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

Samuel T. Cogley · 01-05-2019 4:33pm

Not in force yet. Reports are 1st of July.

In fairness there's been plenty of warning.

CoffeeBean2 · 01-05-2019 5:33pm

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Not in force yet. Reports are 1st of July.

In fairness there's been plenty of warning.

It was Dublin only, then all RPZs
It was 1st of June, then 1st of July

Government decisions change all of the time depending on the direction of the wind, making it impossible to plan on rumors or conjectures. The government has had plenty of time to come forward with the new laws. I can't understand why they are stalling.

Samuel T. Cogley · 01-05-2019 5:40pm

CoffeeBean2 wrote: »

It was Dublin only, then all RPZs
It was 1st of June, then 1st of July

Government decisions change all of the time depending on the direction of the wind, making it impossible to plan on rumors or conjectures. The government has had plenty of time to come forward with the new laws. I can't understand why they are stalling.

I'm not sure where people are getting the idea this wasn't nationwide from the start. Happy to be corrected.

serfboard · 01-05-2019 5:47pm

CoffeeBean2 wrote: »

The government has had plenty of time to come forward with the new laws. I can't understand why they are stalling.

Because it will negatively affect the earnings of the only people they care about - themselves (check out the number of landlords in the Dail), their donors, their party members and their voters.

01-05-2019 5:50pm

serfboard wrote: »

Because it will negatively affect the earnings of the only people they care about - themselves (check out the number of landlords in the Dail), their donors, their party members and their voters.

Are they all AirBnBing their houses?

serfboard · 01-05-2019 6:08pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Are they all AirBnBing their houses?

Good point - they're not. Which makes the foot-dragging even less excusable.

But you can't have missed the findings about the number of full houses/apartments being put into AirBnB - which will affect a significant number of significant people. Significant, that is, to the government.

01-05-2019 6:17pm

serfboard wrote: »

Good point - they're not. Which makes the foot-dragging even less excusable.

But you can't have missed the findings about the number of full houses/apartments being put into AirBnB - which will affect a significant number of significant people. Significant, that is, to the government.

I don’t get what point you’re trying to make. Are you against AirBnB or the government?

I’ve been posting for some time about the crazy situation of buildings built as homes being let out as a business via AirBnB.

serfboard · 01-05-2019 6:49pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I don’t get what point you’re trying to make.

The point I'm trying to make is not just about AirBnB, but a general political one, which this is. Whenever you're trying to figure out why something happens or doesn't happen in (any) society, ask what powerful vested interests want and you'll get your answer.

In the case of housing, there are powerful vested interests (landlords) making obscene amounts of money from AirBnBing full apartments/houses all-year round. And these landlords tend to donate to/be members of/vote for FFG (AKA the permanent government), so they don't want any change to the existing arrangement.

Remember that when AirBnB started, the founders:

Wikipedia wrote:

came up with the idea of putting an air mattress in their living room and turning it into a bed and breakfast

In other words, a hosted arrangement. And that's the way it should have stayed.

However, a perfect storm followed - full apartments on AirBnB, a recession meaning a lack of new housing being built, governments at first unable and then unwilling to build social housing - which lead to the housing crisis we have not just here, but around the world.

In Ireland, if we keep voting FFG this is not going to change anytime soon.

01-05-2019 6:53pm

serfboard wrote: »

The point I'm trying to make is not just about AirBnB, but a general political one, which this is. Whenever you're trying to figure out why something happens or doesn't happen in (any) society, ask what powerful vested interests want and you'll get your answer.

In the case of housing, there are powerful vested interests (landlords) making obscene amounts of money from AirBnBing full apartments/houses all-year round. And these landlords tend to donate to/be members of/vote for FFG (AKA the permanent government), so they don't want any change to the existing arrangement.

Remember that when AirBnB started, the founders:
In other words, a hosted arrangement. And that's the way it should have stayed.

However, a perfect storm followed - full apartments on AirBnB, a recession meaning a lack of new housing being built, governments at first unable and then unwilling to build social housing - which lead to the housing crisis we have not just here, but around the world.

In Ireland, if we keep voting FFG this is not going to change anytime soon.

In my opinion, anyone using the “word” FFG have already lost the argument.

serfboard · 01-05-2019 8:20pm

Deleted User wrote: »

In my opinion, anyone using the “word” FFG have already lost the argument.

OK.

Deleted User wrote: »

I don’t get what point you’re trying to make.

I think my arguement was lost on you anyway ...

21-05-2019 7:01pm

I can't believe it, it looks like they're actually going to get it through very soon https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/140/?tab=debates

Delighted as a neighbour to an airbnb but I feel very sorry for all the tourists.

The government should have had this legislation in place much earlier and by the same token all short term rental sites should have properly warned their customers that this was potentially on the way.

Samuel T. Cogley · 21-05-2019 7:28pm

They'll be zero enforcement for the first 90 days anyway as proving it wasn't previously a PPR will be more difficult than simply seeing an ad on a website.

21-05-2019 7:36pm

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

They'll be zero enforcement for the first 90 days anyway as proving it wasn't previously a PPR will be more difficult than simply seeing an ad on a website.

Reviews going back months and years would prove it surely

4ensic15 · 21-05-2019 8:20pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Reviews going back months and years would prove it surely

They are not admissible as evidence in court. the person who wrote the review would have to come to court and give evidence.

Pkiernan · 22-05-2019 8:23am

Only 9 days left until the end of homelessness guys.

All those evil Air BnB'ers who took our homes will be gone.

Bluefoam · 22-05-2019 8:51am

Pkiernan wrote: »

Only 9 days left until the end of homelessness guys.

All those evil Air BnB'ers who took our homes will be gone.

Lol. Your animosity is amusing

LuckyLloyd · 22-05-2019 9:50am

I definitely feel way less sorry for the tourists than I do those contributing full time to our economy looking for somewhere to rent in the city.

It would be bizarre to favour the wants of Tourists over the needs of residents.

Fian · 22-05-2019 10:07am

Looking at the version of this bill as it was passed by the Dail:

==

2 year period between rent reviews was extended until 1 January 2022, had been scheduled to automatically drop before then. could easily be extended again before that date is reached unless RPZs are extended nationwide.

==

Error in section 19(5) has been corrected so that properties which were first let out after 25 Dec 2016 will now have the RPZ limits applied to them. Currently if a property was not rented before this date it was permanently outside of the RPZ 4% per annum limit, this has been fixed. Hopefully this will not have too much impact on new supply/building, we will see.

==

Section 8(2) is the big one:

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (5) of section 24A of the Act of 2004 or any order made
thereunder, the period specified in any such order to be the period during which an
area shall stand prescribed as a rent pressure zone shall expire on 31 December 2021.

This would appear to extend all RPZs to 31 December 2021 but also cause all RPZs to expire on 31 December 2021, unless primary legislation is enacted to prevent this from occurring in the interim. It would appear to be no longer open to a Minister to extend the RPZs by order beyond this date. Only the Oireachtas can do so and only by amending the legislation. Of course there is plenty of time to bring in such legislation before that date is reached.

==

the legislation also changes the criteria for RPZs by excluding the dublin area from the "national average" the area is compared to for the purpose of qualifying as an RPZ.

Pkiernan · 22-05-2019 10:55am

Bluefoam wrote: »

Lol. Your animosity is amusing

What animosity?

How could I have anything but praise for this law which will free up 2000 homes in Dublin, thereby ending homelessness in the capital.

Everyone's a winner!

Bluefoam · 22-05-2019 10:58am

Pkiernan wrote: »

What animosity?

How could I have anything but praise for this law which will free up 2000 homes in Dublin, thereby ending homelessness in the capital.

Everyone's a winner!

Your disingenuous comment humours me also.

Graham · 22-05-2019 11:08am

Mod Note

Pkiernan quit the trolling.

FAILSAFE 00 · 22-05-2019 11:12am

Who is going to police it though?

My guess is they'll keep going until the slap on the wrist and then make the change.

Bluefoam · 22-05-2019 11:19am

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Who is going to police it though?

My guess is they'll keep going until the slap on the wrist and then make the change.

The sites (such as AirBNB) will be expected to provide details to the revenue... You'll just get a tax bill and a court order in the post.

Graham · 22-05-2019 11:51am

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Who is going to police it though?

My guess is they'll keep going until the slap on the wrist and then make the change.

I understand DCC are already beginning to resource for the enforcement.

Is this covered by the up-to €5k and 6 months sized slap on the wrist?

22-05-2019 12:32pm

Bluefoam wrote: »

The sites (such as AirBNB) will be expected to provide details to the revenue... You'll just get a tax bill and a court order in the post.

Actually this is incorrect.

Airbnb already provide Revenue with details of Host earnings, that however is not enough to prosecute. In fact the person in DCC responsible for enforcement stated that a listing/booking/payment/review, nor anything else on the site is enough to enforce the new legislation. The enforcement personnel literally have to catch the guests in the act, take their details and then enforce. There is a link earlier in the thread to his interview.

Here is the interview:

https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2018/1122/1012709-airbnb-dublin/

machalla · 22-05-2019 1:05pm

Graham wrote: »

I understand DCC are already beginning to resource for the enforcement.

Is this covered by the up-to €5k and 6 months sized slap on the wrist?

Knowing public recruitment policies this could take months to fill any vacant roles. Especially over the summer period.

Claw Hammer · 22-05-2019 1:14pm

Isn't it going to be an offence to advertise or host the advertisement of an unlicenced property?

22-05-2019 1:17pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Isn't it going to be an offence to advertise or host the advertisement of an unlicenced property?

Can you prove who is advertising?

Claw Hammer · 22-05-2019 1:21pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Can you prove who is advertising?

Very easily i the case of well known platforms. All that has to be done is make a booking and have payment accepted, then trace then follow the money.

22-05-2019 1:24pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Very easily i the case of well known platforms. All that has to be done is make a booking and have payment accepted, then trace then follow the money.

That is incorrect, read the link above, the person responsible in DCC for enforcement stated that a booking/payment is not enough evidence to secure a prosecution, the person may not actually have stayed there and the Host may not be the property owner, it could be a tenant.

Claw Hammer · 22-05-2019 1:32pm

Dav010 wrote: »

That is incorrect, read the link above, the person responsible in DCC for enforcement stated that a booking/payment is not enough evidence to secure a prosecution, the person may not actually have stayed there and the Host may not be the property owner, it could be a tenant.

The bank of the advertising host can be traced. If it is an offence to advertise an unlicenced property the person or company who hosted the ad will have to show that there was a licence attached to the property they were advertising. The idea is that people who want to do short term letting won't be able to use the well known platforms since the platform will be at risk of prosecution if they host the ad.

22-05-2019 1:36pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The bank of the advertising host can be traced. If it is an offence to advertise an unlicenced property the person or company who hosted the ad will have to show that there was a licence attached to the property they were advertising. The idea is that people who want to do short term letting won't be able to use the well known platforms since the platform will be at risk of prosecution if they host the ad.

Have you read that article, or are you just ignoring it? I’m inclined to think Mr Shakespeare in his capacity as the person tasked with enforcement, knows more than you.

Do you think DCC are going to trace bank accounts, and banks are just going to hand over that information?

Unless the law has changed, advertising alone is not an offence and before you prosecute, you must first prove who is breaking the law, and that a law has been broken. If the guest does not stay, no offence has taken place, that is what Mr Shakespeare said, they must physically confirm the guest stayed, advertising/payment is not enough. It is not an offence for a 10 year old to pay for an alcoholic drink in a bar, on the other hand it is an offence for the owner to serve alcohol to the 10 year old.

3DataModem · 22-05-2019 1:42pm

My understanding of the planning laws (which this falls under) is that the complainant (DCC in this case) will have to demonstrate a breach unambiguously.

E.g.
Putting a barbers pole on your front room is not a planning violation. Cutting hair in your front room is not a planning violation. Taking a few quid from friends and friends-of-friends for materials for cutting hair in your front room is not a planning violation. However running a barber shop business from your front room IS a planning violation. Seeing people getting hair cut, seeing a pole, seeing money change hands, etc... might not be enough.

Perhaps an advertisement on Airbnb will be deemed enough, but there are plenty of large scale operators with money for lawyers, and that will tie up the 400k budget of the DCC for a long time.

We shall see what happens.

Claw Hammer · 22-05-2019 1:44pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Have you read that article, or are you just ignoring it? I’m inclined to think Mr Shakespeare in his capacity as the person tasked with enforcement, knows more than you.

Do you think DCC are going to trace bank accounts, and banks are just going to hand over that information?

Unless the law has changed, advertising alone is not an offence and before you prosecute, you must first prove who is breaking the law, and that a law has been broken. If the guest does not stay, no offence has taken place, that is what Mr Shakespeare said, they must physically confirm the guest stayed, advertising/payment is not enough. It is not an offence for a 10 year old to pay for an alcoholic drink in a bar, on the other hand it is an offence for the owner to serve alcohol to the 10 year old.

That relates to the current planning laws. There is to be a new offence of advertising. There is already an offence of advertising without citing the BER in the case of long term lets.

22-05-2019 2:03pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

That relates to the current planning laws. There is to be a new offence of advertising. There is already an offence of advertising without citing the BER in the case of long term lets.

Where are you seeing that advertising alone will be an offence without proof of occupation? What if a tenant advertises or an ad is placed maliciously?

FAILSAFE 00 · 22-05-2019 2:24pm

It sounds great but policing it will be a whole different ball game.

It will be interesting to watch over the coming weeks/months. We should see a drop in Airbnb listings if its working. I am highly skeptical.

Claw Hammer · 22-05-2019 2:43pm

Dav010 wrote: »

Where are you seeing that advertising alone will be an offence without proof of occupation? What if a tenant advertises or an ad is placed maliciously?

That advertising proposal is being studied. A tenant would have to provide proof of licensing to advertise. The idea is to kill Air bnb by choking off the advertising. Only very gullible people would book on an unregulated site an the hosts of the sites would not want to face prosecution. The current planning laws make prosecution difficult. The idea is to create an offence which is easy to prosecute.

22-05-2019 3:22pm

Claw Hammer wrote: »

That advertising proposal is being studied..

Ah, it’s being studied? Earlier you posted “That relates to the current planning laws. There is to be a new offence of advertising”

So in relation to advertising, the current legislation applies and a “study” might change this in the future. Can you provide a link to this study?, it would be an interesting piece of legislation.

GalwayGaillimh · 24-05-2019 1:54am

Looks like July the 1st will be the end of it

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/airbnb-asks-for-delay-to-tighter-rules-on-lettings-v399lg6zd

dealhunter1985 · 24-05-2019 2:10am

GalwayGaillimh wrote: »

Looks like July the 1st will be the end of it

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/airbnb-asks-for-delay-to-tighter-rules-on-lettings-v399lg6zd

link is gated
can you copy and paste the article?

L1011 · 24-05-2019 7:07am

For copyright reasons, no they can't

GalwayGaillimh · 24-05-2019 8:26am

Basically legislation coming into effect on July 1st and zero grace period , Airbnb crying for a grace period due to bookings but falling on deaf ears..
Meant to be some sort of publicity about new law between now and July 1st

TheChizler · 24-05-2019 8:32am

GalwayGaillimh wrote: »

Basically legislation coming into effect on July 1st and zero grace period , Airbnb crying for a grace period due to bookings but falling on deaf ears..
Meant to be some sort of publicity about new law between now and July 1st

How long have they known this was coming? The laws being broken aren't new, bit cheeky asking for a delay in commencing laws being written to enforce the existing ones.

They're basically saying we knew customers were breaking the law and they made commitments thinking they'd get away with it for longer.

24-05-2019 8:39am

TheChizler wrote: »

How long have they known this was coming? The laws being broken aren't new, bit cheeky asking for a delay in commencing laws being written to enforce the existing ones.

They're basically saying we knew customers were breaking the law and they made commitments thinking they'd get away with it for longer.

Actually these laws being “ broken” are so new, that haven’t been enacted yet. How many times over the years have we heard that the Government was to bring forward legislation to improve something, only for it to disappear? It would have been foolish not to take bookings just because something might happen.

I’m pretty confident that apart from a few, rare prosecutions, this will make zero difference.

TheChizler · 24-05-2019 8:43am

Dav010 wrote: »

Actually these laws being “ broken” are so new, that haven’t been enacted yet. How many times over the years have we heard that the Government was to bring forward legislation to improve something, only for it to disappear? It would have been foolish not to take bookings just because something might happen.

I'll have to read back in the thread but aren't there existing laws that prevent long running short term lets of entire properties without planning permission? Didn't Dublin City Council take someone to court over this a while back?

24-05-2019 8:48am

TheChizler wrote: »

I'll have to read back in the thread but aren't there existing laws that prevent long running short term lets of entire properties without planning permission? Didn't Dublin City Council take someone to court over this a while back?

There are literally thousands of Airbnb’s in Dublin at the moment, so whatever existing legislation is there is making no difference. This new legislation is supposed to firm up the restrictions on short term rentals and provide for enforcement, but enforcement will be logistically very difficult so the odd court case is unlikely to have any effect.

As posted earlier, the guests have to be literally caught in the property, internet listing, nor hearsay (complaints by neighbors) will be enough for enforcement.

24-05-2019 9:05am

dealhunter1985 wrote: »

link is gated
can you copy and paste the article?

It’s just confirmed that July 1st is d day. However, some hosts who are letting a second property via AirBnB are claiming they don’t know what the new rules are and are continuing to accept bookings past July 1st. AirBnB wants a grace period.

TheChizler · 24-05-2019 9:45am

Dav010 wrote: »

There are literally thousands of Airbnb’s in Dublin at the moment, so whatever existing legislation is there is making no difference. This new legislation is supposed to firm up the restrictions on short term rentals and provide for enforcement, but enforcement will be logistically very difficult so the odd court case is unlikely to have any effect.

I think this is the case I was thinking of. ABP not court. A property being used full-time for short-term lets constituted a change of use and required planning permission. This referres to a specific case but that kind of thing is repeated all over the place.

Whether this common violation is practically enforcable or will have an effect or not or not doesn't mean they weren't breaking the law. The new laws just make this more enforcable in RPZs, presumably they won't have to go to ABP first.

24-05-2019 10:02am

TheChizler wrote: »

I think this is the case I was thinking of. ABP not court. A property being used full-time for short-term lets constituted a change of use and required planning permission. This referres to a specific case but that kind of thing is repeated all over the place.

Whether this common violation is practically enforcable or will have an effect or not or not doesn't mean they weren't breaking the law. The new laws just make this more enforcable in RPZs, presumably they won't have to go to ABP first.

If whole properties are being let out via AirBnB, then they have to apply for change of use planning. It’s doubtful that they’ll get it as the properties were built as private dwellings.

LuckyLloyd · 24-05-2019 1:57pm

By asking for a grace period AirBnB confirm that the legislative changes are necessary and impactful.

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

Comments