Landlords solely using AirBnB for lettings now require planning permission

jamesthepeach

4ensic15 wrote: »

The terms of a lease can't be changed but there are other ways of catching an owner. there is a requirement to notify the management company of every person staying at the address. they can introduce security measures regarding keys and car parking. It would be quite difficult to insist on doing AirBnB if there was a hostile management company, even with planning permission.

Someone is doing short term let's. Management company says to them you can't do that.

Owner says they are just mates staying the odd time. And says, do your worst mr management company. I defy you Mr management company.

Graham

jamesthepeach wrote: »

I think you underestimate the ability of people to adapt.
Try booking an Airbnb in Berlin, but not through airbnb. A whole host of options open up. It's actually easier and better than going through airbnb.

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Someone is doing short term let's. Management company says to them you can't do that.

Owner says they are just mates staying the odd time. And says, do your worst mr management company. I defy you Mr management company.

There are always going to be a sub-section of landlords that will attempt to skirt around the law/lease-conditions. That's not particularly surprising. Nor is it any reason not to attempt to address the issue.

It will be interesting to see what happens in Berlin when the current pipeline of prosecutions gets through the courts. Fines of up-to €100,000 if I remember correctly.

jamesthepeach

Graham wrote: »

There are always going to be a sub-section of landlords that will attempt to skirt around the law/lease-conditions. That's not particularly surprising. Nor is it any reason not to attempt to address the issue.

It will be interesting to see what happens in Berlin when the current pipeline of prosecutions gets through the courts. Fines of up-to €100,000 if I remember correctly.

Well I guess we will see. IF it ever happens.

So what can a management company in Ireland do to someone doing short term letting against their wishes?

Graham

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Well I guess we will see. IF it ever happens.

So what can a management company in Ireland do to someone doing short term letting against their wishes?

The management company for a small 16 unit development in Killarney were granted an injunction restraining short-term lettings.

You'd be a brave landlord to start trying to skirt around something like that on the basis of 'just mates staying'.

jamesthepeach

Graham wrote: »

The management company for a small 16 unit development in Killarney were granted an injunction restraining short-term lettings.

You'd be a brave landlord to start trying to skirt around something like that on the basis of 'just mates staying'.

I was on two different management committee s.
On just one now.
Airbnb came up often on both. Actions were discussed but it turns out we had no power whatsoever to prevent people doing airbnb, bar try to scare them out of it. Those who ignored us quickly found out we were overstepping our mark and we were just bluffing.

Graham

jamesthepeach wrote: »

I was on two different management committee s.
On just one now.
Airbnb came up often on both. Actions were discussed but it turns out we had no power whatsoever to prevent people doing airbnb, bar try to scare them out of it. Those who ignored us quickly found out we were overstepping our mark and we were just bluffing.

Sounds like your management company need to get better legal advice.

murphaph

Is the point of an airbnb ban to prevent nuisance to residents or prevent units leaving the residential lettings market?

If the latter then the airbnb units will just be replaced by aparthotels and real hotels, which also take up space and prevent residential development.

I would generally agree that short term lets less than a couple of months are likely to be a nuisance in an apartment block, but a house on its own with no shared access and where the guests probably won't even use the driveway but take public transport? I'd offer that this is the state taking too much of an interest in the private property of its citizens.

Graham

murphaph wrote: »

Is the point of an airbnb ban to prevent nuisance to residents or prevent units leaving the residential lettings market?

Both of those sounds like symptoms of the same issue, unauthorised development.

dubdev

Graham wrote: »

Sounds like your management company need to get better legal advice.

I would agree with this. My complex's management company have received legal advice to begin litigating against several apartment owners who have ignored a ban and several letters ordering them to stop.

AirBnB'ing where I live contravenes the head lease, the house rules and the development's planning permission. Not sure you can get a stronger legal case than that.

Graham

Graham wrote: »

Both of those sounds like symptoms of the same issue, unauthorised development.

Rent caps preventing LLs getting maximum potential rent for their property and tenants having far too much power/rights over the property they are only renting are the two main reasons for the number of people turning to Airbnb. How anyone can blame a property owner for protecting their property and their investment by using Airbnb is beyond me.

Stop Airbnb and something else will come along, stop the something else and another way will pop up to make money from a property without handing total control to tenants or being subject to price fixing by the gov.

Graham

Odin Thousands Flapjack wrote: »

Rent caps preventing LLs getting maximum potential rent for their property and tenants having far too much power/rights over the property they are only renting are the two main reasons for the number of people turning to Airbnb. How anyone can blame a property owner for protecting their property and their investment by using Airbnb is beyond me.

I see no exemptions in the planning legislation for any of the above.

jamesthepeach

dubdev wrote: »

I would agree with this. My complex's management company have received legal advice to begin litigating against several apartment owners who have ignored a ban and several letters ordering them to stop.

AirBnB'ing where I live contravenes the head lease, the house rules and the development's planning permission. Not sure you can get a stronger legal case than that.

So tell. What have you been able to achieve so far. In particular I would like to know what punishment the short term letters received.

dubdev

murphaph wrote: »

Is the point of an airbnb ban to prevent nuisance to residents or prevent units leaving the residential lettings market?

If the latter then the airbnb units will just be replaced by aparthotels and real hotels, which also take up space and prevent residential development.

I would generally agree that short term lets less than a couple of months are likely to be a nuisance in an apartment block, but a house on its own with no shared access and where the guests probably won't even use the driveway but take public transport? I'd offer that this is the state taking too much of an interest in the private property of its citizens.

Two different cases entirely. In an apartment block, short-term subletting of entire apartments on an industrial scale turns it into a badly run hotel where you have randomers coming and going at all hours of the night and day with little to no oversight as to who they are.

The anti-social behaviour of it is just one aspect of it. If you've bought an apartment to live in as your home, then you have a right to to do so in peace and quiet.

As regards the state taking too much of an interest in citizens' private property, owning a property doesn't give someone the right to be a d**k. They are still subject to planning legislation and civil and criminal law. They will have neighbours, common areas and local amenities which they are expected to interact with legally and respectfully.

Graham

Graham wrote: »

I see no exemptions in the planning legislation for any of the above.

I never said there was, but it's why people are ignoring the planning legalisation. Was the system fairer for LLs then then planning breaches would be greatly reduced as would the number of people complaining about Airbnb in their complex.

Graham

jamesthepeach wrote: »

So tell. What have you been able to achieve so far. In particular I would like to know what punishment the short term letters received.

'Begin litigating' suggests the process is only just starting.

Graham

Odin Thousands Flapjack wrote: »

I never said there was, but it's why people are ignoring the planning legalisation. Was the system fairer for LLs then then planning breaches would be greatly reduced as would the number of people complaining about Airbnb in their complex.

That's all largely irrelevant.

By all means argue that landlords are getting a raw deal and you would have my full support. That's an entirely separate debate.

The solution isn't to ride roughshod over planning legislation and the rights of other residents.

dubdev

jamesthepeach wrote: »

So tell. What have you been able to achieve so far. In particular I would like to know what punishment the short term letters received.

The process has only just begun. Off the top of my head there are at least two avenues to be pursued:

A planning enforcement complaint against non-compliant landlords under the Planning and Development Acts for failing to file a change of use application and unlawfully operating a commercial business in a residential area. This will result in an Enforcement Notice (section 154); or, if they have already been subject to an enforcement notice, then a court order under section 106 of the Planning and Development Acts.

A claim for nuisance under Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Act 1992 (Noise) Regulations 1994.

Both pieces of legislation provide for injunctive remedies, fines and jail time.

Yourself isit

Odin Thousands Flapjack wrote: »

I never said there was, but it's why people are ignoring the planning legalisation. Was the system fairer for LLs then then planning breaches would be greatly reduced as would the number of people complaining about Airbnb in their complex.

There are property owners in those apartments who live there who will oppose the "property rights" of landlords to rent out Airbnb. And there's the management company, another property owner who in law owns the common areas.

That's enough rights for property owners right there. To oppose Airbnb.

jamesthepeach

Graham wrote: »

'Begin litigating' suggests the process is only just starting.

So nothing then. That's what I thought.

dubdev

jamesthepeach wrote: »

So nothing then. That's what I thought.

Can we assume then with all the negativity that you are an AirBnB landlord?

Graham

jamesthepeach wrote: »

So nothing then. That's what I thought.

Which part of 'the process is only just starting' don't you get?

dubdev

Odin Thousands Flapjack wrote: »

Rent caps preventing LLs getting maximum potential rent for their property and tenants having far too much power/rights over the property they are only renting are the two main reasons for the number of people turning to Airbnb. How anyone can blame a property owner for protecting their property and their investment by using Airbnb is beyond me.

I do sympathise with landlords on this one, no two ways about it. My mum owns her own house and was left my Dad's house in his will, and she is now letting it long-term. The tenants have proved quite problematic but there is no real way of getting rid of them unless you get the courts involved and even then it's not guaranteed. For her, she couldn't do AirBnB even if she wanted to as it is too labour intensive managing it and keeping it clean for new guests every few days.

However, there are also properties being bought up in blocks to be used exclusively for use as AirBnB apartments in complexes that have planning permission for use exclusively as residences. That isn't right either. Short-term letting isn't bad in any way in and of itself, but it needs to be done in purpose-built developments as it attracts a different clientele (stags, holidays, hens etc). Short-term letting in residential apartment block is neither an appropriate or fair on the residents who play by the rules .

jamesthepeach

dubdev wrote: »

The process has only just begun. Off the top of my head there are at least two avenues to be pursued:

A planning enforcement complaint against non-compliant landlords under the Planning and Development Acts for failing to file a change of use application and unlawfully operating a commercial business in a residential area. This will result in an Enforcement Notice (section 154); or, if they have already been subject to an enforcement notice, then a court order under section 106 of the Planning and Development Acts.

A claim for nuisance under Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Act 1992 (Noise) Regulations 1994.

Both pieces of legislation provide for injunctive remedies, fines and jail time.

Come back to us when you achieve something.
How much is this costing you, or your members, by the way?

Graham

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Come back to us when you achieve something.
How much is this costing you, or your members, by the way?

If a small 16 unit development can do it, there's no reason why the generally larger Dublin based developments can't.

You should probably take legal advice if you're acting as both an AirBnB landlord in conflict with your obligations as a Director of your OMC (I assume that's what you meant earlier).

wordofwarning

murphaph wrote: »

In Berlin we're now seeing developers building short stay apartment blocks as an alternative to normal residential. Wonder how long it will be before we see this effect in Dublin.

It has already started in Dublin. There are a few Aparthotel style developments with planning waiting to be built. Banning Airbnb will just penalise the small person with an Airbnb. The State will allow a massive company with tens of millions to build blocks of short term let apartments, that could be residential apartments. Airbnb exists as there is a demand for it. It would not be as popular if our hotels were not over 90% full midweek during low season.

Banning Airbnb will just shift the profits of short term lets to other players in the market. Like changing residential accommodation has benefited institutional investors at the expense of small landlords.

dubdev

Graham wrote: »

If a small 16 unit development can do it, there's no reason why the generally larger Dublin based developments can't.

Correct. There are 620 units in our development, and believe me, I was at the last management company meeting and the owners present are highly motivated to get this resolved, which I'm certain it will be.

After the ban was introduced, the number of units being used for short-term let reduced by about 70%, but there is still a cohort of delinquent owners holding out. I guess the 80/20 rule applies here like everything else.

Graham

wordofwarning wrote: »

It has already started in Dublin. There are a few Aparthotel style developments with planning waiting to be built. Banning Airbnb will just penalise the small person with an Airbnb. The State will allow a massive company with tens of millions to build blocks of short term let apartments, that could be residential apartments. Airbnb exists as there is a demand for it. It would not be as popular if our hotels were not over 90% full midweek during low season.

Banning Airbnb will just shift the profits of short term lets to other players in the market. Like changing residential accommodation has benefited institutional investors at the expense of small landlords.

Profits will move back to the tourism sector.

Appropriate accommodation for tourists will be developed.

Personally, I don't want to see AirBnB banned. I think it's a great way for residents to utilise some of the spare space within their homes on an occasional basis.

jamesthepeach

Graham wrote: »

If a small 16 unit development can do it, there's no reason why the generally larger Dublin based developments can't.

You should probably take legal advice if you're acting as both an AirBnB landlord in conflict with your obligations as a Director of your OMC (I assume that's what you meant earlier).

Again, I'm just asking for some proof of punishment to airbnbers. Do you have any? What was the punishment? Was it worse than the punishment for breaking the blasphemy laws?

And thanks for your legal advice, but I don't actually need to take legal advice about being on the committee.

Graham

dubdev wrote: »

Correct. There are 620 units in our development, and believe me, I was at the last management company meeting and the owners present are highly motivated to get this resolved, which I'm certain it will be.

After the ban was introduced, the number of units being used for short-term let reduced by about 70%, but there is still a cohort of delinquent owners holding out. I guess the 80/20 rule applies here like everything else.

Impressive, a 70% drop is a fair result so early in the process.

Other OMCs should take note.

Graham

jamesthepeach wrote: »

Again, I'm just asking for some proof of punishment to airbnbers. Do you have any? What was the punishment? Was it worse than the punishment for breaking the blasphemy laws?

You're obsessed with punishment. Most people just want to see it curtailed.