Live data from Hacker News

Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

polygon.com

71–80 of 98 posts

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#71
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure these are "never before seen corner cases". This kind of stuff is pretty much Landlording 101, and it's standard practice for someone engaged in renting a property to know about eviction laws. This person wasn't even engaging in what you might call the new, casual-sharing-of-personal-possessions style of rental, where someone rents their own personal apartment out occasionally while they're on vacation.…

But Airbnb, as a service, should at least filter/advise for knowingly stupid things like renting out for such an extended period.

If they're going to that effort, then why can't they filter for knowingly illegal things, like short-term rentals in cities in which this practice is illegal?

I don't see them doing either one anytime soon, since it presents a major PR/deniability problem.

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#72
post #19

In some ways, this is the dark side of disrupting established industries: legal protections aren't in place yet; it's not clear what recourse people caught in never before seen corner cases have. We (e.g. HN folks) are quick to applaud people with new ideas that are shaking things up (e.g. Airbnb, Uber, etc.) I suspect this is the sort of scenario detractors (e.g. Seattle City Council re: Uber) are worried about. Ter…

You seem to be confused about what legal protections are or are not in place, and whom the law protects. This isn't some loophole or edge case in the law, this is an explicit protection for lessee which is written into the law for a specific reason. "Legitimate slumlords", if you can tolerate such a concept, are well aware of this provision, and will bodily remove you and your belongings from their flop houses on the 29th day.

This is just an example of a person with barely enough capital to dabble in capitalism and lose. They thought they were going to flip a condo into rental income, skirted the law -- one wonders what other shortcuts were taken; did they have an occupant's insurance policy or a landlord's policy? did they take out a mortgage under the pretense of occupancy? Are they taking income tax interest deductions and claiming homeowner's property tax exemptions -- and pretty much got what they had coming.

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#73
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a sms exchange here [0] where he does in fact say he does require electricity, and if they cut it off, he will press charges for blackmail and damages. Unfortunately it seems it will only be resolved with a lengthy eviction process. It is also interesting that there problems within the first few days. [0] http://www.businessinsider.com/airbnb-host-cant-get-squatter...

I wonder if a whole-house version of a lamp timer would be useful in this situation? Suppose there were a device that turned off power on a schedule, and which could only be reset from inside the apartment. Power would turn off automatically 12 hours after the lease terminates to "save power in an unoccupied unit." That way, the owner isn't turning off power to constructively evict, but the power is off all the same.

"Pacific Heights", 1990 starring Melanie Griffith, Matthew Modine & Michael Keaton. SF based movie showing Michael Keaton abusing renters rights and even having the home owner arrested after turning off his electricity. Fantastic film, these guys (definitely scumbags) unfortunately might be in the legal right. Very unfortunate.

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#74
post #19

In some ways, this is the dark side of disrupting established industries: legal protections aren't in place yet; it's not clear what recourse people caught in never before seen corner cases have. We (e.g. HN folks) are quick to applaud people with new ideas that are shaking things up (e.g. Airbnb, Uber, etc.) I suspect this is the sort of scenario detractors (e.g. Seattle City Council re: Uber) are worried about. Ter…

It is unclear to me if one could pull the same thing at an actual hotel or not. Assuming you could find a hotel that had a room available for more than 30 days, would they book you for that long? Or do they already have a policy against that for this very reason? Or do they have some different protection under the law that makes it easier to make you leave when your stay has ended?

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that not mean you could live in the house too with a nice guard dog?

They probably could sue you for tenant harassment.

Please see: Pacific Heights (1990)

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#76
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Airbnb, as a service, should at least filter/advise for knowingly stupid things like renting out for such an extended period.

If they're going to that effort, then why can't they filter for knowingly illegal things, like short-term rentals in cities in which this practice is illegal? I don't see them doing either one anytime soon, since it presents a major PR/deniability problem.

They're pretty much knowingly illegal as a business model, but that doesn't mean they can't protect their own users from simple abuses.

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#77

Whatever happened to physically grabbing someone and violently throwing them out of your house?

You cannot violently throw a tenant out of their apartment, because that is a violent crime. You can violently repel an intruder in self-defense, but if you have actually rented an apartment to someone, they are not an intruder. If, after first renting to them, you later believe they should leave—and they disagree—then you have a dispute about the terms and duration of rental. (It might be a really one-sided dispute…

I see, so she will just have to co-exist with them.

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#78
post #19

In some ways, this is the dark side of disrupting established industries: legal protections aren't in place yet; it's not clear what recourse people caught in never before seen corner cases have. We (e.g. HN folks) are quick to applaud people with new ideas that are shaking things up (e.g. Airbnb, Uber, etc.) I suspect this is the sort of scenario detractors (e.g. Seattle City Council re: Uber) are worried about. Ter…

> In some ways, this is the dark side of disrupting established industries: legal protections aren't in place yet... That's simply not true. The homeowner voluntarily agreed to rent her home to someone for more than 30 days. On the 30th day, that person became a tenant and gained certain rights under the law. The homeowner still has legal rights of her own, but the nature of the rental she agreed to means that she wi…

Airbnb makes it easier for naive or unsophisticated "landlords" to rent out their properties. Yes, those would-be landlords should educate themselves about what they are getting into. But you could argue that Airbnb, by dint of its existence and its success, is lowering the barriers to entry for the would-be landlords of the world -- and thus bears a social and ethical, if not necessarily a legal, responsibility to educate or protect those people from common mistakes. And besides, it's just good business to watch out for your customers.

The woman in question was not aware of the problems involved in 30+-day leases. We can fall back on the idea that she was ignorant, and that she got what was coming to her. True. But that's victim-blaming, and it's only half satisfactory. She is the kind of person who would not have invested in, and rented out, a property without the existence of a hand-holding site like Airbnb. Accordingly, Airbnb should do its part to ensure that people like her -- people entering the market because of Airbnb, and who are presumably unsophisticated -- are reasonably protected from rookie mistakes.

I don't think Airbnb is to blame here. I don't think Airbnb owes her any money. But I do think it should be thinking very carefully about how to retool its process, so that situations like these don't pop up again. Not for legal reasons, but for UX reasons. Airbnb operates a two-sided marketplace, and maintaining that two-sided marketplace means balancing the needs of both sides of the market.

It seems that Airbnb is offering to assist her with her legal expenses, and I applaud them for that. No, they probably don't have to do that. But "We don't have to" is a pretty lousy excuse to fall back on. Customer service matters, even if it means protecting your customers from their own mistakes (within reason).

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#79
The most interesting part of the article, for me, is that they moved the nexus of their corporation from two tax free states to California. I doubt they realize the tax and legal implications of being residents rather than just visiting CA on holiday.

Re: Notorious Airbnb squatter may be the dev behind two flailing Kickstarter games

#80
post #19

In some ways, this is the dark side of disrupting established industries: legal protections aren't in place yet; it's not clear what recourse people caught in never before seen corner cases have. We (e.g. HN folks) are quick to applaud people with new ideas that are shaking things up (e.g. Airbnb, Uber, etc.) I suspect this is the sort of scenario detractors (e.g. Seattle City Council re: Uber) are worried about. Ter…

These scenarios are why AirBnb can make money (IMO).

If you think about it simplistically, AirBnb sidesteps regulation. As a result, the biggest use-case for AirBnb is leases that are supposed to be against regulations.

AirBnb can't avoid messes AND regulations. Avoiding regulations is their profit model! With that comes messes. But that's OK for them- they have pretty successfully outsourced the risk to their hosts.

That's the thing that annoys me the most about Uber and AirBnb. They are no fools; they know what they are doing. And when you boil it down, what they are doing smells a lot like what the banks did running up to 2006- socialize the risk, privatize the profit.

Post reply on HN