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

Yellow_Fern · 15-01-2020 5:36pm

Graham wrote: »

If it comes as a surprise to anyone that there are limits/restrictions on what they can do with private property, they might be better served considering alternative investments.

It comes as a surprise how retrograde such restrictions are.

awec · 15-01-2020 6:06pm

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

It is not private property owners job to "provide homes", it is their job to make as much money from their property and minimise risk. This key point cannot be highlighted enough.

Some people really do appear to think that landlords aim is to provide housing, it is not. They are proving a service to make money, if another type of service can be provided (i.e. airbnb rather than a long term let) which is better business wise then they will of course choose this as any business would alter their business to suit the market.

You can turn it into a b&b though without planning. I see no reason why airbnb shouldn't have the same exemption. Airbnb is completely incomparable to a hotel, thats the very reason its so popular as it offers a totally different service.

Within the law. This is the bit that's confusing you I think.

awec · 15-01-2020 6:08pm

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

It comes as a surprise how retrograde such restrictions are.

It is an entirely positive step. The only people annoyed by it are those who have been taking the piss, and they know full well they've been taking the piss.

Indeed, the sheer depths those trying to come up with problems are stooping to is testament to that fact. There will be some seriously blunt fingernails for some on this thread, scraping all those barrels!

Jay Dee · 15-01-2020 6:25pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

You have convinced nobody of that. Trying to argue that Airbnb is closer to residential accommodation is utterly farcical. You shot yourself in the foot by saying that Airbnb is nothing like a holiday home when they are practically the same. Literally everything you listed as a thing that apparently makes Airbnb different also applies to holiday homes and most of them apply to hotels. The thing that ties them all is that none of them are anyone’s residence. I can’t believe I have to point out something so obvious.

Your relations couldn’t afford a hotel for two weeks. So they rented another type of holiday accommodation.

(a) You shot yourself in the foot by saying that Airbnb is nothing like a holiday home when they are practically the same..... The majority of AirBnB's are rooms within a private house , to insist that they are more like Holiday homes or Hotel Apartments is inaccurate to say the least..

(b) Your relations couldn’t afford a hotel for two weeks
Not a very nice comment !!
Please stick to the thread...

Yellow_Fern · 15-01-2020 6:31pm

awec wrote: »

It is an entirely positive step. The only people annoyed by it are those who have been taking the piss, and they know full well they've been taking the piss.

Indeed, the sheer depths those trying to come up with problems are stooping to is testament to that fact. There will be some seriously blunt fingernails for some on this thread, scraping all those barrels!

I d question why people like yourself post such unreliable information. Such advised confidence. Are you really saying that no one would disagree with such regulations, unless they them selves were hosts? I never broke these rules and I disagree with them. There you are disproved. Now an adult rebuttal please.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 15-01-2020 6:38pm

Jay Dee wrote: »

(a) You shot yourself in the foot by saying that Airbnb is nothing like a holiday home when they are practically the same..... The majority of AirBnB's are rooms within a private house , to insist that they are more like Holiday homes or Hotel Apartments is inaccurate to say the least..

(b) Your relations couldn’t afford a hotel for two weeks
Not a very nice comment !!
Please stick to the thread...

The supposed differences were that in Airbnbs, people can cook for themselves, do washing and work from them if needed. I have never been in a holiday home where all those things weren’t possible. I mean, continue to argue that they’re not analogous. Seriously, knock yourself out. You’re just making yourself look silly. The argument that Airbnb is closer to residential accommodation wouldn’t stand up legally.

On the second point, are you a mod? And I’m going off information volunteered by that poster.

15-01-2020 6:38pm

awec wrote: »

It is an entirely positive step. The only people annoyed by it are those who have been taking the piss, and they know full well they've been taking the piss.

Indeed, the sheer depths those trying to come up with problems are stooping to is testament to that fact. There will be some seriously blunt fingernails for some on this thread, scraping all those barrels!

Why do people like yourself see it as the responsibility of a private property owner to provide rental accommodation or ownership to the public?
The law says you need planning, the law is being given the consideration it deserves. This seems to irk a lot of people, the reality is that no one likes being told what they can do with their own private property. Many counties, including the one I live in, take this law so seriously that they have NO staff assigned to enforcement.

Surely you understand that these laws were just a sound bite, a show of intention by the Government to do something about their housing policy failures, there seems little political will to do anything about enforcement.

Incidentally, I’m not hypocritical, I don’t think anyone let’s their home just to benefit tourism, it is to make money and to avoid letting to a tenant.

15-01-2020 6:39pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Your relations couldn’t afford a hotel for two weeks. So they rented another type of holiday accommodation.

They could easily afford a hotel for two weeks but it would have been a significant compromise is comfort, facilities etc and of course availability.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 15-01-2020 6:43pm

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

They could easily afford a hotel for two weeks but it would have been a significant compromise is comfort, facilities etc and of course availability.

That doesn’t change that it was holiday accommodation. Apparently to you, mimicking the beats of home (which can also be achieved in a holiday home) makes short-term holiday accommodation residential. Weird.

15-01-2020 6:48pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

That doesn’t change that it was holiday accommodation. Apparently to you, mimicking the beats of home (which can also be achieved in a holiday home) makes short-term holiday accommodation residential. Weird.

And where will you find holiday homes? Back in clifden or similar not in a city centre estate which is where people tend to want to stay with Airbnb.

The vast majority of people would disagree with stopping Airbnb the same as the vast majority disagree with the ban on Uber. Anyone I know living in counties that allow Uber absolutely sing it’s praises, it’s a fantastic service which we are denied in this country due to total over regulation.

Jay Dee · 15-01-2020 6:53pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The supposed differences were that in Airbnbs, people can cook for themselves, do washing and work from them if needed. I have never been in a holiday home where all those things weren’t possible. I mean, continue to argue that they’re not analogous. Seriously, knock yourself out. You’re just making yourself look silly. The argument that Airbnb is closer to residential accommodation wouldn’t stand up legally.

On the second point, are you a mod? And I’m going off information volunteered by that poster.

If after 80 odd pages of comment, you still cannot see the difference between AirB&B 's and Hotels / Holiday Apartments, then it has been a great waste of time.
On the second point... It shouldn't take a mod....

Graham · 15-01-2020 6:54pm

Mod Note

whichever your respective viewpoints, please keep it civil.

If you have an issue with a post please report it. Jay Dee, quit the backseat moderation.

Do not reply to this post. Thanks

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 15-01-2020 7:13pm

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

And where will you find holiday homes? Back in clifden or similar not in a city centre estate which is where people tend to want to stay with Airbnb.

The vast majority of people would disagree with stopping Airbnb the same as the vast majority disagree with the ban on Uber. Anyone I know living in counties that allow Uber absolutely sing it’s praises, it’s a fantastic service which we are denied in this country due to total over regulation.

What the flip has that got to do with anything? Holiday accommodation is holiday accommodation.

I’m happy for Airbnb to stay. I also want it strictly regulated. Believe it or not, it’s not either/or. We need regulations to stop those who will walk over anyone they can they make money.

15-01-2020 7:18pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

What the flip has that got to do with anything? Holiday accommodation is holiday accommodation.

I’m happy for Airbnb to stay. I also want it strictly regulated. Believe it or not, it’s not either/or.

Strictly regulated, to suit an agenda?

The beauty of Airbnb is its simplicity. You book, you pay, you stay, if it’s crap you leave a crap review which puts others off and Host loses out, so it’s in the Hosts best interest to provide a good service.

Which part of that do you want strictly regulated? Or is it to suit an agenda like: Private Property owners have a responsibility to provide accommodation for long term tenants to ease the shortage?

Graham · 15-01-2020 7:21pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Private Property owners have a responsibility to provide accommodation for long term tenants to ease the shortage?

Who suggested private property owners have such a responsibility?

Marcusm · 15-01-2020 7:30pm

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

It is not private property owners job to "provide homes", it is their job to make as much money from their property and minimise risk. This key point cannot be highlighted enough.

Some people really do appear to think that landlords aim is to provide housing, it is not. They are proving a service to make money, if another type of service can be provided (i.e. airbnb rather than a long term let) which is better business wise then they will of course choose this as any business would alter their business to suit the market.

You can turn it into a b&b though without planning. I see no reason why airbnb shouldn't have the same exemption. Airbnb is completely incomparable to a hotel, thats the very reason its so popular as it offers a totally different service.

Would this extend to allowing a neighbouring landowner to designate a field opposite your family home as a halting site? Is the issue here that you only experience Airbnb as a customer and not an aggrieved permanent resident?

15-01-2020 7:58pm

awec wrote: »

None of these things are as important as providing homes.

You have alternatives.

Graham wrote: »

Who suggested private property owners have such a responsibility?

It is not the responsibility of Airbnb property owners to provide homes, or rental accommodation, so their shortage should not be used as a reason to criticise someone who uses their property for this activity.

awec · 15-01-2020 7:58pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Why do people like yourself see it as the responsibility of a private property owner to provide rental accommodation or ownership to the public?
The law says you need planning, the law is being given the consideration it deserves. This seems to irk a lot of people, the reality is that no one likes being told what they can do with their own private property. Many counties, including the one I live in, take this law so seriously that they have NO staff assigned to enforcement.

Surely you understand that these laws were just a sound bite, a show of intention by the Government to do something about their housing policy failures, there seems little political will to do anything about enforcement.

Incidentally, I’m not hypocritical, I don’t think anyone let’s their home just to benefit tourism, it is to make money and to avoid letting to a tenant.

I don't.

I see it as residential property being used for residential purposes. They don't have to rent it out if they don't want to.

awec · 15-01-2020 8:01pm

Graham wrote: »

Who suggested private property owners have such a responsibility?

Dav010 wrote: »

It is not the responsibility of Airbnb property owners to provide homes, or rental accommodation, so their shortage should not be used as a reason to criticise someone who uses their property for this activity.

It's very straightforward.

Owners of residential property have a responsibility to use that property in accordance with the law. This means using it as a hotel is not allowed. Using it as a pub is not allowed. Using it as a nightclub is not allowed. Using it as a brothel is not allowed.

They can rent it out if they want. They can leave it empty if they want. They can sell it if they want. They can use it as a weekend home for themselves if they want. They can let their granny live there if they want.

Providing homes is not private landlords responsibility. It is the governments. It is also the government's responsibility to ensure the law is upheld, and chancers are not allowed to flout planning regulations, and luckily for all involved enforcement of this law will help everyone involved, except of course the chancers themselves. Oh and the tourists, I can't forget the poor tourists.

15-01-2020 8:01pm

awec wrote: »

I don't.

I see it as residential property being used for residential purposes. They don't have to rent it out if they don't want to.

But they do want to. The tenants are just short stay rather than long stay.

15-01-2020 8:05pm

awec wrote: »

It's very straightforward.

Owners of residential property have a duty to use that property in accordance with the law. This means using it as a hotel is not allowed. Using it as a pub is not allowed. Using it as a nightclub is not allowed. Using it as a brothel is not allowed.

They can rent it out if they want. They can leave it empty if they want. They can sell it if they want. They can use it as a weekend home for themselves if they want. They can let their granny live there if they want.

I have an airbnb, I don't sell alcohol, like most hotels do, I don't have a night club or function room, like many hotels do, I don't use it as a brothel, like certain hotels might, because its not a hotel.

awec · 15-01-2020 8:06pm

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

And where will you find holiday homes? Back in clifden or similar not in a city centre estate which is where people tend to want to stay with Airbnb.

The vast majority of people would disagree with stopping Airbnb the same as the vast majority disagree with the ban on Uber. Anyone I know living in counties that allow Uber absolutely sing it’s praises, it’s a fantastic service which we are denied in this country due to total over regulation.

This is of course why there has been such massive uproar about this policy. All those protests, Joe Duffy segments and what not.

In reality, this ban is widely supported which is why the government brought it in, and why they are stepping up enforcement.

awec · 15-01-2020 8:06pm

Dav010 wrote: »

I have an airbnb, I don't sell alcohol, like most hotels do, I don't have a night club or function room, like many hotels do, I don't use it as a brothel, like certain hotels might, because its not a hotel.

You're not using it for residential purposes.

This is not complicated, no matter how hard you try to obfuscate things.

awec · 15-01-2020 8:07pm

Dav010 wrote: »

But they do want to. The tenants are just short stay rather than long stay.

You mean guests, not tenants. You're running a bed and breakfast, you're not a landlord.

Graham · 15-01-2020 8:07pm

Dav010 wrote: »

It is not the responsibility of Airbnb property owners to provide homes, or rental accommodation, so their shortage should not be used as a reason to criticise someone who uses their property for this activity.

There's no need to continue that particular strawman.

Nobody has suggested property owners have any such responsibility.

Property owners do however have an obligation to ensure the use of their property is in accordance with the planning permission.

15-01-2020 8:13pm

awec wrote: »

This is of course why there has been such massive uproar about this policy. All those protests, Joe Duffy segments and what not.

In reality, this ban is widely supported which is why the government brought it in. It is the same as the rent controls. Widely supported.

Do you think?

Rents rose by an average of 14% last year in Dublin, there hasn't been one enforcement order on an Airbnb host, property numbers being advertised increased and the PP applications are paltry, you ask 100 people on the street what they think of Airbnb regs, I bet a high percentage won't even know what you are talking about. You ask a tenant, no surprise that they favour rent caps, ask a LL, they are against it, ask people who are neither, they don't give a crap.

It just suits an agenda for some, but in reality, both pieces of legislation have made little or no difference.

15-01-2020 8:14pm

awec wrote: »

You mean guests, not tenants. You're running a bed and breakfast, you're not a landlord.

If he was running bed and breakfast he woundn’t require planning or be breaking any rules.

15-01-2020 8:19pm

Graham wrote: »

There's no need to continue that particular strawman.

Nobody has suggested property owners have any such responsibility.

Property owners do however have an obligation to ensure the use of their property is in accordance with the planning permission.

So no more mention should be made of property owners being wrong to use their homes for short let while there is a shortage of rental accommodation because it is reducing supply? Good, that should cut out lots of posts on this thread.

I agree, owners should not break the law, in fact to suggest that would be against this forums policy I'll have you know, but until legislation is introduced which makes renting more appealing to Landlords, we should not be surprised if the law is ignored.

Graham · 15-01-2020 8:31pm

Dav010 wrote: »

So no more mention should be made of property owners being wrong to use their homes for short let while there is a shortage of rental accommodation because it is reducing supply? Good, that should cut out lots of posts on this thread.

The issue is it's not in accordance with planning. The effect of the supply of residential property is one of the negative side effects.

Pretending someone has suggested that it's compulsory to rent out residential accommodation does not help your point.

15-01-2020 8:40pm

Graham wrote: »

The issue is it's not in accordance with planning. The effect of the supply of residential property is one of the negative side effects.

Pretending someone has suggested that it's compulsory to rent out residential accommodation does not help your point.

I take your point, and you are correct, no one has said it is compulsory to rent a property previously used for rental accommodation, now being used for airbnb, and you are right, it does not help my point.

Equally, should anyone make the point that it is wrong to change from long term to short term rentals while supply is so low, no doubt you will inform them that it is not the owners responsibility to provide supply, only to obey the law, which of course is pretty much being ignored, but is unlawful.

Is that strawmanning, or steelmanning, I get confused sometimes. Sorry.

15-01-2020 8:41pm

awec wrote: »

This is of course why there has been such massive uproar about this policy. All those protests, Joe Duffy segments and what not.

In reality, this ban is widely supported which is why the government brought it in, and why they are stepping up enforcement.

I wouldn’t use protests as a way to judge opinion, there are far bigger issue than Airbnb that nobody would go as far as their front garden to protest over.

As for enforcement, there is zero enforcement. The ban is being totally ignored by all hosts and I expect that to continue.

Jamsiek · 15-01-2020 8:46pm

Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »

As for enforcement, there is zero enforcement. The ban is being totally ignored by all hosts and I expect that to continue.

This is the reason why enforcement will likely increase to combat this

15-01-2020 8:49pm

Jamsiek wrote: »

This is the reason why enforcement will likely increase to combat this

To be fair, a single enforcement would qualify as an increase, so you are probably on solid ground there.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 15-01-2020 9:15pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Strictly regulated, to suit an agenda?

The beauty of Airbnb is its simplicity. You book, you pay, you stay, if it’s crap you leave a crap review which puts others off and Host loses out, so it’s in the Hosts best interest to provide a good service.

Which part of that do you want strictly regulated? Or is it to suit an agenda like: Private Property owners have a responsibility to provide accommodation for long term tenants to ease the shortage?

People have a right to peaceful enjoyment of their home. An agenda I’m happy to get behind.

LuckyLloyd · 15-01-2020 9:20pm

The first enforcement order / court case on this matter is coming. Budget was made available only within the last few months. It will take time, but enforcement is coming..,

15-01-2020 9:33pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The first enforcement order / court case on this matter is coming. Budget was made available only within the last few months. It will take time, but enforcement is coming..,

That is interesting, have you a link to that particular case, has is been filed in a Court?

15-01-2020 9:37pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

People have a right to peaceful enjoyment of their home. An agenda I’m happy to get behind.

What would you do if you lived next door to a tenant who is there 365 days a year, causing a disturbance to your peaceful enjoyment? Do all Airbnb guests disturb the neighbours?

Graham · 15-01-2020 9:50pm

Dav010 wrote: »

What would you do if you lived next door to a tenant who is there 365 days a year, causing a disturbance to your peaceful enjoyment?

I'd start another thread because I'd understand that scenario is not related to short-term lettings or AirBnB.

15-01-2020 9:59pm

Graham wrote: »

I'd start another thread because I'd understand that scenario is not related to short-term lettings or AirBnB.

C’mon Graham, the poster is saying Airbnb inhibits peaceful enjoyment. To say the two are mutually exclusive is taking things a bit far. I suspect many would prefer an occasional noisy Airbnb guest that they know will be gone in a few days over a noisy tenant who could be there for months/years and that neither the neighbour nor the landlord can do anything about. Both are more likely to be the exception rather than the norm.

Graham · 15-01-2020 10:29pm

Let's not pretend the only choices are a bad tenant or AirBnB.

15-01-2020 10:32pm

Graham wrote: »

Let's not pretend the only choices are a bad tenant or AirBnB.

Nor that all Airbnb guests disturb neighbours peaceful enjoyment.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 15-01-2020 11:01pm

Dav010 wrote: »

What would you do if you lived next door to a tenant who is there 365 days a year, causing a disturbance to your peaceful enjoyment? Do all Airbnb guests disturb the neighbours?

That’s also unacceptable. This is whataboutery, as you well know. Both issues are a problem. This thread is about Airbnb.

15-01-2020 11:08pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

That’s also unacceptable. This is whataboutery, as you well know. Both issues are a problem. This thread is about Airbnb.

True, but the agenda you are happy to get behind in relation to Airbnb is, peoples “right to peaceful enjoyment of their home”, surely you are not saying they are mutually exclusive, are you?

runawaybishop · 15-01-2020 11:11pm

Graham wrote: »

The issue is it's not in accordance with planning. The effect of the supply of residential property is one of the negative side effects.

Pretending someone has suggested that it's compulsory to rent out residential accommodation does not help your point.

This regulation was solely brought in to force Airbnb properties back onto the long term rental market. Nothing to do with planning.

Graham · 15-01-2020 11:12pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Nor that all Airbnb guests disturb neighbours peaceful enjoyment.

I'd welcome a link to the post where that was stated.

Graham · 15-01-2020 11:14pm

runawaybishop wrote: »

This regulation was solely brought in to force Airbnb properties back onto the long term rental market. Nothing to do with planning.

The purpose of planning/zoning is surely to influence the use of property no?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 15-01-2020 11:15pm

Dav010 wrote: »

True, but the agenda you are happy to get behind in relation to Airbnb is, peoples “right to peaceful enjoyment of their home”, surely you are not saying they are mutually exclusive, are you?

I’m not. This is a thread about a particular issue. People can care about more than one thing. By bringing up antisocial tenants, you are basically saying “Hey, look at that big distraction over there!”. Thankfully, it’s very transparent.

15-01-2020 11:16pm

Graham wrote: »

I'd welcome a link to the post where that was stated.

Ok, here it is:

quote="Dav010;112263479"]Nor that all Airbnb guests disturb neighbours peaceful enjoyment.[/quote]

runawaybishop · 15-01-2020 11:16pm

Graham wrote: »

The purpose of planning/zoning is surely to influence the use of property no?

Again, this regulation was solely brought in to force landlords from Airbnb back to the long term rental market, as stated by the minister.

When it was announced several people on here said it would be unenforceable and would only encourage landlords to exit the market completely. It was badly timed and should have come with regulations to assist landlords.

Graham · 15-01-2020 11:24pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Ok, here it is:

Dav010 wrote: »

Nor that all Airbnb guests disturb neighbours peaceful enjoyment.

So nobody made the point you appear to be refuting?

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

Comments