Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to open a huge loophole for landlords.

No, it's concerning. If my renter is allowed to make money off my property I have a huge issue with that and would be putting this into a lease. If they just want to sublet for when they will be out of town (let's say summer time), I have no issue. But if they are renting my property to then turn it into PROFIT that's a huge issue. Leases can contain clauses about sublets where time for sublet is limited (let's say 30 days or longer) and also tenant isn't allowed to charge anything above whatever the rent is plus percentage extra for amenities/furnishing, etc. I have this in the lease for the place we rent.

It's weird to me that you're focused on them making money off the property--who really cares? If they decorated it beautifully and offered it as a space for photo shoots, would you also kick up a fuss? The real issue is that some of these short term tenants might damage the apartment, and then it would be difficult to triangulate the repair and costs between you, the tenant, and the short term tenant.

No. As a former landlord it would be completely crystal clear to me. The ONLY agreement and relationship I have is between myself and my tenant. If the unit gets damaged because my tenant did something stupid by renting it out to someone else that is 100% on the tenant and I will go after the tenant. The tenant needs to pay up. How the tenant does cost recovery between themselves and whoever they rented it out to is zero care or concern of mine. If the tenant can't get their AirBNB visitor to pay I don't care, the tenant still needs to pay regardless.

Can the airbnb client still go after you as the owner of the property if they slip in the bath (even if you don't know your tenant is subletting on airbnb).

Of course they will. Their lawyer will go after anyone with money, including the owner of the property, in the hopes of a settlement.

Anonymous wrote:Without any sources, I call BS. This doesn’t make sense especially since a landlord can easily restrict use of their property via the lease. DC recently restricted Airbnb use to primary residences so why in the world would they only allow people who rent to play host on Airbnb?!

DC is pretty transient. I have a lot of friends who will leave on work trips for 2-10 weeks in duration for the government, World Bank, etc. Those folks will often try to line up a sub-letter for the entire duration of the trip via word-of-mouth and friends-of-friends, but may also use STR platforms (Airbnb) to host multiple tenants. Some inform their landlord about the subletting and others do not (if the landlord is hostile to subletting).

It sounds like DC Council is considering giving tenants the right to sublet for a short period of time. A statute passed by the Council will override and negate any lease terms that restrict or ban subletting. Illegal terms in a lease are null and void - for example, landlord can only raise rent once every 12 months and terms in a lease that violate this law are unenforceable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:can you link to the proposed legislation? I find it hard to believe the Council would propose to create a tenant’s right to do AirBnB.

I don’t understand how this would even be possible under a legal lease? The tenant would be effectively subleasing the property which is usually not allowed under the normal terms of a lease. It’s a fundamental change in the use the property.

I saw this happen in my neighborhood and the tenant just kept lying to the out of town home owner e.g. it's just my brother staying for a few days. It was rotating crews of construction workers living there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is going to open a huge loophole for landlords.

No, it's concerning. If my renter is allowed to make money off my property I have a huge issue with that and would be putting this into a lease. If they just want to sublet for when they will be out of town (let's say summer time), I have no issue. But if they are renting my property to then turn it into PROFIT that's a huge issue. Leases can contain clauses about sublets where time for sublet is limited (let's say 30 days or longer) and also tenant isn't allowed to charge anything above whatever the rent is plus percentage extra for amenities/furnishing, etc. I have this in the lease for the place we rent.

It's weird to me that you're focused on them making money off the property--who really cares? If they decorated it beautifully and offered it as a space for photo shoots, would you also kick up a fuss? The real issue is that some of these short term tenants might damage the apartment, and then it would be difficult to triangulate the repair and costs between you, the tenant, and the short term tenant.

No. As a former landlord it would be completely crystal clear to me. The ONLY agreement and relationship I have is between myself and my tenant. If the unit gets damaged because my tenant did something stupid by renting it out to someone else that is 100% on the tenant and I will go after the tenant. The tenant needs to pay up. How the tenant does cost recovery between themselves and whoever they rented it out to is zero care or concern of mine. If the tenant can't get their AirBNB visitor to pay I don't care, the tenant still needs to pay regardless.

Can the airbnb client still go after you as the owner of the property if they slip in the bath (even if you don't know your tenant is subletting on airbnb).