Forums

Somewhere, in a lonely gravel pit in South Dakota, the spirit of a long dead innocent puppy is howling in delight.

Your use of ‘stem’ was correct, I realize once you clarified, as that would aim to prevent municipal legislation on tourist homes steamrolling over the flexibility or specificity of regulations that each building would prefer to control. Stand-alone detached house owners, I assume a very small representation, would likely not want any interference.  From what I understand, what is common between Rio and Barcelona is consideration of affordable housing inventory for locals, though in Rio the emphasis is preventing new multiple family dwelling projects from being undermined by the tourist home economy (I assume a very small proportion of total housing is represented by upcoming projects); in Barcelona the blanket ban goal by 2028 is to increase conventional rental inventory by even a small percentage across all zones (less socioeconomically stratified compared to Rio?) while attenuating the surge of tourism that many locals resent. It appears that condo syndicates in Rio have strong authority in terms of banning ST rentals but the general and practical rule of thumb emerging globally is that both municipalities and condo entities must align in terms of allowing same. It makes sense, as you describe, to regulate internally via building governance and reduce the need for municipalities to exercise regulations for the sake of safety and security, based on headline-grabbing incidents, that seem to punitively override the prerogative of a condo co-owner collective. They can focus on things like tourist tax collection, host permit infrastructure if applicable, and land use legality such as zoning related to defined-purpose building projects.  Prohibiting unregistered guests is a legal no-brainer since from the point of view of the insurance integrated into bookings it is stipulated that the paying booker is liable for damages incurred even by guests “registered” on the booking. Airbnb assiduously assesses incidents on a case-by-case basis for the sake of their own insurance premium management.  Hosts that cavalierly assert the home is yours to use absolutely at your discretion have not necessarily thought it through.

Two weeks ago I walked up and down Patpong 1 on both sides of the street several times but could not find the bar.  

I was there 10 days ago and it was THB 3 100 for one hour. 

Not completely sure I’m understanding you, so maybe that makes two of us! What I meant by “stem” (maybe it was not the best choice of words) was starting self-regulation at the building level so that when or if it ever comes to a vote at the prefeitura (city hall) level, additional legislation would not pass because it would be deemed unnecessary or repetitive. Condo buildings and apartment buildings have their own rules that are voted on from within (by the owners), plus there are city, state and federal laws. I can’t speak to the wishes of every building in my area, but of the ones I do know, most owners would vote to keep short-term rentals as long as it is well self-regulated. But enough bad incidents with bad actors in the toniest, priciest areas of town — especially if given lots of bad press, and even more especially if they involve foreigners / Westerners! — will drive a vote at the government level for more restrictions. Possibly even “the death penalty” for short-term rentals, like what’s going on in Barcelona (although I don’t think this will happen, as there are too many local owners here who enjoy renting their places out). Those regulations could include or exclude room-only rentals. I doubt they would. It is likely to be an “all or nothing” thing. The buildings like mine and the others I am aware of did not exclude rooms-only. And regarding buildings with no doormen, I imagine they would still have the same regulation, but enforcement would occur at a local resident or staff level (meaning, “if you see something, say something”). I do know of one Airbnb male guest who tried to “sneak in” an unregistered pro (female) into a doorman-less building, and after she left (after the deed was done), the owner was asked to remove the guest or be fined. That was probably a very embarrassing conversation for both the Airbnb host and the guest.