Air BnB [and other platforms] to be effectively outlawed in high demand areas

hometruths

Dav010 wrote: »

No compensation, with Airbnb if a Host cancels a booking, the dates are blocked from being booked again. Why would Hosts have to cancel when restrictions are lifted? If you are talking about guests cancelling, it depends on the Hosts cancellation policy, you can set that as you wish.

If it is your PDH I don't think you'll have a problem, but I think there is a good chance that the legislation will be enforced. i.e any hosts who are not listing their PDH will be shut down.

May even happen before lockdown is lifted. Sooner or later we will have a new housing minister, who will be looking for a big win to hit the ground running with.

I think an airbnb clamp down will be at the very top of their in tray.

There is a good chance it will be Darragh O’Brien because he is FF spokesperson for housing. If it is him I'd say he will announce measures on the first day in the job!

Dav010

schmittel wrote: »

If it is your PDH I don't think you'll have a problem, but I think there is a good chance that the legislation will be enforced. i.e any hosts who are not listing their PDH will be shut down.

May even happen before lockdown is lifted. Sooner or later we will have a new housing minister, who will be looking for a big win to hit the ground running with.

I think an airbnb clamp down will be at the very top of their in tray.

There is a good chance it will be Darragh O’Brien because he is FF spokesperson for housing. If it is him I'd say he will announce measures on the first day in the job!

I think you are being naive. You understand that to get a prosecution, the LA have to actually find and interview the guests in the property? A listing is not enough. A clampdown on STLs will not be top of the tray, there are far bigger and more important problems in the country.

Again this is an example of people giving STLs far more importance than they deserve. It’s a strange phenomenon.

Melanchthon

Dav010 wrote: »

I think you are being naive. You understand that to get a prosecution, the LA have to actually find and interview the guests in the property? A listing is not enough. A clampdown on STLs will not be top of the tray, there are far bigger and more important problems in the country.

But not ridiculously easy political wins which is the point. Wouldn't it be really simple for the Local Authority to get convictions, just get a staff member who had used AirBnB before a bit with good feedback to make a booking.

Dav010

Melanchthon wrote: »

But not ridiculously easy political wins which is the point. Wouldn't it be really simple for the Local Authority to get convictions, just get a staff member who had used AirBnB before a bit with good feedback to make a booking.

Good idea, except you have to pay for it when making the booking, a high proportion of Hosts have a minimum 2 night stay. Can you see the problem with doing that?


Of all the factors effecting property prices, how many posts now about Airbnb? It’s crazy that people think this tiny percentage of the market will have any significant effect.

hometruths

Dav010 wrote: »

I think you are being naive. You understand that to get a prosecution, the LA have to actually find and interview the guests in the property? A listing is not enough. A clampdown on STLs will not be top of the tray, there are far bigger and more important problems in the country.

Again this is an example of people giving STLs far more importance than they deserve. It’s a strange phenomenon.

I guess time will tell who is naive when we finally have a new government.

I am not the only one guilty of this strange phenomenon of people "giving STLs far more importance than they deserve."

Darragh O’Brien is too, and has been for a while. From 2018:

The party has previously introduced detailed legislation aimed at regulating Airbnb and other short term letting platforms, in Dáil Éireann.

“Over the course of 2016, 1,103 homes in Dublin were booked via Airbnb for more than 80 nights consecutively. It has now emerged that over 50% of homes to rent in the city are listed as tourist lets and are therefore not available for long-term letting, “said Deputy O’Brien.

“These latest figures illustrate the need for Government to progress with the regulation of Airbnb and other short term lettings platform before the rental market becomes even more saturated.

http://www.darraghobrien.ie/news/airbnb-regulations-are-required-to-avoid-any-further-loss-of-homes-available-in-the-rental-market

After FG introduced legislation last year he has repeatedly followed up on why the regulations have not been enforced.

To be honest I think it is naive to expect it will be business as usual for airbnb when one of the likeliest contenders for the new housing minister has been banging this drum for over 2 years.

Donald Trump

Dav010 wrote: »

Good idea, except you have to pay for it when making the booking, a high proportion of Hosts have a minimum 2 night stay. Can you see the problem with doing that?


Of all the factors effecting property prices, how many posts now about Airbnb? It’s crazy that people think this tiny percentage of the market will have any significant effect.

I'd imagine that if a user booked a place, arrived, was given the key and an official from the LA turned up so that they couldn't stay there, a refund would have to be given.


However, the alternative of just turning up and ringing the doorbell would be easier and more productive.

"Hello, I'd like to speak to the owner of the hosue"
"Sorry, we are just here with Airbnb"
"Oh ok. This is actually an illegal letting. Would you sign this statement for us to confirm that you are staying here and we will allow you to finish your stay"

Graham

Mod Note

discussion of STL enforcement/legislation moved from the Property Market thread.

Dav010

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'd imagine that if a user booked a place, arrived, was given the key and an official from the LA turned up so that they couldn't stay there, a refund would have to be given.


However, the alternative of just turning up and ringing the doorbell would be easier and more productive.

"Hello, I'd like to speak to the owner of the hosue"
"Sorry, we are just here with Airbnb"
"Oh ok. This is actually an illegal letting. Would you sign this statement for us to confirm that you are staying here and we will allow you to finish your stay"

There is no requirement currently for a refund in the scenario you describe, from Airbnb nor the Government.

Many Airbnb Hosts are not the property owners, but the property owner is the only one who can be prosecuted under the legislation.

You want LA officials to sit outside a property all day until the guest comes back? Good plan.

Graham

Dav010 wrote: »

If you are talking about guests cancelling, it depends on the Hosts cancellation policy, you can set that as you wish.

Wasn't the hosts cancellation policy recently overridden by AirBnB's new cancellation policy?

Dav010

Graham wrote: »

Wasn't the hosts cancellation policy recently overridden by AirBnB's new cancellation policy?

Only during the Covid restrictions, the poster was referring to cancellations after restrictions are lifted.

Incidentally, that policy and the fact that Airbnb did it without any consideration for their customers/Hosts has let to a lot of Hosts moving to cheaper alternative platforms. Facebook is now a no cost way of advertising/booking STLs, I’m staying with Airbnb because I like the fact that the guest has to pay when booking and the payments are easy to compile for Revenue.

hometruths

Dav010 wrote: »

Good idea, except you have to pay for it when making the booking, a high proportion of Hosts have a minimum 2 night stay. Can you see the problem with doing that?

No, what I am missing? Start with the ones that accept instant bookings. LA logs on to airbnb and makes booking for 9 months time, pays for two nights online.

What's the problem with that?

Dav010 wrote: »

Of all the factors effecting property prices, how many posts now about Airbnb? It’s crazy that people think this tiny percentage of the market will have any significant effect.

Inside Airbnb estimates that there are currently 4663 entire apartments/houses available on airbnb in Co Dublin.

Daft.ie lists 2,384 properties for rent currently available to rent in Co Dublin.

So if all those airbnb properties were on the market for long term rent you could triple the current available supply.

Do you really think that would have no significant effect?

Graham

schmittel wrote: »

No, what I am missing? Start with the ones that accept instant bookings. LA logs on to airbnb and makes booking for 9 months time, pays for two nights online.

What's the problem with that?

I think there's a misconception that STLs are impossible to enforce because enforcement has been pretty light-handed so far.

Much more likely is LAs just didn't have the resources to do it. It does look like that is likely to change with recent recruitment.

Dav010

schmittel wrote: »

No, what I am missing? Start with the ones that accept instant bookings. LA logs on to airbnb and makes booking for 9 months time, pays for two nights online.

What's the problem with that?




Inside Airbnb estimates that there are currently 4663 entire apartments/houses available on airbnb in Co Dublin.

Daft.ie lists 2,384 properties for rent currently available to rent in Co Dublin.

So if all those airbnb properties were on the market for long term rent you could triple the current available supply.

Do you really think that would have no significant effect?

What’s the problem with that?

2 problems, the LA is paying around €500 to make the booking which they won’t get back, and, a booking is not enough proof, the person actually has to stay there. There is an interview with the head of Dublin LA, you will find links to it earlier in the thread where he outlined the difficulty they face in order to prosecute. Two LA staff are required to substantiate the offence, they must prove the Host is the property owner and that the guest actually stayed there, so they have to catch and interview the guest in the property.

The fact that there are currently that many listings means that despite the legislation which has been in effect for almost a year, Hosts are ignoring it. There must be many, many more on booking.com and Facebook platforms, 4663 properties will not be hitting the market.

Dav010

Graham wrote: »

I think there's a misconception that STLs are impossible to enforce because enforcement has been pretty light-handed so far.

Much more likely is LAs just didn't have the resources to do it. It does look like that is likely to change with recent recruitment.

Not impossible, but the odds are still heavily in favour of the Hosts. With the economic downturn and loss of rates income, I doubt there will be much in budgets for new recruits.

Donald Trump

Dav010 wrote: »

There is no requirement currently for a refund in the scenario you describe, from Airbnb nor the Government.

Many Airbnb Hosts are not the property owners, but the property owner is the only one who can be prosecuted under the legislation.

You want LA officials to sit outside a property all day until the guest comes back? Good plan.

If I book on airbnb and I am handed the keys but on entering, I find out that the property is not what was advertised - i.e. I booked a place with lovely photos of a spacious three bed and it is just a studio with a single deflated air mattress, then I get on to airbnb and get my money back (they are not under obligation to find you another place). If I arrive at the address, and it is a completely fake listing, then airbnb give me my money back. If I legitimately cannot stay there for any reason which is the fault of the host, then I get my money back. It doesn't matter whether the local fire warden closed down the entire building or whether the local authorities prevented the owner from allowing me to stay there.



Easy thing to do is to book with a credit card and do a chargeback. You might get barred from the platform if you did it a few times, but you'd get your money back fairly easy.

Graham

Doesn't the DCC Short-Term Lettings Unit already have 11 staff and four enforcement officers?

The Minister spoke to STLs recently:

Minister for Housing Eoghan Murphy said the Covid-19 crisis has highlighted the number of short-term lets in Dublin which are now available to homeless services and the HSE.

The Minister said it has become “abundantly clear” the amount of short-term lets available and that the Government needed to further regulate the market.

hometruths

Dav010 wrote: »

What’s the problem with that?

2 problems, the LA is paying around €500 to make the booking which they won’t get back and, a booking is not enough proof, the person actually has to stay there.

In the last budget €2.5m was allocated to tackle the problem. Would cost about €2.3 million even if every current listing had to be book at a cost of €500, which is unlikely to be necessary. Lets say Government budgets to make 2000 bookings at €500 = €1m in booking fees. But they'll get the bulk of it back.

So person making the booking pays their €500. Then emails host to say under Section whatever of Act what have you, you are required to have planning pemission to operate this business. Please be aware that unless you have planning permission once we stay in your property either you or owner of the property will be in breach of this and will be liable for prosecution.

Once the host gets the email what is the first thing that will happen. They are going to cancel the reservation. At which stage the Govt gets its money back.

From Airbnb:

If your reservation is cancelled by your host, we'll automatically give you a full refund. You'll receive an email confirming the full refund, with a link to check on the status.

Now for every cancelled reservation, at no cost other than a little time, the Government have the address of a property that was flouting the rules.

Dav010 wrote: »

There is an interview with the head of Dublin LA, you will find links to it earlier in the thread where he outlined the difficulty they face in order to prosecute. Two LA staff are required to substantiate the offence, they must prove the Host is the property owner and that the guest actually stayed there, so they have to catch and interview the guest in the property.

They can follow up the cancelled reservation and warn the host officially. If that property is then removed from airbnb that's a win for the Govt - they don't need a prosecution, or two LA staff, or proving an offence took place.

The government will be far more interested in removing the properties from STL market than criminalising the hosts.

This seems like a very easy thing to police if the will is there to do it, and all the warning signs are that it will be a priority for the next minister.

Dav010

Donald Trump wrote: »

If I book on airbnb and I am handed the keys but on entering, I find out that the property is not what was advertised - i.e. I booked a place with lovely photos of a spacious three bed and it is just a studio with a single deflated air mattress, then I get on to airbnb and get my money back (they are not under obligation to find you another place). If I arrive at the address, and it is a completely fake listing, then airbnb give me my money back. If I legitimately cannot stay there for any reason which is the fault of the host, then I get my money back. It doesn't matter whether the local fire warden closed down the entire building or whether the local authorities prevented the owner from allowing me to stay there.



Easy thing to do is to book with a credit card and do a chargeback. You might get barred from the platform if you did it a few times, but you'd get your money back fairly easy.

Does the LA have the authority to stop a guest from staying in the property? I’m not sure they are able to evict them. You are correct about the other scenarios, I’m just not sure how relevant they are to this conversation.

Regarding the chargeback, you would be charging back from Airbnb, not the Host, Airbnb would then have to recover the money from the Host. This is not like booking.com where the guest pays the Host directly. In Airbnb, the guest pays Airbnb, who deduct their cut, then pay the Host. The LA forms the contract with Airbnb when they book, Airbnb then pays the Host.

Spanish Eyes

A friend of ours in Co. Wicklow (RPZ) goes back home for three months in Summer (might not be feasible under current circs admittedly), but he understood he could let the place for 90 days provided he informed Wicklow Co Co. and does not need planning permission.

I think he is correct. Is he?

hometruths

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

A friend of ours in Co. Wicklow (RPZ) goes back home for three months in Summer (might not be feasible under current circs admittedly), but he understood he could let the place for 90 days provided he informed Wicklow Co Co. and does not need planning permission.

I think he is correct. Is he?

Yes, as long as it is his PDH.

Dav010

schmittel wrote: »

In the last budget €2.5m was allocated to tackle the problem. Would cost about €2.3 million even if every current listing had to be book at a cost of €500, which is unlikely to be necessary. Lets say Government budgets to make 2000 bookings at €500 = €1m in booking fees. But they'll get the bulk of it back.

So person making the booking pays their €500. Then emails host to say under Section whatever of Act what have you, you are required to have planning pemission to operate this business. Please be aware that unless you have planning permission once we stay in your property either you or owner of the property will be in breach of this and will be liable for prosecution.

Once the host gets the email what is the first thing that will happen. They are going to cancel the reservation. At which stage the Govt gets its money back.

From Airbnb:


Now for every cancelled reservation, at no cost other than a little time, the Government have the address of a property that was flouting the rules.



They can follow up the cancelled reservation and warn the host officially. If that property is then removed from airbnb that's a win for the Govt - they don't need a prosecution, or two LA staff, or proving an offence took place.

The government will be far more interested in removing the properties from STL market than criminalising the hosts.

This seems like a very easy thing to police if the will is there to do it, and all the warning signs are that it will be a priority for the next minister.

The Host does not get paid by Airbnb until the day after the guest arrives. When you book, you are paying Airbnb, not the Host, hence the reason why making/acceptance of a booking is not evidence of any offence having taken place. The Host can ignore any email, we already know planning is needed, apparently it is being ignored. And if the Host is not the owner, the email can be deleted since only the owner can be prosecuted.

It is not at all easy to police, people just think it is. As I said, the head of Dublin LA outlined just how difficult it is.

Spanish Eyes

schmittel wrote: »

Yes, as long as it is his PDH.

Sorry do you mean as long as it is is principal residence owned by him, that would be yes to both.

hometruths

Dav010 wrote: »

The Host does not get paid by Airbnb until the day after the guest arrives. When you book, you are paying Airbnb, not the Host, hence the reason why making/acceptance of a booking is not evidence of any offence having taken place. The Host can ignore any email, we already know planning is needed, apparently it is being ignored. And if the Host is not the owner, the email can be deleted since only the owner can be prosecuted.

It is not at all easy to police, people just think it is. As I said, the head of Dublin LA outlined just how difficult it is.

Are you really saying that if you got a new confirmed booking on airbnb, that was followed up by an email saying "Hi, this booking was made on behalf government, we will need evidence prior to arrival that you are in compliance with the law" - you would just ignore or delete that email?

hometruths

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Sorry do you mean as long as it is is principal residence owned by him, that would be yes to both.

Yes principal residence, don't think it even has to be owned by him, as long as that is where he lives full time.

Hubertj

schmittel wrote: »

In the last budget €2.5m was allocated to tackle the problem. Would cost about €2.3 million even if every current listing had to be book at a cost of €500, which is unlikely to be necessary. Lets say Government budgets to make 2000 bookings at €500 = €1m in booking fees. But they'll get the bulk of it back.

So person making the booking pays their €500. Then emails host to say under Section whatever of Act what have you, you are required to have planning pemission to operate this business. Please be aware that unless you have planning permission once we stay in your property either you or owner of the property will be in breach of this and will be liable for prosecution.

Once the host gets the email what is the first thing that will happen. They are going to cancel the reservation. At which stage the Govt gets its money back.

From Airbnb:


Now for every cancelled reservation, at no cost other than a little time, the Government have the address of a property that was flouting the rules.



They can follow up the cancelled reservation and warn the host officially. If that property is then removed from airbnb that's a win for the Govt - they don't need a prosecution, or two LA staff, or proving an offence took place.

The government will be far more interested in removing the properties from STL market than criminalising the hosts.

This seems like a very easy thing to police if the will is there to do it, and all the warning signs are that it will be a priority for the next minister.

It sounds like a good plan. However, I don’t think the council would have the ability or competence to properly manage this. Unfortunately we are dealing with institutionalised incompetence in most councils.

Dav010

schmittel wrote: »

Are you really saying that if you got a new confirmed booking on airbnb, that was followed up by an email saying "Hi, this booking was made on behalf government, we will need evidence prior to arrival that you are in compliance with the law" - you would just ignore or delete that email?

Absolutely, all I would have is the name of the guest and the confirmation that they had paid Airbnb. Have you any idea how many crackpot emails we get from guests?

hometruths

Hubertj wrote: »

It sounds like a good plan. However, I don’t think the council would have the ability or competence to properly manage this. Unfortunately we are dealing with institutionalised incompetence in most councils.

Fair point. Minister could oversee it. He's got €2.5 budget to play with.

I would be fairly confident if someone gave me a €2.5m budget to tackle the problem I could reduce non compliant listings in Dublin by 90% on Airbnb within 12 months.

Obviously Dav010 would be in the 10%!

Dav010

schmittel wrote: »

Fair point. Minister could oversee it. He's got €2.5 budget to play with.

I would be fairly confident if someone gave me a €2.5m budget to tackle the problem I could reduce non compliant listings in Dublin by 90% on Airbnb within 12 months.

Obviously Dav010 would be in the 10%!

How would you do it?

hometruths

Dav010 wrote: »

Absolutely, all I would have is the name of the guest and the confirmation that they had paid Airbnb. Have you any idea how many crackpot emails we get from guests?

And the guest has the address of the property. So when the letter on official headed notepaper arrives saying:

Dear Dav010

We are writing to remind you that we have a confirmed booking for this property on such and such a date. Please ensure that you provide details of legal compliance prior to our arrive.

love from the Dept of Housing/LA/whoever

You would ignore this and bin it as well?

hometruths

Dav010 wrote: »

How would you do it?

I'd announce that as part of Governments appraisal of the STL market they would be making a number of bookings in order to get first hand experience of how it operates.

And then I'd crack on with exactly what I set out in the post above. I'd just start making bookings.