Hacker News Reader

Comment by blaines | Hacker News Reader

I had to take my couch offline because my HOA threatened to fine me. No more visitors, no more foreign friends. :(

It seems the first wave of enforcement has come from HOAs, I've heard of various people having to remove their listing for that reason. [1]

Now it appears, according to the article above, municipal authorities are pushing back. Could this be a result of lobbying from hotels? Vacation rentals is not a new concept, and couchsurfing has been around for years as well. It seems that just because couchsurfing/vacation rentals are getting a wider audience that it's now suddenly a problem.

I personally don't want my HOA or government telling me who I can or can not have over to stay. Their place is not in my home.

1: http://betabeat.com/2011/05/airbnb-takes-manhattan-with-2k-b...

View on HN

... telling me who I can or can not have over to stay.

They aren't telling you who you can or can not have over, they are prohibiting you from having temporary guests that pay.

Why? Well, an establishment that houses temporary guests traditionally has to answer to health & safety codes and regulations. Under-the-radar AirBnB rentals circumvent that system.

You'd probably get similar kickback if you tried running an informal restaurant out of your home. "Who is the government to tell me who I can and can not serve food!" Well, restaurant health codes, that's who.

I think you're on to something: An AirBnB for supper clubs.

It was tried. Not sure why he closed it. https://twitter.com/housefed/

I received an email with my airbnb listing and couchsurfing listing attached saying I can't keep either online otherwise I'll get a fine.

It wasn't my main source of income, and I'm not running a business. In fact, I'd rather not have someone on my couch every day, I like my space. I'm saying it should be my choice to have a kid from Massachusetts, a student from Spain, or a grandmother from South Carolina, or my family stay.

edit: http://cookitfor.us/

would the loophole here be to just post availability and list an email address then keep all discussions of payment offline?

> They aren't telling you who you can or can not have over, they are prohibiting you from having temporary guests that pay.

Right. Now try to get the average person to care about the distinction.

Guest stays free = okay. Guest pays you = not okay.

The average person can understand that. In fact, most people do. The "benefits" of AirBNB are usually lost on the average person, who cannot understand why someone would rent out their house directly to total strangers.

In High Point, NC they have a bi-yearly furniture market that nearly everyone in town rents their house for two weeks. This has been going on for decades and gave most of the people who did it an extra few thousand a year. It's not as radical as it seems even in non vacation areas.

Vacation spots usually have permissive laws regarding vacation rentals to encourage property owners to rent out their properties during the times of the year they are not using their property. (For example, contrast the permissive rules of Dana Point and Myrtle Beach with the prospective rules of Pasadena and Boston.)

Different considerations apply in communities which are not vacation spots.

I know that's why I mentioned High Point, NC :) Everyone ignored it there even though everyone was doing it.

Well, municipalities have had similar rules for awhile, though more often to be used as a stick against people engaging in arguably socially harmful behavior. And at least in the case of HOA, more often than not a contract was signed in the beginning that explicitly forbids that type of arrangement.

Which sucks, but it is the free market. Just goes to show that contract rights aren't enough to ensure freedom.

if you actually read all the rules of the municipality...every single person in town is guilty of something. It's just a way to enforce rules without looking authoritative.

We aren't telling you that you can't do X...but Article 294-984b, section 49a states that doing X is a $50,000 fine.

HOAs are a whole different beast when it comes to the discussion of markets and property rights.

You choose to join an HOA.

Not really, for most areas you cannot not join an HOA when you purchase a house, and there are no houses that are not covered by an HOA in said area.

thats irrelevant. ultimately, you chose to buy the property, and your name is at the bottom of the contract that says "i hereby agree to follow the rules of the HOA"

check it, i am certain you signed something like this

HOAs make me want to puke. Why did you agree to join anyway?

It's commonplace when you purchase a condo and sometimes even a home. I do prefer to have my building's fire alarms working.

The HOA for a condo generally covers building maintenance, insurance, and other necessary costs that are shared by all of the units in the complex. Thus, if you buy a condo, you do not have a choice about joining the HOA unless you buy the entire complex (meaning the building and all the units*).

Great explanation. Thank you.

Sounds like you bought a co-op, not a condo.

Condo = unit owners own fractional interests in the shared areas (including the building and land).

Co-op = the cooperative owns the shared areas; the members own shares in the coooperative entity.

Both = the entity (HOA/cooperative) pays for the maintenance/other costs of the shared areas. Co-ops collect the money for these expenses through monthly dues and yearly assessments. I do not know how co-ops collect for these expenses.

My unit is a condo; I fractionally own portions of the building and land. My condo pays for the expenses associated with the common areas through monthly dues and yearly assessments.

ever had a neighbor who suddenly decides to stop caring for their property? when you live eighteen inches away from them, it matters. this is the allure of an HOA for some - it enforces minimal standards. you are of course free to not live there if you think its too uptight

Reply on news.ycombinator.com