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

Graham

Graham wrote: »

Hmmmm, the complete abolition of planning laws.

Fortunately that's not on the agenda, quite the opposite in fact.

Where did I say the abolishment it planning laws. There is a massive difference between running an air bnb and say opening a pub. To me running an Airbnb is very close to renting out a property and is pretty much exactly the same as the planning not required 4 rooms or less b&b. What difference does it make that in one the owner lives there and in the other they don’t. It makes zero difference to the vast majority of people staying in a place of the owners lives there or not so their behavior is going to be the same.

The main issue people have Airbnb is begrudging others making a bit of money, that’s a simple fact.

Calina wrote: »

Lastly, in Ireland, we spell favour with a u. If you live here, grand. But if you are American, in America, maybe consider that we have different social values and priorities.

This is a new low for this forum that’s for sure, a paragraph about spelling, Christ above. It was an auto-correct anyway just so you know.

Graham

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

What difference does it make that in one the owner lives there and in the other they don’t.

Somewhere between 3000 and 4000 previously residential properties in Dublin is the current difference.

L1011

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

is pretty much exactly the same as the planning not required 4 rooms or less b&b. What difference does it make that in one the owner lives there and in the other they don’t.

To get the B&B exemption the owner must live there. So there's no difference but in the exact way you didn't mean.

L1011

L1011 wrote: »

To get the B&B exemption the owner must live there. So there's no difference but in the exact way you didn't mean.

My point was it’s a stupid rule. The fact someone lives there or not should make no difference.

Bob24

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

Where did I say the abolishment it planning laws.

Here:

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

I would say the opposite I think the vast majority of property owners would be very much in favor of having the power to use their property as they want.

One core effect of planning laws is precisely to restrict how owners can use their properties. So suggesting to give them “the power to use their property as they want” is de facto calling for the end of planning laws.

lookr

This regulation exists to protect the public interest and is totally logical. Yes, landlords earning supernormal rental returns are going to lose an advantage but such is life. All business ventures are vulnerable to the external risk of government regulation. Landlords renting out properties through Airbnb should have seen this coming a mile away. I don't know why anyone is shocked.

Just like people are not entitled to do "whatever they want" with the cars that they own, they are not entitled to do "whatever they want" with property. The European Court of Human Rights has affirmed that these rights are not absolute. They are limited in order to reduce negative externalities.

There are obviously lots of complicated problems with our property market, and this is just one part of a much larger puzzle. But as a taxpaying tenant living in Dublin city, I do not support the manner in which Airbnb is contributing to market failure. I don't understand why anyone who doesn't have a vested interest would.

I expect the government to follow Barcelona's lead and gain access to Airbnb's relevant data. This will make enforcement much easier.

4ensic15

lookr wrote: »

This regulation exists to protect the public interest and is totally logical. Yes, landlords earning supernormal rental returns are going to lose an advantage but such is life. All business ventures are vulnerable to the external risk of government regulation. Landlords renting out properties through Airbnb should have seen this coming a mile away. I don't know why anyone is shocked.

Just like people are not entitled to do "whatever they want" with the cars that they own, they are not entitled to do "whatever they want" with property. The European Court of Human Rights has affirmed that these rights are not absolute. They are limited in order to reduce negative externalities.

There are obviously lots of complicated problems with our property market, and this is just one part of a much larger puzzle. But as a taxpaying tenant living in Dublin city, I do not support the manner in which Airbnb is contributing to market failure. I don't understand why anyone who doesn't have a vested interest would.

I expect the government to follow Barcelona's lead and gain access to Airbnb's relevant data. This will make enforcement much easier.

Any landlord who has planning permission to do it can continue. All that is happening is a clampdown on unauthorised use.

robp

4ensic15 wrote: »

lookr wrote: »

This regulation exists to protect the public interest and is totally logical. Yes, landlords earning supernormal rental returns are going to lose an advantage but such is life. All business ventures are vulnerable to the external risk of government regulation. Landlords renting out properties through Airbnb should have seen this coming a mile away. I don't know why anyone is shocked.

Just like people are not entitled to do "whatever they want" with the cars that they own, they are not entitled to do "whatever they want" with property. The European Court of Human Rights has affirmed that these rights are not absolute. They are limited in order to reduce negative externalities.

There are obviously lots of complicated problems with our property market, and this is just one part of a much larger puzzle. But as a taxpaying tenant living in Dublin city, I do not support the manner in which Airbnb is contributing to market failure. I don't understand why anyone who doesn't have a vested interest would.

I expect the government to follow Barcelona's lead and gain access to Airbnb's relevant data. This will make enforcement much easier.

Any landlord who has planning permission to do it can continue. All that is happening is a clampdown on unauthorised use.

I guess there is a certain cynicism to the usefulness of the planning system given that it has actually blocked the development of highrise in Dublin which could reduce prices.

Bluefoam

robp wrote: »

4ensic15 wrote: »

lookr wrote: »

This regulation exists to protect the public interest and is totally logical. Yes, landlords earning supernormal rental returns are going to lose an advantage but such is life. All business ventures are vulnerable to the external risk of government regulation. Landlords renting out properties through Airbnb should have seen this coming a mile away. I don't know why anyone is shocked.

Just like people are not entitled to do "whatever they want" with the cars that they own, they are not entitled to do "whatever they want" with property. The European Court of Human Rights has affirmed that these rights are not absolute. They are limited in order to reduce negative externalities.

There are obviously lots of complicated problems with our property market, and this is just one part of a much larger puzzle. But as a taxpaying tenant living in Dublin city, I do not support the manner in which Airbnb is contributing to market failure. I don't understand why anyone who doesn't have a vested interest would.

I expect the government to follow Barcelona's lead and gain access to Airbnb's relevant data. This will make enforcement much easier.

Any landlord who has planning permission to do it can continue. All that is happening is a clampdown on unauthorised use.

I guess there is a certain cynicism to the usefulness of the planning system given that it has actually blocked the development of highrise in Dublin which could reduce prices.

High-rise is permitted in Ireland. In fact the government released a paper recently detailing how is should be applied with regard to the residential market. However, the barrier is asset inflation and the cost to return of building high-rise. Developers make more money from lower buildings. If all the Airbnb landlords/moonlighting hotel operators are so concerned about the housing crisis why don't the do something about it and build some high-rise again.

I have mentioned this before, but a landlord painting themselves as a 'homeowner' is disingenuous. They are a commercial entity, same as a hotelier, shop owner or other business & should be treated as such.

lookr

4ensic15 wrote: »

Any landlord who has planning permission to do it can continue. All that is happening is a clampdown on unauthorised use.

Are you disputing the idea that this is new regulation, or that it will have an impact? How many Airbnb landlords do you think have planning permission for short-term letting in Dublin?

Bluefoam

lookr wrote: »

4ensic15 wrote: »

Any landlord who has planning permission to do it can continue. All that is happening is a clampdown on unauthorised use.

How many Airbnb landlords do you think have planning permission for short-term letting in Dublin?

Very few, I think that's his point...

lookr

Bluefoam wrote: »

Very few, I think that's his point...

Of course. You edited out the rest of my post, I don't think there's any disagreement there.

Vote4Napoleon

seamus wrote:

I'm not sure why the wait. Why not just provide direction/support for county councils to crack down on it now?

seamus wrote:

Yes.

seamus wrote:

In effect this is just a signal that some quango will be tasked with chasing up the existing planning laws, to try and scare landlords out of the market.

seamus wrote:

It's long overdue, landlords have been taking the piss for a couple of years now.

Seamus lets say you have a spare room that u want to just leave there, for whatever reason you don't want a lodger but there's a housing shortage so the government passes legislation that all spare bedrooms must be let out. Do you think it wud be brilliant or wud u think the government is taking the piss?

Bluefoam

Vote4Napoleon wrote: »

seamus wrote:

I'm not sure why the wait. Why not just provide direction/support for county councils to crack down on it now?

seamus wrote:

Yes.

seamus wrote:

In effect this is just a signal that some quango will be tasked with chasing up the existing planning laws, to try and scare landlords out of the market.

seamus wrote:

It's long overdue, landlords have been taking the piss for a couple of years now.

Seamus lets say you have a spare room that u want to just leave there, for whatever reason you don't want a lodger but there's a housing shortage so the government passes legislation that all spare bedrooms must be let out. Do you think it wud be brilliant or wud u think the government is taking the piss?

Well, there's a big difference between a businessman renting out hospitality accommodation as a commercial enterprise and a private home owner living in their own home. I haven't heard the government make any statement about taking away you right to your own home, in fact, I believe that would probably be unconstitutional.

the_syco

lookr wrote: »

How many Airbnb landlords do you think have planning permission for short-term letting in Dublin?

I'm guessing the majority of them are houses, and maybe some apartments that have their own external door. As opposed to apartments inside a complex.

Bluefoam

the_syco wrote: »

lookr wrote: »

How many Airbnb landlords do you think have planning permission for short-term letting in Dublin?

I'm guessing the majority of them are houses, and maybe some apartments that have their own external door. As opposed to apartments inside a complex.

I'm not sure what your point is here...? Some of them could have red doors, some blue...

It's irrelevant, if you don't have appropriate planning to run a commercial business out of a residential house then you shouldn't be running a commercial business out of a house.

4ensic15

lookr wrote: »

Are you disputing the idea that this is new regulation, or that it will have an impact? How many Airbnb landlords do you think have planning permission for short-term letting in Dublin?

It is new enforcement, not new regulation. I don't think, I either know or I don't know.

Graham

4ensic15 wrote: »

It is new enforcement, not new regulation. I don't think, I either know or I don't know.

Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government appear to disagree

Minister Murphy Announces Regulations for Short-Term Lettings

Eoghan Murphy T.D., Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government has today (25 October, 2018) announced new regulations in respect of short-term lettings.

Source: https://www.housing.gov.ie/housing/private-rented-housing/minister-murphy-announces-regulations-short-term-lettings

Wheres Me Jumper?

Barcelona, Berlin, Paris.
We'll get there eventually

https://www.europeanceo.com/lifestyle/tenant-fined-e47000-for-illegally-subletting-parisian-flat-on-airbnb/

4ensic15

Graham wrote: »

Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government appear to disagree


Source: https://www.housing.gov.ie/housing/private-rented-housing/minister-murphy-announces-regulations-short-term-lettings

I was referring to Planning permission in connection with non-PPR's. there is no change in planning just enforcement of existing law.

pwurple

The people I know who let on AirBnB as full units are teachers or professionals who leave the country for a few months. I did that a few years ago, worked in the US for a project for 9 months, and came back. It would have worked out great at the time if I could have the house occupied, and some income from it. But I couldn't take the risk with a rental, that the tenant would leave afterwards. They are required to by law, if I want my house back, but there are plenty of horror stories where it can take a year or more to drag them through the courts to get them out. 
Air BnB would have been perfect for that, and in my experience, that's what a lot of people were using it for. Not exactly tourists, but business travel.

Bluefoam

pwurple wrote: »

The people I know who let on AirBnB as full units are teachers or professionals who leave the country for a few months. I did that a few years ago, worked in the US for a project for 9 months, and came back. It would have worked out great at the time if I could have the house occupied, and some income from it. But I couldn't take the risk with a rental, that the tenant would leave afterwards. They are required to by law, if I want my house back, but there are plenty of horror stories where it can take a year or more to drag them through the courts to get them out. 
Air BnB would have been perfect for that, and in my experience, that's what a lot of people were using it for. Not exactly tourists, but business travel.

That would still be permitted, but limited to 180 days.

pwurple

Bluefoam wrote: »

pwurple wrote: »

The people I know who let on AirBnB as full units are teachers or professionals who leave the country for a few months. I did that a few years ago, worked in the US for a project for 9 months, and came back. It would have worked out great at the time if I could have the house occupied, and some income from it. But I couldn't take the risk with a rental, that the tenant would leave afterwards. They are required to by law, if I want my house back, but there are plenty of horror stories where it can take a year or more to drag them through the courts to get them out. 
Air BnB would have been perfect for that, and in my experience, that's what a lot of people were using it for. Not exactly tourists, but business travel.

That would still be permitted, but limited to 180 days.

The report I read said above 90 days, and less than 180. So that effectively eliminates teachers who go to france for 2 months, doesn't it?

Calina

Two months is 60 days so 90 is still grand for the teachers.

Bluefoam

pwurple wrote: »

The report I read said above 90 days, and less than 180. So that effectively eliminates teachers who go to france for 2 months, doesn't it?

no, they can still rent out their place on airbnb once they don't exceed the time period allowed.

Samuel T. Cogley

pwurple wrote: »

The report I read said above 90 days, and less than 180. So that effectively eliminates teachers who go to france for 2 months, doesn't it?

Not entirely sure where ytou're getting that from. It's up to 90 days, not between X and Y unless X is 1 and Y is 90.

Andycap8

I hope everyone is well aware that the hotel & hospitality lobby groups were behind the NYC & San Fran clamp downs on AirBNB.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/16/technology/inside-the-hotel-industrys-plan-to-combat-airbnb.html

The only winner here is Dublin hotel owners & senior management.

Those properties which are 100% rented out on Airbnb are unlikely to come back onto the rental market. They'll be sold. The long term rent won't provide a sufficient return and many owners simply don't want the hassle of dealing with long term tenants - this won't change that.

The 3,000 figure touted by many of the politicians & SJW activists is not backed up by anything you could stand over. If memory serves me correctly it was a point in time data scrap In August of the site so made no allowance for how long an entire house is available or what type of property it was (note, August is out of term for universities - most dedicated student accommodation providers rent their units out over the summer on airbnb).

The "huge return" figures typically sited in media reports are based on information from AirDNA or other scrapping websites - these websites can't distinguish between days that are booked and days that are blocked out by the owner. They also can't distinguish between dates that are unavailable due to minimum stays (i.e. in a minimum stay of 3 nights - you can't rent out periods of less than 3 days between guests). Airbnb said there was about 700-900 units full time available on airbnb. So that's your likely pool. That won't make a blind bit of difference to anything other than stopping lower income families or groups being able to come to Ireland for a weekend at a reasonable price.

davindub

Andycap8 wrote: »

That won't make a blind bit of difference to anything other than stopping lower income families or groups being able to come to Ireland for a weekend at a reasonable price.

Sure we will find out for certain next year, which is better than guessing now.

Pkiernan

It'll be interesting to hear what the lefties will want after next June when homelessness is still rising.

Empty house tax, folliwed by forced letting of spare rooms.

Bluefoam

Pkiernan wrote: »

It'll be interesting to hear what the lefties will want after next June when homelessness is still rising.

Empty house tax, folliwed by forced letting of spare rooms.

Who are the lefties?

Empty house tax, this has international precedent.
Forced letting of spare rooms would be in conflict of our Constitution, which protects the home. It doesn't however protect houses belonging to businesses, such as commercial landlords.