@Kajal Aggarwal I agree with the others that have already posted.The unauthorized consent of the other individual should not have been done.Usually you do not want to give the tenants possession until after they have paid the move in costs upfront.

Considering that the tenant had them come out without your consent & did the work, it sounds like it should be on the tenant.

California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation-Consent OrderAgain this was ten minute internet search but when I see companies that are tech mixed with real estate - my ears perk up and I wonder if it ends well.

Always get written consent to screen and verify info.

I went to NARPM.com as you suggested, but looks like I have to consent to BP to give my contact info to telemarketers. 

On one hand you might turn it over to AirBnb now, but then whoever you get on the other end of the phone, might decide that the guest was lacking a critical resource - running water - and decide to issue a full refund without your consent period.

It essentially extinguishes the old agreement and creates a fresh contractual relationship, with the consent of all involved parties.To answer the rest of your question.

.: Quote from @James Wise: Quote from @Christine Mulkins: @David Delahanty get it in writing from the tenant otherwise, just throwing it away without his/her consent could be a real problem for you.  

OMG THANK YOU THIS IS HELPFUL ALSO, the top left hand corner of that agreement says “valid until” - does this mean anything done after that date was done without consent?

“If we are unable to continue to raise sufficient capital through this offering, there is a strong likelihood our business will fail and you may lose your entire investment.”RAD declined to directly answer detailed lists of questions from The Inquirer, saying in a statement that they contain “various inaccuracies.”The firm did say it works to “comply with all securities, licensing, landlord-tenant, and other applicable laws and regulations.”Now, the SEC wants to tell federal prosecutors about allegations concerning the divergence between RAD’s online pitches and its more downbeat official self-descriptions.ADVERTISEMENTThe allegations are contained in a complaint sent to the SEC by a fraudster-turned-self-styled whistle-blower named Barry Minkow, who said he gathered material from RAD for his report by pretending to be a potential investor in the company.Late last month, the SEC asked Minkow for his consent to share the document with the Office of the U.S.