All Forum Posts by: Account Closed

@Lesley Resnick Which of the beaches there? Jax? Do you happen to have the occupancy rates for these actually? I thought Jacksonville actually is one of the 10 or so cities that actually decided to make short term rentals literally illegal. AirBNB is just a booking service, just as hotels.com or booking.com. Users of their sites (room renters) in most of the cities are required to obtain a license to get in the STR game and those who aren't are renting illegally.

@Angela Yan lol... sure they do... was this before or after the lawsuit? The issue isnt really about who makes what but rather airBNBs declaration to make enforcement of city ordinances difficult... they've tried everything from claiming it violates their rights, to raising user's privacy issues hence their going on a lawsuit filing spree.

@David Fernandez Are you saying the city asked landlords to sue airBNB or airBNB asked landlords to sue city? 

There are cases of the city suing some of the landlords that are deliberately using airBNB  illegally. And there is this class action were landlords are forming a class to sue airBNB.

It is bullying because you have airBNB already suing SF, NY, Miami and Santa Monica just to have them either change their ordinances or exempt them somehow from it.

I am actually surprised that many of the cities haven't either individually or collectively sued airBNB yet. They seem to think that because they are a website or broker of sorts, they have no responsibilities when it is a well established fact that many users of the site, use the site to commit various types of crimes.

Most of the cities look on airBNB and see 1000 listings for the city but only 5 or 10 legally registered. Despite contacting airBNB, they often try to refuse working with the city to resolve it. 

There are other companies in the STR business who have already sued cities for STR regulation on grounds of violating the constitution and failed.

As a landlord though, there is always regulatory risk with STRs. Its not a stable long term strategy if you own say an SFR that you use for STR purposes. The cities always tweak those ordinances all the time, and in ways that can materially affect your income adversely.

If a landlord really wants to get in the STR business, just buy a hotel. If you are trying to use a primary residence for a hotel, the city would likely want it registered for that use, they may want to inspect it to ensure ensure its up to code, you may have to you obtain the necessary license, pay necessary fees etc... this isn't some grand new scheme targeted at STR operators, it applies to just about every other business, restaurants, bars, convenient stores, night clubs etc...

@Michael Biggs So we have airBNB suing San Francisco, then New York, then Miami, and apparently it did also Santa Monica and I am sure there is more... am I next airBNB?

Lets talk specifics... what exactly is airBNB sobbing about...

It turns out Santa Monica happens to have one of the strictest regulations of STRs that they've encountered so they allege again violation of the constitution:

https://consumerist.com/2016/09/06/airbnb-says-cit...

This is a lawsuit they had filed in federal court. There are others who have also filed similar suits -- you have to realize, homeaway.com for instance is actually owned by expedia inc. and sometimes they have joined together to sue as a group. But here is a result of some of these cases:

https://la.curbed.com/2017/3/31/15116298/santa-mon...

THISMISS!!!

Seriously, I am trying to save you some time... airBNB should really be thanking me for this. oh wait... I think  just got a complaint from airBNB

 Sure they can loose; they have already bungled how many cases already. The public at some point will realize, these guys were just trying to evade what other businesses are complying with.

 @Troy Whitney It literally is sad, airBNB lawsuits are in many ways frivolous, I am starting to think it is some form of marketing for them; based on some of the discussions here, some are already thinking airBNB is some sort of victim here. The money is going into their bank account.

@Michael Biggs The fact that airBNB is a service with users in multiple states, exposes airBNB to comply with federal laws as it pertains to commerce. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, just don't whine about it. Others are also in the STR space, why is it only airBNB with all these issues? Also, it doesn't mean the federal government is obligated to step in to every business problem they encounter just because they have the ability to.

If you also read the constitution, the commerce clause indicates regulating commerce with foreign nations. This however does not mean that if airBNB chooses to do business in 50 different countries (as it does), that it can go cry to the federal government, to have other countries change it laws so it can do business there or have a better profit margin. 

If Toyota goes to the international court of justice in The Hague, to file a lawsuit against the US government, to have it change its laws so Toyota can make some more money, someone would be told to go pound sand. This is what airBNB is trying to do.

The Wickard v. Filburn is not relevant to this issue... that case has to do with the regulation of agricultural produce.. an issue the US government is extremely sensitive about. State level activity in certain crops is an emotional national issue in some cases... very different here.

Don't confuse things, delegating some things to the state, does not mean the federal govt. doesn't have the ability to step in and declare a state's conduct in violation of the constitution --- so a state cannot make and expect to enforce an illegal state law. This is not the case here.

It is common practice just about anywhere in the world to require a business register with its local government and or obtain a business license and to pay any relevant tax assessed on that industry. failure to do these often involves fines and penalties. This is not someone picking on airBNB. This isn't anything new or unusual. They just would rather be exempt from it.

They know there are users abusing the system, perpetrating all sorts of fraud, actual violent criminal actions,  sexual assaults, robberies etc including tax evasion but fail to do what is necessary to thwart these issues. 

Look, they have enough legal issues to spend the next decade in court.

@Thomas S.  Although there are landlords using airBNB illegally, as the landlord being fined here for $1.2 mil, there are landlords who aren't aware of tenant renting out their properties. This however isn't a basis for excuse, the landlord still has to pay the fine. A penalty in that range can be a slight or not so slight dent to cash flow.

Account Closed Then it appears you haven't read the constitution. 

Certain things are regulated at a federal level... and some matters get delegated to the states. Fair housing laws, discrimination etc... these obviously are issues well within the scope of federal regulation. 

But you don't expect issues pertaining to which local buildings or sections of a neighborhood is zoned for residential or commercial activity to be a federal decision... thats a local decision. 

Each local government have varying needs, they determine what it wants to tax, and at what rate, to raise the funds it need to provide services. So don't expect the feds to step in and set a universal city, county or state tax rate for everyone because airBNB feels its too difficult to collect and send these funds for each of the states.

The characteristics of the land, housing market, inventory levels etc... is almost different in each town or state... so you have local ordinances that vary because they are all trying to achieve goals that often vary based on the challenges they face. 

AirBNB does not have to do business simultaneously in 200 different cities around the world; this is not an obligation placed on them by the federal govt.. They are making the decision to by themselves and therefore have to comply with the ordinances wherever they want to do business in outside of San Francisco. 

If they had to sue San Francisco where their home base is, this means they can't even comply with the laws of San Francisco where they are located; why the heck are they running around suing every other city?

 @Laura Williams Some forms of tax evasions can be expensive.. if the city isn't raising the revenues that it should, then you hear of cities filing bankruptcies like Detroit and others. 

Part of the dispute is also that the cities and states are trying to get airBNB to take some responsibility in vetting its customers.... which reduces cost of enforcing compliance for the cities and easier to target violators. 

Most of the cities want tenants to use similar services legally, it seem. You just have to comply with their laws. Register the house you are renting with the city, get necessary license etc...

AirBNB doesnt want to do that or at least didn't in some markets until it had to. They want to pass that burden on to the cities instead.