Under the new restrictions, short-term renters will need to register with the city and must be present in the home for the duration of the rental
Home-sharing company Airbnb said it had to stop accepting some reservations in New York City after new regulations on short-term rentals went into effect.
The new rules are intended to effectively end a free-for-all in which landlords and residents have been renting out their apartments by the week or the night to tourists or others in the city for short stays. Advocates say the practice has driven a rise in demand for housing in already scarce neighbourhoods in the city.
Under the new system, rentals shorter than 30 days are only allowed if hosts register with the city. Hosts must also commit to being physically present in the home for the duration of the rental, sharing living quarters with their guest. More than two guests at a time are not allowed, either, meaning families are effectively barred.
It gets sticky with the semantics but I don’t think any reasonable person would call me a landlord for renting out my apartment for a week while I take a trip. Sure they are technically landlords but a host to short term tenets is not the same level of responsibility or cost. The contracts are different, the rights are different, and few people comfortable with short term tenets would be willing or able to accommodate long term tenets. That said, it shouldn’t be more cost effective to run a 24/7/365 airbnb versus renting the same property to a long term tenet. Like all things it can’t be explained so simply as “ban airbnb”. If that’s the real problem you want to solve then I think a good start would be at property taxes for properties without long term residents (landlord and tenets alike). But there’s absolutely nothing wrong with renting out spare rooms at will and that shouldn’t be discouraged or taxed as anything other than income, in my humble opinion.
If you look at the comment I replied to, it said they have a full furnished basement that they airbnb out.
I said it should be a house for someone to live in.
I’m not exactly sure where you’re getting “should they be compelled to sell part of their lifelong home outright” or “I don’t think any reasonable person would call me a landlord for renting out my apartment for a week while I take a trip” in my comments, it seems you’re either inventing something to get mad at or you have a guilty conscience.
Because that’s the standard of living? A basement?
Fully furnished? I own a home, my guest room is fully furnished in that it has a bed, desk, side tables, and a TV.
Listen to yourself. Fully furnished doesn’t mean the same as configured with separate utilities, a separate entrance, a separate kitchen, or separate bathing facilities.
I’m glad you’re housing secure with a guest room, it must be nice.
Some people would kill for a full furnished basement and instead of being rented out short term it could be housing someone instead and leave the short term to hotels.
I really don’t understand why this is such a controversial view.
I wouldn’t want someone living in my basement full time. I have no obligation to make that basement available to live in wtf kinda bullshit is this.
Uh, no one said that, dude.
Then don’t rent it out?
In this specific instance, I suspect it is because there is every indication that the basement room rented by OP was not, in fact, a fully self contained suite within a house, but was a guest room.
How do you physically get into these “basement suites” in your part of the world? When I lived in a townhouse, access to the cellar was via a door in the middle of the property leading off the kitchen. There would be no practical way to split the cellar off from the main property as a separate dwelling. But having guests sleep down there every so often was no big deal.
Some are walk out basements and have their own ground level entry, some are a separate door and other are a door in the middle of shared living space.
Interesting. Here, when conversions happen to make cellars into self-contained units, I’d argue they are frequently only suitable for short term lets, on the basis that no-one should have to live like that. In converting properties whose lower ground floors were never meant to be used for residential purposes into housing, we get stuff like this.
Rental Opportunity of the Week: A Remodelled Crypt, for Goths Your own windowless basement in London Bridge, for just £2,000 a month.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/akz9ze/rental-opportunity-london-bridge-basement
It’s brutal but what if you have a choice of that or being homeless?
Now if that’s being used as a hotel and your only choice left is to be homeless?
There’s so many more problems then just airbnb but it’s not helping either.
It goes for £2000 a month ($2500) and is in Zone 1, a 25 minute stroll from the London Stock Exchange. You aren’t going homeless if you have £2000 a month to spend on rent, and Zone 2 is one stop away on the Jubilee line. You’re moving to Zone 2/3, or moving into a flatshare. Or out of London.
Given the location, pricing and finish I suspect it’s more likely to be used as a pied a terre – a second (weekday) home – for someone in the City.