Air BnB versus Daft

every_other

Just a query I'm throwing out on boards as Im currently searching for a room to rent as my lease is up in my current apartment so looking in/near the area but....
the current listing on daft for long-term rooms to rent (i.e. 6 months and more) is 2. However the amount of listings I see in my current apartment complex for Airbnb is 20 rooms.

From what I can tell, it looks like tenants are sub-letting a room to rent on Airbnb, I had presumed this isn't allowed (insurance purposes but also I presume their landlord isn't aware). However even if these people own these apartment aren't they breaking their management company agreement? Also what about insurance, I presume they need to be covered by a separate policy?

Is this rampant everywhere?

Baby01032012

Tenants may or may not be subletting without landlords knowledge..insurance wise yes there could be a potential issue as airbnb letting wouldn't be cover under normal policy. As for landlords yes it's most likely against the head lease and also against local council planning requirements but some management companies are actively cracking down on it some are not. While there was a single case in temple bar last year there is no wide spread enforcement however expect that to change in legislation this year.

Greaney

According to my young fella, there's a fair few sub-letting rooms on Air bnb. It seems most of our rental housing stock are three bed homes and many couples and single people find the one and two bedroom options, too expensive. This way, you can live on your own, or with your significant other without having flat mates I imagine/

gizmo81

This is wide spread across Dublin. 5 properties in a 12 property development I lived in two years ago were subletting on Air BnB 3 without the landlord knowledge. 2 with. Worse still, just before I moved out three girls rented a two bed apartment in the building. They never moved in. The 2 bedroom apartment was listed a three individual rooms on Air BnB. 2 Bedrooms, a mattress was put in the living/kitchen room.

We had a lot of anti-social incidents in the building from Air BnB.

A little investigation at this time and I was able to figure out this phenomena of people creating mini-b&b empires with other peoples properties.

In January there were 6000+ properties on Air BnB compared to 1000+ on Daft in Dublin, this would ease the rental crisis dramatically if anyone would take charge and regulate Air BnB, which should be restricted to owner occupied properties limited to 5 days per month.

the_syco

gizmo81 wrote: »

In January there were 6000+ properties on Air BnB compared to 1000+ on Daft in Dublin, this would ease the rental crisis dramatically if anyone would take charge and regulate Air BnB, which should be restricted to owner occupied properties limited to 5 days per month.

Why five days a month?

Greaney

gizmo81 wrote: »

This is wide spread across Dublin. 5 properties in a 12 property development I lived in two years ago were subletting on Air BnB 3 without the landlord knowledge. 2 with. Worse still, just before I moved out three girls rented a two bed apartment in the building. They never moved in. The 2 bedroom apartment was listed a three individual rooms on Air BnB. 2 Bedrooms, a mattress was put in the living/kitchen room.

We had a lot of anti-social incidents in the building from Air BnB.

A little investigation at this time and I was able to figure out this phenomena of people creating mini-b&b empires with other peoples properties.

In January there were 6000+ properties on Air BnB compared to 1000+ on Daft in Dublin, this would ease the rental crisis dramatically if anyone would take charge and regulate Air BnB, which should be restricted to owner occupied properties limited to 5 days per month.

Blimey, thanks for doing your homework, that's a pretty breathtaking number of properties. I can see how you'd say 5 days a month, it presumes that folk would perhaps let their property two weekends a month which would suggest an income stream as opposed to a business enterprise. On the other hand I have a acquaintance with an unusual property, it's their family home and they let the top floor. It would be impossible to let to a regular tenant, what with it being remote and the top floor of a castle they've been personally rebuilding as their home for 20 years. AirBnB is an important part of the families income, I find that scenario very fair.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

Friends of mine in city centre sublet their spare room, it essentially pays their rent without having a permanent room mate. The two apartments either side of them do the same thing. I'm a fan of air bnb but some sort of regulation is needed on it. I would have thought it'd be an easy one for the housing minister to get done. Would be relatively little opposition if the regulations were sensible, and could potentially free up a lot of units.

Pkiernan

the_syco wrote: »

Why five days a month?

It's all part of the begrudging left wing who believe property is theft.
They want to control what you do with your house, because they haven't got one of their own. Very childish really.

gizmo81

Most recommend 60 days a year so I just split it down.

In our small property one Air BNB had travelling sex workers. Johns roaming the corridors all the time.

People were being woken by 'guests' all the time. Intercoms buzzing.

There were Fights. Tenants threatened.

And the feckin noise of suitcases being walloped off every step on 3 flights of stairs.

None of the Air BNB hosts paying for extra security though. Or for extra cleaning of common areas.

I don't want to steal anyone's property I want peaceful home life. I don't need to come home in the evening afraid to wonder who I'll meet in the common areas. Or have to put up with the stag party in the tiny terrace house next door.

The only people stealing are the peopling stealing away peoples peace in their own homes. Tenants are entitled to this as too, they pay enough.

gizmo81

Definitely owner-occupied is the way and I don't want to stop anyone who owns their home. However, I just think people need to remember no ones signs up to live in or next to a hotel.

Air BnB can be very disruptive for neighbours. Having owner-occupied definitely restricts the potential for anti-social behaviour.

I think it has great potential but as with everything it is being abused. I think owner-occupiers need to organise and lobby Air BnB before stricter regulation comes in down the line to weed out the bad apples.

Greaney wrote: »

Blimey, thanks for doing your homework, that's a pretty breathtaking number of properties. I can see how you'd say 5 days a month, it presumes that folk would perhaps let their property two weekends a month which would suggest an income stream as opposed to a business enterprise. On the other hand I have a acquaintance with an unusual property, it's their family home and they let the top floor. It would be impossible to let to a regular tenant, what with it being remote and the top floor of a castle they've been personally rebuilding as their home for 20 years. AirBnB is an important part of the families income, I find that scenario very fair.

jamesthepeach

Supply is low on daft in rpzs now because landlords are leaving the market, plus tenants are now staying put because they got rent co trials below market rates when the rent controls came in. There is no churn anymore.

A lot of regular rentals are also being turned into airbnb now after the rent caps and also because of the increasing risk from overstaying delinquent tenants.

I had two one bed apartments that I had rented and was going to put on airbnb.
In the end I sold one and the other is now taking bookings on airbnb via an agent, which so far anyway seems to be working out really well. It will on current form, make far more than it would make renting, but most importantly it is not subject to to the passing whims of the rental system in Ireland. In that I remain in control of my very expensive investment.

In rpzs I think airbnb is where it's going to go for everyone now. I bet you'll be able to get discounts on 4 or 5 months let's on airbnb in rpzs soon too.

Graham

Pkiernan wrote: »

It's all part of the begrudging left wing who believe property is theft.
They want to control what you do with your house, because they haven't got one of their own. Very childish really.

That's a bit of a leap in fairness.

There are plenty of people that have no issue with AirBnB's original purpose which is enabling home-owners to generate a bit of cash from under-utilised spare bedrooms.

Large scale conversion of residential property into holiday-lettings is the cause of most negative AirBnB sentiment.

wordofwarning

gizmo81 wrote: »

We had a lot of anti-social incidents in the building from Air BnB.

It is a pity you had some negative experiences. I know a small development in Dublin City with less 20 apartments. 2/3 of the apartments are full time Airbnbs, 2/3 are long term rentals and the rest are owner occupiers. The residents have zero issues with the Airbnb. They have found the guests, well educated, considerate and courteous to others.

On the hand, the two of the long term rentals are an utter disaster. One crowd appear to do nothing but drink and smoke 18 hours a day. They are on the balcony drinking until 5am some morning. Due the fact part IV is now 6 years long. The residents of this development will have the pleasure of these tenants partying for the next 6 years. Whereas a bad Airbnb guest will likely be gone within a few days

I see in a later comment, you blame Airbnb for a 'working women' in your apartment block. With Airbnb she would likely be gone in a few days. If she was a tenant, she would be working there for the next 6 years. Which would you prefer?

gizmo81 wrote: »

A little investigation at this time and I was able to figure out this phenomena of people creating mini-b&b empires with other peoples properties.

If you did a little more investigate, you would see only a fraction of hosts have multiple properties

gizmo81 wrote: »

In January there were 6000+ properties on Air BnB compared to 1000+ on Daft in Dublin, this would ease the rental crisis dramatically if anyone would take charge and regulate Air BnB, which should be restricted to owner occupied properties limited to 5 days per month.

Lets breakdown your "investigation". Half of the properties on Airbnb are spare rooms for let on it. I know plenty of people who have rented two bedroom apartments, but only use one of them. They put the room on Airbnb the odd night. If Airbnb was banned, they would have no desire to slap the room up on daft.ie sharing. You are making an assumption, that everyone currently letting a spareroom on Airbnb would let it if Airbnb was banned. Most people use Airbnb for their spareroom, as they have no desire for someone to live there full time.

Explain to me why a professional letting their spareroom on Airbnb would continue to do if all the guests were anti-social and causing massive issues? Would you really continue hosting guests on Airbnb if guests were coming home drunk constantly and a making noise when you have to get up for 7am to be in work for 9am?

Can I ask why tenants should not be allowed to let their spareroom on Airbnb? I get the impression, you see tenants as a lesser class of people. You don't refer to them as residents, but "tenants".

So there are 3,000 entire properties on Airbnb. I have looked at Airbnbs around my property and nearly all are people going on holidays, wanting to let their house out for 2/3 weeks. One of my neighbours let her house on Airbnb when they went travelling for a summer. If Airbnb was banned, these lettings would not end up on the rental market, as you let your house to someone while you are backpacking in Asia and they are entitled to reside there for 6 years.

Airbnb is not widespread across the city. There is very few outside of the canal relative to inside of the canal. Why would a person on holiday want to stay in Ongar, Ballymun, Ballyfermont or Crumlin?

According to the CSO, there were 527k housing units in Dublin in 2011. It is probably up to 540k today. So just over 0.5% of Dublin housing stock is Airbnb units. Banning Airbnb will not 'dramatically ease the housing crisis' as so few Airbnb's to begin with.

To ease the housing crisis we need tens of thousands of housing units built. Banning Airbnb, rent controls etc are nothing more than window dressing and failing to get to the root of the issue, ie lack of supply

LuckyLloyd

every_other wrote: »

Just a query I'm throwing out on boards as Im currently searching for a room to rent as my lease is up in my current apartment so looking in/near the area but....

You don't need to leave your current place just because your lease is up. Simply inform your landlord that you intend to stay on beyond the end date of the lease as part of a chapter IV tenancy.

Graham

wordofwarning wrote: »

If you did a little more investigate, you would see only a fraction of hosts have multiple properties

Investigation like Inside AirBnB have done that estimates 43% of Dublin hosts have multiple properties?

wordofwarning wrote: »

So there are 3,000 entire properties on Airbnb. I have looked at Airbnbs around my property and nearly all are people going on holidays, wanting to let their house out for 2/3 weeks.Airbnb is not widespread across the city. There is very few outside of the canal relative to inside of the canal. Why would a person on holiday want to stay in Ongar, Ballymun, Ballyfermont or Crumlin?

According to the CSO, there were 527k housing units in Dublin in 2011. It is probably up to 540k today. So just over 0.5% of Dublin housing stock is Airbnb units. Banning Airbnb will not 'dramatically ease the housing crisis' as so few Airbnb's to begin with.

5000 - 6000 properties according to AirDNA and Inside AirBnB so around 1%. As you noted these are mainly concentrated inside the canals, prime residential areas so the knock-on effect to the residential letting market is disproportionate in those areas.

wordofwarning wrote: »

Banning Airbnb will not 'dramatically ease the housing crisis' as so few Airbnb's to begin with.

I don't see many people calling for a ban on AirBnB but 3000+ properties being returned to the central Dublin residential market would have a fairly dramatic impact.

every_other

There is other factors at play as to why I'm moving out but I guess I was surprised by how little supply there is.

hytrogen

gizmo81 wrote:

In January there were 6000+ properties on Air BnB compared to 1000+ on Daft in Dublin, this would ease the rental crisis dramatically if anyone would take charge and regulate Air BnB, which should be restricted to owner occupied properties limited to 5 days per month.

Sure the whole "rental crisis" has been spun wildy out of proportion by Daft this whole time so they can sell their advertising, they're not even a legitimate benchmarking system to the market unlike the CSO, they're just a bunch of tech journos selling online rags, how many times must this be reiterated?

wordofwarning

Graham wrote: »

Investigation like Inside AirBnB have done that estimates 43% of Dublin hosts have multiple properties?

Multi-listings. If I have two rooms up on Airbnb, I have multiple listings according to the site. That does not mean I have several properties up on the site.

Graham wrote: »

5000 - 6000 properties according to AirDNA and Inside AirBnB so around 1%. As you noted these are mainly concentrated inside the canals, prime residential areas so the knock-on effect to the residential letting market is disproportionate in those areas.

3000 of those listings are spare rooms. A lot of people if Airbnb was banned would not let their spare room on the market.

Graham wrote: »

I don't see many people calling for a ban on AirBnB but 3000+ properties being returned to the central Dublin residential market would have a fairly dramatic impact.

A 0.5% increase in housing would have a dramatic impact? It would have in reality a small impact. To put into a perspective, a large student accommodation block in Dublin houses around 500 students. A few large student accommodation developments would have a greater impact than banning Airbnb

It is easy to blame Airbnb for the housing problems. But Colleges failing to build new accommodation for their soaring student numbers and DCC failing to provide social housing is a far bigger cause of the housing problems in the City.

Graham

wordofwarning wrote: »

Multi-listings. If I have two rooms up on Airbnb, I have multiple listings according to the site. That does not mean I have several properties up on the site.

Plenty of examples on that site of people with more bedrooms than you'd fit in to most residential accommodation which is pretty indicative of multiple properties.

wordofwarning wrote: »

3000 of those listings are spare rooms. A lot of people if Airbnb was banned would not let their spare room on the market.

So 3,000 are not spare rooms.

That's residential accommodation (housing) for somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 people in central Dublin alone!

wordofwarning wrote: »

A 0.5% increase in housing would have a dramatic impact?

you said it yourself, its a much higher percentage in the city centre where demand is highest. Your own anecdotal evidence mentions two thirds of an entire development that has been converted to holiday lettings via AirBnB.

That's 66%+ in one development alone.

wordofwarning wrote: »

It is easy to blame Airbnb for the housing problems.

I don't know where you got that suggestion. AirBnB isn't to blame but it is making a bad situation worse.

wordofwarning

Graham wrote: »

That's residential accommodation (housing) for somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 people in central Dublin alone!

You are making the assumption, that if it was banned that those rooms would be back on the market. A family letting their boxroom the odd time or a couple letting their spareroom in their two bed, are not likely going to be ok with a long term lodger in their house. Airbnb was set up to let a spare room the odd time and for a fair amount of people that is the case.

Graham wrote: »

you said it yourself, its a much higher percentage in the city centre where demand is highest. Your own anecdotal evidence mentions two thirds of an entire development that has been converted to holiday lettings via AirBnB.

That's 66%+ in one development alone.

You completely misread my post. I said 2/3 of the apartments are Airbnbs ie two or three of the apartments. When you read the next sentence I mention 2/3 are long term lets. If you add 2/3 + 2/3, you get over 132%. Plus there is a lot of owner occupiers.

Graham wrote: »

I don't know where you got that suggestion. AirBnB isn't to blame but it is making a bad situation worse.

If it is not blame, banning it is the not the solution to the housing crisis. Airbnb is making a minimal impact on the housing market in Dublin.

gizmo81

Most hosts are 20 something non-nationals. They do not own the properties. The rooms would be on the rental market if there was a ban on non owner occupiers.

wordofwarning wrote: »

You are making the assumption, that if it was banned that those rooms would be back on the market. A family letting their boxroom the odd time or a couple letting their spareroom in their two bed, are not likely going to be ok with a long term lodger in their house. Airbnb was set up to let a spare room the odd time and for a fair amount of people that is the case.




You completely misread my post. I said 2/3 of the apartments are Airbnbs ie two or three of the apartments. When you read the next sentence I mention 2/3 are long term lets. If you add 2/3 + 2/3, you get over 132%. Plus there is a lot of owner occupiers.



If it is not blame, banning it is the not the solution to the housing crisis. Airbnb is making a minimal impact on the housing market in Dublin.

Graham

wordofwarning wrote: »

You are making the assumption, that if it was banned that those rooms would be back on the market.

Nope.

I assumed that the majority of the entire-property AirBnB rentals would return back to the residential market. Each property capable of housing 2 - 4 people.

Baby01032012

Graham wrote: »

Nope.

I assumed that the majority of the entire-property AirBnB rentals would return back to the residential market. Each property capable of housing 2 - 4 people.

More likely they would be sold. Residential leggings no longer offer an adequate return to stay in that market so will be sold reducing rental stock and housing fewer people if sold.

jamesthepeach

Only one and two bed apartments in Dublin and county being bought in any kind of numbers by reits. That's why the price of apartments all.over dublin is shooting up since Christmas.

Graham

Baby01032012 wrote: »

More likely they would be sold. Residential leggings no longer offer an adequate return to stay in that market so will be sold reducing rental stock and housing fewer people if sold.

Selling would still return the properties back to the residential market.

Baby01032012

Yes but typical sale would be to a couple so where do the other 2-4 people who previously were renting that house go?

Graham

Baby01032012 wrote: »

Yes but typical sale would be to a couple so where do the other 2-4 people who previously were renting that house go?

As we're discussing current AirBnB properties, I guess they have to vacation somewhere else.

Baby01032012

As were discussing the impact Airbnb properties have on the the rental crisis...52% of  Airbnb lettings are whole properties ...the point was made that baning Airbnb would release these back to the rental market...my point was that landlords would sell rather than do residental lettings again...the impact of such would be to house a couple rather than 4-6 people if it went back to residental letting...were not talking about people on holidays...

Graham

Baby01032012 wrote: »

my point was that landlords would sell rather than do residental lettings again...the impact of such would be to house a couple rather than 4-6 people if it went back to residental letting...were not talking about people on holidays...

I am impressed that you've managed to survey all those landlords so quickly.

Alternatively, many landlords will return their properties back to the residential lettings market. Those that don't will sell either to other investors or owner occupiers. A number of those owner occupiers will no doubt be moving from rented accommodation freeing up their existing rented accommodation.

Baby01032012

Less of the sarcasm...its a comment point made by landlords on this forum..that are are selling or going the airbnb route. I give up trying to explain basic maths...2 3 bed semi-detached houses..residental letting let to up to 12 people between them..landlord of 1 sells up..yes 2 tenants buying the house for sale freeing up for 2 new tenants..however those 2 who bought have just displaced  6 people. 
Anyway the only solution is build build build...build more hotels for visitors, build homes, build rental...the main focus at the moment is cuting off supply by small time landlords. REITS with their buying power can invest in high volume accomodation...however its restricting owner occupiers as REITS are taking over prime residental locations...yes it imcreases rental accomodation but at peak market rates..then people are stuck in the rental trap for longer...we still have a preoccupation with owning our own home...so nothing but building will satisfy that.

Graham

Baby01032012 wrote: »

I give up trying to explain basic maths...2 3 bed semi-detached houses..residental letting let to up to 12 people between them..landlord of 1 sells up..yes 2 tenants buying the house for sale freeing up for 2 new tenants..however those 2 who bought have just displaced  6 people. 

Here's an even simpler maths example:

3000 residential properties in central Dublin currently housing 0 people.