Thursday, May 11, 2017

Going after AirBnBers is tough

From Crains:

In the three months since the state's anti-Airbnb bill went into effect, the city has issued fines on 139 listings. That leaves a mere 24,000 more to investigate.

Earlier this week the city announced two women forked over $1,000 each, one for renting out her pad in Trump Tower, the other, her place in a co-op building on the Lower East Side. They were the first hosts to pay up under the new state law banning advertising for home rentals of less than 30 days. But a staggering amount of New York listings remain on the Airbnb site.

The number of potentially illegal Airbnb listings was 23,639 as of April, according to data from the company, though a portion of those ads could be for a stay in a single-family home or another type of dwelling exempt from the legislation. But based on current rates, it would take the Mayor's Office of Special Enforcement 43 years to run down those potential violations.

Rather than go after every one, City Hall's goal likely is to fine enough hosts to discourage the illegal listings and have the numbers come down on their own. Thus far officials have focused on owners of multiunit building who essentially run illegal hotels by renting out multiple apartments for short stays. The mayor plans to add inspectors going forward.

At least for now, hosts with only one listing have a slimmer chance of being caught, and according to Airbnb's site, 96% of hosts fall into this category. Since they stand to earn $750 a week on average, paying off the fine might not prove to be much of a deterrent.


Anonymous said...

It's not the first fine that's the deterrent, it's the second one. Once you're in the city radar they'll get you for $5k real fast.

Anonymous said...

What's so's all computerized?

Anonymous said...

Until the dam city stops being hostile to landlords wile giving every deadbeat tenant & hotel owner the upper hand I will be sticking behind AirBnb .

Why ?
Because my invited house guests help with the rent then leave !!
Jesus Christ is this still America or Russia 1950 ?

Gino said...

The city has no right to tell a home owner who lives in the building who he or she can have. A home owner who lives in the building can also discriminate.
The article has some mention of this. It it sounds like they can only go after people subletting or slumlords who do not reside in the buildings they rent.

The city and its special friends created AirBnb with its 20% hotel taxes, apparently 'protection money" This is all passed down to customers. Not everybody can afford $200 $350 a night to visit. Nobody wants to stay in some Maspeth hotel in a nasty location with bums & drug addicts, get you car stolen, broken into. Now these bums, pimps and druggies working hotels carry small lithium battery powered torx & star tools to even steal headlight parts and ECU computers right off the cars.

A cop friend at the 104 told me many of the the women tenants are also lookouts who get a cut or in some cases free drugs ! Why the news people dont cover this I have no idea, I guess they are afraid to upset the mayor and loose press & special parking privileges.
AirBnb isn't a problem its the shitty mayor with his "sanctuary city COME AND GET IT" bullshit policy that is the problem. To many people are parachuting in to get all the free stuff, so now working class people and visitors can no longer afford housing.


JQ LLC said...

Consider the venues involved with these two slags who got fined.

The one in Trump Tower. Considering that the owner and proprietor is the treasonous figurehead/president of the USA, using her luxury pad as a motel with different strangers coming in and out is a homeland security risk. Who knows who her clients were and where were they were from? Corrupt wealthy Russians immediately or gangster international LLC partners come to mind.

And the one who was using public housing to enrich herself. Turning a place that should have housed a middle class or working poor family into some trendy hot spot night club. And there must have been collusion with either other tenants or public officials because she did illegal renovations to her apartment to make these accommodations easier. I don't know how long she was a resident, but it's clear that using it for Airbnb was the intent.

I knew this 1000 fine was a mere pittance to these fiends. Jail should be considered along with heavier fines and expulsion from the building.