RENTERS: No license, no rent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm no proponent of illegal rentals, but I also think we also have to acknowledge that there's a wide latitude between units that lack a BBL because they have serious safety issues and units that lack a BBL because of issues that are not unsafe but are difficult to correct. A center beam in a rowhouse basement that's a few inches lower than the limit for rentals is not a fire hazard; virtually everyone who has such a beam and doesn't rent their basement uses it as finished space without issue. Utilities that are not separated by unit are not a fire hazard. On the other hand, overcrowding, insufficient egress, those are very serious issues.

What we should really have are a set of more limited restrictions for getting a BBL that are solely focused on fire safety, coupled with more stringent enforcement of those limited restrictions. Maybe some of the eliminated requirements could be replaced by disclosure requirements to tenants. The current regulations end up pulling a lot of units out of the rental market that might otherwise be available, and that tenants would be happy (and safe) to live in. This exacerbates our issues with affordable housing, and it probably actually makes much of the remaining housing less safe by ensuring that many rented units go uninspected to avoid the more onerous restrictions that have little to do with safety.

BINGO.

As noted on the other thread, t's perfectly legal to use your basement apartment as an Arbnb without jumping through all the hoops required -- many of which are not safety related -- to rent the apartment out long-term. And why is that? It's because the city wants to make sure that Arbnbs benefit actual residents who want/need to supplement their incomes to afford their housing -- not people who want to start a business that displaces residents. Insisting on so many ridiculous requirements to rent out your basement long-term undermines the city's efforts to provide more affordable housing.

For up to 90 days a year! Enjoy that. Also, insurance policies in place and I gotta say I’m not seeing too many dodgy basements to swoon over on AirBnB

You don’t understand the new Airbnb law. Look again. If you’re living upstairs you can rent out the basement through Airbnb for as many days as you’d like. There’s no 90 day limit.

No, there’s a consecutive up to 30 day limit. How many of these you think you can cobble together and make it worth your while? At what price? Who wants an illegal basement unless it’s dirt cheap? AirBnB is a clever way for DC gov to mute the my basement should be legal crowd. Now it’s your opportunity to not make any real money and you can’t complain. And I think it’s a bit harder to get around AirBnB rules than cheat the DC government

Yea, I’m sorry but you just don’t understand the law or economics. The law says you can’t rent to the same tenant for more than 30 days as an Airbnb. Fine. The overwhelming majority of Arbnb rentals are for less time than that. And many basement apartment owners have made the calculation that, even taking into account days when the apartment is empty, they still come out ahead with Airbnb because they charge by the night which is typically more expensive than by the month. Plus you have the luxury of empty space for part of the year that you can use personally.

In fact, this is the VERY reason for the new law restricting Airbnbs. The city determined that too many landlord were being enticed by the greater earning potential of short-term rentals and were removing too many places from the long term market.

I totally do get it. Maybe what I think is worth my while and inconvenience and cleaning fees and insurance and overhead and the hassle is just not the same. I don’t think your basement airbnb can compete with prime properties and I wouldn’t rent it. In fact, we just looked at a super host 5* place in Europe and cancelled because they didn’t disclose it was partially underground. Got a full condo penthouse for barely $10 more per night. That’s what I’m talking about. But if the economics work for you, go for it.

I’m questioning the possibility that anyone who has a unit that would otherwise not be possible to license and goes airbnb route, would make bank. It certainly will not be making the money it could on rent. So it could still be worth it for some. But I think tens of thousands is more like ten thousand per year if you’re very lucky. Worth it? Dealer’s choice.

See, now you’re humming a different tune - because you’ve been proven wrong. It may not be worth the hassle to you, personally, and you personally may not want to rent a basement, but the broader market disagrees with you and that’s why DC changed the law. None of this is about you.

You have no idea if the broader market disagrees. We’ll find out. Air BnBs that were so popular weren’t illegal basements! Trust me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people with legal-ready, nice basements that are not a 6’ shitshow may make some money. People with nice ADUs will make money.

People with basements they couldn’t make legal will make change. These are typically townhouses that anyway have a rodent and crime problem, can’t wait to read the reviews.

Again, worse case scenario arguments are not persuasive. There are many, many basements that are not the shitshows that you describe.

Then get a license, and it’s “worst case”. Sounds like you are a worse case, but maybe not the worst case, but still illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To summarize:

Illegal landlords can try their luck in the short term rental market. They need a license.

Renters renting from illegal landlords should in my opinion take the cue from these law-breakers and push the envelope as far as it would go. If your rental is not licensed, most likely it can’t be and for a good reason.

For the rest of you out there, pay $200 and get yourself a license, you cheapskates.

Yes, they need a license - and they can waltz right in there and get one because they’re now far easier to get than a certificate of occupancy for a long term rental. All the new law is going to do is persuade a lot of landlords on the fence - illegal long term rental, or legal arbnb rental? - to go with arbnb. And the effect will be to remove many entirely safe and comfortable units from the long term affordable housing market.

[Anonymous]

This is very simple. Get a license.

If you can’t, you can try your luck with short term. You need a short term license.

If you don’t want to, renters should reclaim the power in that relationship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm no proponent of illegal rentals, but I also think we also have to acknowledge that there's a wide latitude between units that lack a BBL because they have serious safety issues and units that lack a BBL because of issues that are not unsafe but are difficult to correct. A center beam in a rowhouse basement that's a few inches lower than the limit for rentals is not a fire hazard; virtually everyone who has such a beam and doesn't rent their basement uses it as finished space without issue. Utilities that are not separated by unit are not a fire hazard. On the other hand, overcrowding, insufficient egress, those are very serious issues.

What we should really have are a set of more limited restrictions for getting a BBL that are solely focused on fire safety, coupled with more stringent enforcement of those limited restrictions. Maybe some of the eliminated requirements could be replaced by disclosure requirements to tenants. The current regulations end up pulling a lot of units out of the rental market that might otherwise be available, and that tenants would be happy (and safe) to live in. This exacerbates our issues with affordable housing, and it probably actually makes much of the remaining housing less safe by ensuring that many rented units go uninspected to avoid the more onerous restrictions that have little to do with safety.

BINGO.

As noted on the other thread, t's perfectly legal to use your basement apartment as an Arbnb without jumping through all the hoops required -- many of which are not safety related -- to rent the apartment out long-term. And why is that? It's because the city wants to make sure that Arbnbs benefit actual residents who want/need to supplement their incomes to afford their housing -- not people who want to start a business that displaces residents. Insisting on so many ridiculous requirements to rent out your basement long-term undermines the city's efforts to provide more affordable housing.

For up to 90 days a year! Enjoy that. Also, insurance policies in place and I gotta say I’m not seeing too many dodgy basements to swoon over on AirBnB

You don’t understand the new Airbnb law. Look again. If you’re living upstairs you can rent out the basement through Airbnb for as many days as you’d like. There’s no 90 day limit.

No, there’s a consecutive up to 30 day limit. How many of these you think you can cobble together and make it worth your while? At what price? Who wants an illegal basement unless it’s dirt cheap? AirBnB is a clever way for DC gov to mute the my basement should be legal crowd. Now it’s your opportunity to not make any real money and you can’t complain. And I think it’s a bit harder to get around AirBnB rules than cheat the DC government

Yea, I’m sorry but you just don’t understand the law or economics. The law says you can’t rent to the same tenant for more than 30 days as an Airbnb. Fine. The overwhelming majority of Arbnb rentals are for less time than that. And many basement apartment owners have made the calculation that, even taking into account days when the apartment is empty, they still come out ahead with Airbnb because they charge by the night which is typically more expensive than by the month. Plus you have the luxury of empty space for part of the year that you can use personally.

In fact, this is the VERY reason for the new law restricting Airbnbs. The city determined that too many landlord were being enticed by the greater earning potential of short-term rentals and were removing too many places from the long term market.

I totally do get it. Maybe what I think is worth my while and inconvenience and cleaning fees and insurance and overhead and the hassle is just not the same. I don’t think your basement airbnb can compete with prime properties and I wouldn’t rent it. In fact, we just looked at a super host 5* place in Europe and cancelled because they didn’t disclose it was partially underground. Got a full condo penthouse for barely $10 more per night. That’s what I’m talking about. But if the economics work for you, go for it.

I’m questioning the possibility that anyone who has a unit that would otherwise not be possible to license and goes airbnb route, would make bank. It certainly will not be making the money it could on rent. So it could still be worth it for some. But I think tens of thousands is more like ten thousand per year if you’re very lucky. Worth it? Dealer’s choice.

See, now you’re humming a different tune - because you’ve been proven wrong. It may not be worth the hassle to you, personally, and you personally may not want to rent a basement, but the broader market disagrees with you and that’s why DC changed the law. None of this is about you.

You have no idea if the broader market disagrees. We’ll find out. Air BnBs that were so popular weren’t illegal basements! Trust me.

Sigh. You really are stubborn. That the broader market agrees with me has already be proven in study after study and that’s why the law was changed. We’re talking in circles. I’m done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To summarize:

Illegal landlords can try their luck in the short term rental market. They need a license.

Renters renting from illegal landlords should in my opinion take the cue from these law-breakers and push the envelope as far as it would go. If your rental is not licensed, most likely it can’t be and for a good reason.

For the rest of you out there, pay $200 and get yourself a license, you cheapskates.

Yes, they need a license - and they can waltz right in there and get one because they’re now far easier to get than a certificate of occupancy for a long term rental. All the new law is going to do is persuade a lot of landlords on the fence - illegal long term rental, or legal arbnb rental? - to go with arbnb. And the effect will be to remove many entirely safe and comfortable units from the long term affordable housing market.

I’m perfectly comfortable with that. You, the illegal long term landlord, will now be subject to the fair market forces. The legal landlords will get on, and there will be more units that are not basements because no Airbnb. Done.

But I don’t actually care about that. I care that your renter knows their rights and possibilities if they decide to rent your illegal rental.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm no proponent of illegal rentals, but I also think we also have to acknowledge that there's a wide latitude between units that lack a BBL because they have serious safety issues and units that lack a BBL because of issues that are not unsafe but are difficult to correct. A center beam in a rowhouse basement that's a few inches lower than the limit for rentals is not a fire hazard; virtually everyone who has such a beam and doesn't rent their basement uses it as finished space without issue. Utilities that are not separated by unit are not a fire hazard. On the other hand, overcrowding, insufficient egress, those are very serious issues.

What we should really have are a set of more limited restrictions for getting a BBL that are solely focused on fire safety, coupled with more stringent enforcement of those limited restrictions. Maybe some of the eliminated requirements could be replaced by disclosure requirements to tenants. The current regulations end up pulling a lot of units out of the rental market that might otherwise be available, and that tenants would be happy (and safe) to live in. This exacerbates our issues with affordable housing, and it probably actually makes much of the remaining housing less safe by ensuring that many rented units go uninspected to avoid the more onerous restrictions that have little to do with safety.

BINGO.

As noted on the other thread, t's perfectly legal to use your basement apartment as an Arbnb without jumping through all the hoops required -- many of which are not safety related -- to rent the apartment out long-term. And why is that? It's because the city wants to make sure that Arbnbs benefit actual residents who want/need to supplement their incomes to afford their housing -- not people who want to start a business that displaces residents. Insisting on so many ridiculous requirements to rent out your basement long-term undermines the city's efforts to provide more affordable housing.

For up to 90 days a year! Enjoy that. Also, insurance policies in place and I gotta say I’m not seeing too many dodgy basements to swoon over on AirBnB

You don’t understand the new Airbnb law. Look again. If you’re living upstairs you can rent out the basement through Airbnb for as many days as you’d like. There’s no 90 day limit.

No, there’s a consecutive up to 30 day limit. How many of these you think you can cobble together and make it worth your while? At what price? Who wants an illegal basement unless it’s dirt cheap? AirBnB is a clever way for DC gov to mute the my basement should be legal crowd. Now it’s your opportunity to not make any real money and you can’t complain. And I think it’s a bit harder to get around AirBnB rules than cheat the DC government

Yea, I’m sorry but you just don’t understand the law or economics. The law says you can’t rent to the same tenant for more than 30 days as an Airbnb. Fine. The overwhelming majority of Arbnb rentals are for less time than that. And many basement apartment owners have made the calculation that, even taking into account days when the apartment is empty, they still come out ahead with Airbnb because they charge by the night which is typically more expensive than by the month. Plus you have the luxury of empty space for part of the year that you can use personally.

In fact, this is the VERY reason for the new law restricting Airbnbs. The city determined that too many landlord were being enticed by the greater earning potential of short-term rentals and were removing too many places from the long term market.

I totally do get it. Maybe what I think is worth my while and inconvenience and cleaning fees and insurance and overhead and the hassle is just not the same. I don’t think your basement airbnb can compete with prime properties and I wouldn’t rent it. In fact, we just looked at a super host 5* place in Europe and cancelled because they didn’t disclose it was partially underground. Got a full condo penthouse for barely $10 more per night. That’s what I’m talking about. But if the economics work for you, go for it.

I’m questioning the possibility that anyone who has a unit that would otherwise not be possible to license and goes airbnb route, would make bank. It certainly will not be making the money it could on rent. So it could still be worth it for some. But I think tens of thousands is more like ten thousand per year if you’re very lucky. Worth it? Dealer’s choice.

See, now you’re humming a different tune - because you’ve been proven wrong. It may not be worth the hassle to you, personally, and you personally may not want to rent a basement, but the broader market disagrees with you and that’s why DC changed the law. None of this is about you.

You have no idea if the broader market disagrees. We’ll find out. Air BnBs that were so popular weren’t illegal basements! Trust me.

Sigh. You really are stubborn. That the broader market agrees with me has already be proven in study after study and that’s why the law was changed. We’re talking in circles. I’m done.

The market will not swoon over a basement you couldn’t legalize at rates higher than a hotel room. That’s market 101. So maybe it’s worth it to you. Great. But you won’t be illegally renting un-licensable properties to families.

[Anonymous]

Oh and you’ll never make on a unit like that what you could while renting it illegally. You’d have to have it full about 15 days a month each month all to different renters, assuming you live on the premises.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There really should be an easier way to report illegal apartments. Legitimate landlords with safe products pay their fees, taxes, and high renovation costs to maintain legal units. Why should these illegal units push the value of legal units down?

There's a very easy way to report illegal apartments: DCRA. Not sure what you're talking about.

Do they do anything? I know of several.

Sure they will, if reported. But don’t you think you might want to ask the tenants first? Is it possible that they know and are ok with it? Or are you the neighborhood enforcer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, live there if you really want, just don’t pay your rent. They can’t do a thing

If you live in an unlicensed apartment and are not paying rent then you are just a person trespassing in someone else's home and they can certainly kick you out!

That is 100% false in DC.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There really should be an easier way to report illegal apartments. Legitimate landlords with safe products pay their fees, taxes, and high renovation costs to maintain legal units. Why should these illegal units push the value of legal units down?

There's a very easy way to report illegal apartments: DCRA. Not sure what you're talking about.

Do they do anything? I know of several.

Sure they will, if reported. But don’t you think you might want to ask the tenants first? Is it possible that they know and are ok with it? Or are you the neighborhood enforcer?

If I knew of one, I would report it and/or advise your tenants to read this board. That’s really all it is. Everyone knows the full extent they can push it and in the end of the day it’s a free country. Probably I’d do the latter cause it’s far more pain for the ignorant/arrogant illegal landlord.

Why? Again because the licenses are cheap to get. Unlicensed properties kill people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To summarize:

Illegal landlords can try their luck in the short term rental market. They need a license.

Renters renting from illegal landlords should in my opinion take the cue from these law-breakers and push the envelope as far as it would go. If your rental is not licensed, most likely it can’t be and for a good reason.

For the rest of you out there, pay $200 and get yourself a license, you cheapskates.

Yes, they need a license - and they can waltz right in there and get one because they’re now far easier to get than a certificate of occupancy for a long term rental. All the new law is going to do is persuade a lot of landlords on the fence - illegal long term rental, or legal arbnb rental? - to go with arbnb. And the effect will be to remove many entirely safe and comfortable units from the long term affordable housing market.

I’m perfectly comfortable with that. You, the illegal long term landlord, will now be subject to the fair market forces. The legal landlords will get on, and there will be more units that are not basements because no Airbnb. Done.

But I don’t actually care about that. I care that your renter knows their rights and possibilities if they decide to rent your illegal rental.

This is the point. Renters should know they can be as arrogant as the illegal landlord.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is very simple. Get a license.

If you can’t, you can try your luck with short term. You need a short term license.

If you don’t want to, renters should reclaim the power in that relationship.

Again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To summarize:

Illegal landlords can try their luck in the short term rental market. They need a license.

Renters renting from illegal landlords should in my opinion take the cue from these law-breakers and push the envelope as far as it would go. If your rental is not licensed, most likely it can’t be and for a good reason.

For the rest of you out there, pay $200 and get yourself a license, you cheapskates.

Yes, they need a license - and they can waltz right in there and get one because they’re now far easier to get than a certificate of occupancy for a long term rental. All the new law is going to do is persuade a lot of landlords on the fence - illegal long term rental, or legal arbnb rental? - to go with arbnb. And the effect will be to remove many entirely safe and comfortable units from the long term affordable housing market.

I’m perfectly comfortable with that. You, the illegal long term landlord, will now be subject to the fair market forces. The legal landlords will get on, and there will be more units that are not basements because no Airbnb. Done.

But I don’t actually care about that. I care that your renter knows their rights and possibilities if they decide to rent your illegal rental.

Right, we know. You care more about strict enforcement of draconian laws that have no relation to health or safety even if they drive up the cost of affordable housing. We get it. I suspect the many, many basement apartment renters in this city who would be forced out of where they live for no logical reason other than overly strict laws might disagree with you.

[Anonymous]

What I can’t get over is that this all started because of the one braggadocios landlord mansplaining with Bruh…