Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

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

Options
1…4142444647…54

Comments

  • Options
    #1292
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Graham wrote: »
    Let's not pretend the only choices are a bad tenant or AirBnB.

    Nor that all Airbnb guests disturb neighbours peaceful enjoyment.


  • Options
    #1293
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    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.


  • Options
    #1294
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    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?


  • Options
    #1295
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,500 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    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.


  • Options
    #1296
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Nor that all Airbnb guests disturb neighbours peaceful enjoyment.

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


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1297
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    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?


  • Options
    #1298
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    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.


  • Options
    #1299
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    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]


  • Options
    #1300
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,500 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    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.


  • Options
    #1301
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    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?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1302
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


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

    In line with good planning.

    The consequence of not enforcing good planning would have been the continued erosion of housing stock.


  • Options
    #1303
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    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..,

    I don’t think one enforcement order is going to bother many. It’s exceptionally difficult to catch people and prove anything.


  • Options
    #1304
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,500 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    Graham wrote: »
    In line with good planning.

    The consequence of not enforcing good planning would have been the continued erosion of housing stock.

    So what? That is not why the regulation was brought in. If the minister cared about planning he would have made some effort to fix our restrictive planning laws back then. It was purely a populist move to stop those big bad landlords trying to make money and all it has done is further discouraged supply.


  • Options
    #1305
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    It was badly timed and should have come with regulations to assist landlords.

    It had to start at some point, there was always likely to be a lead up time to enforcement.

    I would absolutely agree with the point that landlords warrant additional supporting legislation particularly when it comes to strengthening rights for removing delinquent tenants.


  • Options
    #1306
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    It was purely a populist move to stop those big bad landlords trying to make money and all it has done is further discouraged supply.

    Outcome is the same either way. The response was appropriate whatever the motivation.


  • Options
    #1307
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    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.

    Yes it is about a particular issue, why some oppose and others favour it. Your remark about peaceful enjoyment in relation to Airbnb is no doubt a valid one, but from my own experience of letting through Airbnb, I have never had complaints about disturbances from neighbours I know well for 15 years. Of course, mine is only one experience, but I think it is far fetched to believe that Airbnb guests in general are anti social or inconsiderate.

    This thread is about Airbnb, but the wider issue is it’s effect on the rental market. The legislation was introduced because of the effect on rental supply, to discuss one, without comparing or contrasting to the other is simplistic. There are a multitude of reasons why people may not like Airbnb, but the alternatives also pose problems and risks to those effected by Airbnb. Associating your agenda relating to peaceful enjoyment with Airbnb guests invites comparisons with the alternatives Graham wants us to consider, long term tenants and owners. Anti social behaviour in all is the exception, but only one of this group is likely to leave on a Sunday morning.


  • Options
    #1308
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,500 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    Graham wrote: »
    Outcome is the same either way. The response was appropriate whatever the motivation.

    Perhaps, the timing was terriible though and the minister is responsible for a large number of 'improvements' to the regulations that have had the opposite effect to their intention. Most of them blatantly clear to anyone with even a cursory interest in the area.

    Populist nonsense is all this stuff is.


  • Options
    #1309
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Graham wrote: »
    So nobody made the point you appear to be refuting?

    Ah hear Graham, you asked for a link where it was stated, I linked to a statement. What more are you looking for?


  • Options
    #1310
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Yes it is about a particular issue, why some oppose and others favour it. Your remark about peaceful enjoyment in relation to Airbnb is no doubt a valid one, but from my own experience of letting through Airbnb, I have never had complaints about disturbances from neighbours I know well for 15 years. Of course, mine is only one experience, but I think it is far fetched to believe that Airbnb guests in general are anti social or inconsiderate.

    This thread is about Airbnb, but the wider issue is it’s effect on the rental market. The legislation was introduced because of the effect on rental supply, to discuss one, without comparing or contrasting to the other is simplistic. There are a multitude of reasons why people may not like Airbnb, but the alternatives also pose problems and risks to those effected by Airbnb. Associating your agenda relating to peaceful enjoyment with Airbnb guests invites comparisons with the alternatives Graham wants us to consider, long term tenants and owners. Anti social behaviour in all is the exception, but only one of this group is likely to leave on a Sunday morning.

    Can you stop talking about people having an agenda? It’s not like you have no skin in the game yourself.


  • Options
    #1311
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Ah hear Graham, you asked for a link where it was stated, I linked to a statement. What more are you looking for?

    You quoted one of your own comments.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1312
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users Posts: 36,128 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »
    I don’t think one enforcement order is going to bother many. It’s exceptionally difficult to catch people and prove anything.

    We will see I guess.


  • Options
    #1313
    davindub
    Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Carlos Slow Traitor wrote: »
    If he was running bed and breakfast he woundn’t require planning or be breaking any rules.

    He would require planning permission unless he was resident in the B&B. Similar to the new rules to airbnb.


  • Options
    #1314
    Yellow_Fern
    Registered Users Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭Yellow_Fern


    Graham wrote: »
    In line with good planning.

    The consequence of not enforcing good planning would have been the continued erosion of housing stock.

    In 2018 we lost just under 6,000 houses up for rent with a 1,000 landlords gone, dropping the national stock to 307,000.The fastest year of rental price growth that I know of was 2015 which saw prices grow well over 9% nationally. In the same year there was a whopping increase of 13,000 in new tenancies figures nationally and with 10,000 new landlords. People who think supply and demand doesn't apply to this sector aren't good with numbers.

    Airbnb has grown since then but not much, its stagnated. It was 1500 entire homes in 2015 in Dublin and now is about 3,000.

    It is obviously a drop in the ocean but the real dishonesty that is going on will be when the rental market continues to deteriorate proponents will claim it is a victory as the housing stock is simply moving to owner occupier ownership. Things can get much worse. We have been down this road before, for much of 19th and 20th cen we had rent controls, creating market distortions and dereliction. Decades of these policies is a factor in why home ownership is so high in Ireland, just like it did in the UK.


  • Options
    #1315
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    If there were no housing crisis my opinion would be the same.

    Property owners should not be permitted to unilaterally repurpose residential accommodation.


  • Options
    #1316
    Calina
    Registered Users Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    Yellow_Fern wrote: »
    In 2018 we lost just under 6,000 houses up for rent with a 1,000 landlords gone, dropping the national stock to 307,000.The fastest year of rental price growth that I know of was 2015 which saw prices grow well over 9% nationally. In the same year there was a whopping increase of 13,000 in new tenancies figures nationally and with 10,000 new landlords. People who think supply and demand doesn't apply to this sector aren't good with numbers.

    Airbnb has grown since then but not much, its stagnated. It was 1500 entire homes in 2015 in Dublin and now is about 3,000.

    It is obviously a drop in the ocean but the real dishonesty that is going on will be when the rental market continues to deteriorate proponents will claim it is a victory as the housing stock is simply moving to owner occupier ownership. Things can get much worse. We have been down this road before, for much of 19th and 20th cen we had rent controls, creating market distortions and dereliction. Decades of these policies is a factor in why home ownership is so high in Ireland, just like it did in the UK.

    The issue of movement to owner occupier is less problematic than the movement to short term lets because at least, owner occupiership does not reduce residential capacity whereas short term lets absolutely do reduce residential supply. If the problem you are trying to fix is homelessness or residential supply then this distinction matters.

    Increased supply in the owner occupier section of the market brings about reduced prices in that sector which also takes some demand pressure off the rental market. As prices are starting to drop in Dublin, maybe the exodus of short term let landlords is contributing. I haven't looked at figures directly.

    Regarding the planning side of things, I don't see what the problem is. Airbnb is a change in property use so yes, typically it should require permission. It is being used as tourist accommodation rather than residential.

    In any case, 1500 Airbnb in 2015 to 3000 five years later is a massive increase and whether it is still the case, it certainly was supply that would have housed most of the homeless in Dublin at certain points.

    I don't live in Dublin any more; I left 3 years ago. The issues with rental in Ireland are supply side linked. Frankly, the landlords posting this will disagree but the relationship tends to the toxic, with deposits kept, illegally short notices not being unusual, and of course security of tenure in Ireland has historically been a hilarious joke. Sure tenants have some routes now, but for all that, the idea that 6 weeks represented security of tenure is really a nonsense and for most of the time I lived in Dublin, that was 'good' and you had to earn it via length of tenancy under the Part VI regime. I believe it has evolved but against that, I have a lease now that is three months' notice for me, tacitly renewed unless I get 3 months' notice before the end of the lease.

    Reading this and other threads, I actually cannot see Irish landlords accepting this as a way to do business when it seems complying with planning legislation is already a problem.

    Enforcement of planning regulations should not be contentious.


  • Options
    #1317
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Calina wrote: »
    The issue of movement to owner occupier is less problematic than the movement to short term lets because at least, owner occupiership does not reduce residential capacity whereas short term lets absolutely do reduce residential supply. If the problem you are trying to fix is homelessness or residential supply then this distinction matters.

    Increased supply in the owner occupier section of the market brings about reduced prices in that sector which also takes some demand pressure off the rental market. As prices are starting to drop in Dublin, maybe the exodus of short term let landlords is contributing. I haven't looked at figures directly.

    Regarding the planning side of things, I don't see what the problem is. Airbnb is a change in property use so yes, typically it should require permission. It is being used as tourist accommodation rather than residential.

    In any case, 1500 Airbnb in 2015 to 3000 five years later is a massive increase and whether it is still the case, it certainly was supply that would have housed most of the homeless in Dublin at certain points.

    I don't live in Dublin any more; I left 3 years ago. The issues with rental in Ireland are supply side linked. Frankly, the landlords posting this will disagree but the relationship tends to the toxic, with deposits kept, illegally short notices not being unusual, and of course security of tenure in Ireland has historically been a hilarious joke. Sure tenants have some routes now, but for all that, the idea that 6 weeks represented security of tenure is really a nonsense and for most of the time I lived in Dublin, that was 'good' and you had to earn it via length of tenancy under the Part VI regime. I believe it has evolved but against that, I have a lease now that is three months' notice for me, tacitly renewed unless I get 3 months' notice before the end of the lease.

    Reading this and other threads, I actually cannot see Irish landlords accepting this as a way to do business when it seems complying with planning legislation is already a problem.

    Enforcement of planning regulations should not be contentious.

    You are over reaching on a couple of points, though 3000 might be an adequate number of houses to solve the homeless problem in Dublin, the 3000 houses on Airbnb are highly unlikely to have ever been used for this purpose. Though the two are often mentioned in the same argument, homelessness has many causes, banning short lets ion properties is not the answer, but it is a good sound bite when justifying the new regs.

    I also doubt any reduction is the numbers of owners advertising on Airbnb is having an effect on Dublin house prices, Airbnb numbers have not dropped in any significant way since the new regs, owners are more likely to use other platforms. Dublin house prices are more likely to be stagnant due to high prices, the limit on borrowing, lack of investor interest in rental market etc.

    I don’t wish to go off topic, Graham will be on to me again, but the counter argument to your criticism of landlords is the problems with errant tenants and the difficulty with removing them. Surely you understand that 50k owners leaving the sector at a time when rents are at historical high, is not a normal market occurrence?


  • Options
    #1318
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Graham wrote: »
    If there were no housing crisis my opinion would be the same.

    Property owners should not be permitted to unilaterally repurpose residential accommodation.

    My opinion is that using your property for the purpose of letting to others should be allowed, there is little difference in letting to long stay tenants and short stay guests, so pp should be no more relevant to short stay than long stay. The onus should not be on owners to maintain or increase stock available for tenants.


  • Options
    #1319
    davindub
    Registered Users Posts: 1,447 ✭✭✭davindub


    Dav010 wrote: »
    My opinion is that using your property for the purpose of letting to others should be allowed, there is little difference in letting to long stay tenants and short stay guests, so pp should be no more relevant to short stay than long stay. The onus should not be on owners to maintain or increase stock available for tenants.

    It would be fairer though to give your neighbours a chance to object to the airbnb by seeking planning permission?


  • Options
    #1320
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    davindub wrote: »
    It would be fairer though to give your neighbours a chance to object to the airbnb by seeking planning permission?

    It’s private property, what has this to do with the neighbours?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1321
    xckjoo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,344 ✭✭✭xckjoo


    Dav010 wrote: »
    It’s private property, what has this to do with the neighbours?
    Ah here. As someone else asked, would you be fine with someone turning the land around you into a halting site? Or rubbish dump, pub, brothel, chemical waste treatment facility, etc? How about they just throw up a a balcony overlooking your house? A nice open air space where they can sit and watch you and your family in your home.


Advertisement