engineer and licensed electrical work with required firewalls to prevent an inferno that starts in the illegal in-law from spreading next door are actually pretty good regulations. It sounds like SF may soon allow legal airbnb with some restrictions, but like permits, this will probably be an option to register, pay money, and be regulated vs breaking the law in a nearly zero consequence environment.
- steven2012 12y ago
  Yep, undoubtedly they are breaking the law. But no one appears to care. Ss I was reading your comment, I was thinking "There are so many unpermitted remodels in SF I wonder why this person actually paid for permits?" If you try to buy a house, I would say every single house I saw in SF had some sort of unpermitted remodelling, and no one cares, not even the real estate agents. It's almost as if SF likes to penalize the people that follow the law, which is backwards and sad.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

wavefunction 12y ago

Does your friend pay hotel/occupancy or visitor taxes on the rentals? I'm guessing not, if they're opposed to following rental tenancy laws. I guess a whole new reason to dislike the "AirBnB effect" on housing in America.

geebee 12y ago

I'm guessing that these are rentals for less than 30 days? If so, your friend is making a lot of money by breaking the law. Your friend may have contempt for this particular law, so in this case, this profit is an assumption of risk. Illegal activities tend to be quite profitable because they are higher risk. Honestly, though, I doubt there's all that much risk to this. Maybe even less than renting out to a permanent tenant (who has powerful rights in SF). Unfortunately, SF seems to be unusually good at passing restrictive laws with low enforcement, encouraging people to test the limits and profit, and making chumps of people who follow the rules. I just paid over $8k for permits (hell, I paid a few hundred in permit fees to replace my windows and furnace with energy efficient ones). In response, SF wouldn't allow me to put a sink in my laundry room "to make sure that I'm not putting in an illegal in-law". Meanwhile, there are illegal in-laws left and right, all done with zero permits, and no apparent enforcement. Here's the thing, I don't have contempt for the law. I think that a structural engineer and licensed electrical work with required firewalls to prevent an inferno that starts in the illegal in-law from spreading next door are actually pretty good regulations. It sounds like SF may soon allow legal airbnb with some restrictions, but like permits, this will probably be an option to register, pay money, and be regulated vs breaking the law in a nearly zero consequence environment.

steven2012 12y ago
Yep, undoubtedly they are breaking the law. But no one appears to care. Ss I was reading your comment, I was thinking "There are so many unpermitted remodels in SF I wonder why this person actually paid for permits?" If you try to buy a house, I would say every single house I saw in SF had some sort of unpermitted remodelling, and no one cares, not even the real estate agents. It's almost as if SF likes to penalize the people that follow the law, which is backwards and sad.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]