A license is required in Florida. A license is also required in lake county. Sales tax has to be collected and you need a tax id for that. Tangible tax returns must be filed. Any renter not doing this will be fined.

Just wondering, what is the quantifiable harm/damages residents are experiencing? Without being able to quantify damages it would be almost impossible to get an attorney to take the case.

Sumter County needs to follow neighboring Volusia County & set monthly minimum rental terms! 3-months should be the minimum, in my opinion, in the Villages. Volusia had a big problem with weekend home & condo rentals a few years back. Homes on AirBNB were invaded by college kids for weekend stays. That stopped quickly when minimums were established.

Civil cases do not require damages. Just proof of being wronged. There is no need for an attorney one just files documents . If you want an attorney involved, most have no fees unless they win. An attorney will seek damages.

Airbnb problem?
 

You call it an Airbnb problem but I assume your concerns are not directed simply to that web site but to the practice of short term renting in TV no matter where a property is listed. For instance, this very web site that hosts this forum has a real estate section that currently has several listings advertising rentals by the week. Maybe you could direct your concerns here first to gauge the reception and success you receive and then direct your efforts accordingly? Heck, if you are not successful in changing this we site's policies, you may want to try a different tactic.

No, no, you can't! followed by no real support. I believe some are investors, as well.

Once you buy, you are on your own. Don't look to the Villages to enforce any "rules". It's unfortunate since there are numerous instances of clear violations.

Interesting!

We attend the "Great Minnesota Get-Together" every year (state fair, for you non-norski types). Anyone who has ever gone there and NOT taken public transportation to and from knows that parking is a) expensive, b) impossible, or c) both. Lots of people in neighborhoods adjacent to the fair grounds turn their front yards into parking lots for this event, charging attendees accordingly (more if you're close, less if you want a long hike). I find it hard to believe that these homeowners get a license for a "business" activity that is about two weeks out of any year.

The Super Bowl, of course, is different. Big event. Big spenders. Big businesses reaping the profits of (sometimes) hugely overpriced services. Can't have the little guy infringing on that. After all, what are politicians for? Parking? Hey. No problem. Especially as there are few alternatives to those front-yard parking lots.

The common denominator is money. Who gets it, and who is protecting the source. Homes continue to sell at a brisk pace here and If Airb&bs were negatively impacting that, I can't help but think that this "problem" would never have arisen in the first place.

Having short-term rentals available is a great alternative when relatives come to visit. Many of us have smaller homes with limited space, and there aren't that many hotels in the southern part of The Villages. How is the right to rent out one's house to polite visitors infringing on your rights? Sounds like unnecessary griping to me.

Exactly...... thank you for saying it.

We are thinking of moving for the same reason
Another reason first let me make my self clear I love children. That said when Middleton opens and the family units just wait until you have teens drag racing on the cart paths they won’t be visiting children they will be full time. If I was 16 I would have have running the trails so move of all of us old people and make room for the new Villagers

I don't know what the average STR renter is like since I live nowhere near one. But it seems that the posts by those who live nearby dispute the "polite visitor" narrative. Inconsiderate renters who block parking, litter, have loud parties until 3 AM, disrespect their property and so on does not fit into my concept of "polite visitors".

When everyone bought a home in the Villages they agreed to follow the deed restrictions. Shaming a person, asking about their infringement of rights, or calling them hate-mongers is inappropriate. If you do not wish to abide by the deed restrictions, you should not have purchased a home here. If your neighbor paints his house purple and black with an orange garage door how would that infringe on your rights? How would you feel if your entire road was filled with rental property? And, we all sent our guests over to your neighborhood?

How do we contact the developer to express our concerns! We all need to speak up if we love our city!

Probably true enough. But there are a couple of people near us who do that and sometimes more...and THEY'VE been homeowners here for years. Conversely the renters nearby do an admirable job at keeping up their properties and acting considerately toward their neighbors. Recently a house three doors down was purchased by a couple from Wisconsin who will be renting it out (don't know if it is airb&b or not), and they made sure the neighbors knew to call them if things get out of hand.

Lots of "problems" that news sources and discussion groups around here beat to death, really don't seem to be.

I think it all comes down to whether you are a homeowner living in your primary residence or a landlord renting out their investment houses. If you are a homeowner you want peace and quiet, if you are a landlord you want the highest return on your investment. Short term rentals can return much more money to a landlord than a monthly rental. For example, since most monthly renters come in the winter, the monthly rents for a Villages home in the off season can be $1500 a month. Compare that to $150 per night for short term stays. I think these short term rentals are very popular with landlord investors due to their higher returns. Why stay in a hotel when you can rent a whole house for five days? I wonder why the motel and hotel companies don’t seem to be concerned about this intrusion into their business model.

I suppose I should get used to it on this site, but it still amazes me, how many folks just keep posting "FACTS!" they make up in their head.

Here are the "FACTS!" direct from HUD, on how the "count" works. (I believe there has been some minor interpretation changes made through the years.)

https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_7769.PDF

Reality check:

:duck:

There is quite a bit of that old, “I’d love to hold your coat while you go fight,” routine showing up in this thread.

Who wants to spend their retirement fighting a losing battle?

Legislation? HAH! Does anybody actually think enough legislators would look out for the little guy? Of course there are some in legislative positions (at all levels) who are not— and never will be — for sale. But the rest? Many are rented and far too many are owned.

Those who make their full-time home in TV and have been here for years could be beginning to see turnover on their streets as longtime neighbors decide it’s time to go back home or death catches up. Therefore, even the most well established neighborhoods in TV are not immune to the potential for STRs. This could include even the more expensive homes, with all that extra room and pools, too. Could an investor see those homes as all the better to get high rents from big groups of temporary “neighbors”?

And the new neighborhoods? It is the luck of the draw as to whether the new neighborhoods ever get the chance to become real neighborhoods, as brand new homes are bought up by investors who have no intention of settling in and being a part of a community.

TV is one of a kind. That is part of its draw but at the same time, it is a lot like an experiment that has not come to its conclusion yet — and probably will not — any time soon.

Buyers who want to make a home here should add this STR issue to the list of pros and cons that every homebuyer, everywhere, should always make. (But many don’t.)

We bought pre-owned in 2013.

But we did not buy with stars in our eyes.

I have always seen owning in TV as like owning a dividend-paying stock in a corporation…..

The dividend on TV stock has always been “The Lifestyle” — that has been touted as the major selling point since the beginning of TV……..

Like owning any dividend-paying stock, the stockholder must be aware that the dividend can be cut to paying less or cut out all together.

When a stock dividend is cut or looks like it is going to be, the stockholder then decides whether it’s time to hold or sell.

As far as a solution to the issue of STRs goes, I think that ship has sailed. That horse has bolted from the barn.

Those who are upset by this issue can only choose what works for them as individuals. It’s that, “Hold or Fold” thing. Owners might not like either choice, but, to me, it looks like those two choices are realistically it.

But, of course, there will be some who want to go into battle, but there are more who just want others to go into battle so they can sit back and watch.

Save yourself — whatever that means to you and your enjoyment of your personal life in TV or elsewhere. But be clear that the developer just wants to make as much money as possible and the most money to be made is in selling more and more houses. Your wishes do not count. And guess who is holding all the cards.

Boomer

Key word: enforce. You can not enforce from any practical means. Think through how you might go about it. Every solution cost real money to see it all the way through for every individual finding. Are you offering to finance every pursuit? It would be expensive to try and never ending in bound cases.

Great Information.
 

Great info! Obviously The Villages is at least 25% “occupied”, so they must comply. Does anyone know if they have published records of the “surveys” they are mandated to take every 2 years? I don’t think I have filled-out, answered or been called for any survey.

Really? I would think FEWER homes sold would elevate prices, as demand would quickly overwhelm supply. What is your rationale for thinking the opposite?

yes

You do realize there have always been family village areas? Middleton isn’t a new concept, it just an addition to the perks for those who work on TV property.

So when you went to the village that are family homes, how many teens were drag racing on the cart paths. Or have you never visited any of the family units.

But my bigger question is how far are you currently from Middleton, and will you ever drive from your current home weekly to watch what you in vision drag racing on the trails.

What we have observed in over 13 years, the older the residents become, the less traveled they are. Played up at OB couple weeks ago, all 3 were in late eighties. They were complaining about the new family area, just like you. I asked when was the last time you were in LSL… 2 have never been there, and one went once said it was way too far.

So I ask again why would someone who rarely leaves their area, worry about an area they may or may not ever visit. We can’t wait for the new HS to open and drive down (too far in a cart) to see the new campus, that almost looks like a small private college with great perks. We are excited for the new students.

When you googled Clearwater and Indian Rocks Beach did you notice that:
1. The Clearwater ban was allowed to stand because it existed before 2011. It is possible that Florida Statute 509.032 contains the 2011 exemption in order to allow the Clearwater ban.
2. The new regulations in Indian Rocks Beach, which took effect yesterday, do not ban airBnBs or restrict the duration of rentals.

Getting ALL the facts straight is good advice that you should try following yourself.

It is too hard to post every minute detail on this forum. But, thanks for doing that. One poster called me out and stated there were no bans of any kind in Florida. I was merely responding to that.

Did the Villages not have the 80% rule before the STR's came? I believe it is very similar to Clearwater. Not asking any of you to agree with me. Just stop the unnecessary name-calling! And, not certain I am right, just throwing out an idea. GEEZ!

I rented several times through VillagesHomes4Rent while looking for a house in TV and was always charged tax per the county the home was in. I think I may have been charged a state tax, too, some kind of rental surcharge. Maybe that was bogus and I got fleeced?

I think the only way for this issue to be resolved is for The Villages to establish a time limit for rentals, such as a minimum of 30 days, and to consistently enforce the rule. Deed restrictions won't do it, especially the deed restrictions that currently exist. The posters who claim that renting a house is a business and that tenants are customers have a very weak argument at best. Many people consider rental property to be an investment, not a business.

When I tried to get a vehicle removed from a visitor parking space in a courtyard villa area, the deed compliance office told me that the vehicle owner was not violating any deed restriction because he did not own a house in the section. Nevermind that he was also not visiting anyone. He was just storing a vehicle on our property and was not even renting a house. They also told me that renters were not subject to the deed restrictions for the house they are renting.

No, they are correct in collecting the sales tax. The question is did they send it to Florida Dept of Revenue. I would guess probably so. Their business would be shut down if they didn't.

. This is one hell of a crazy place!

No help from us....
 

I know of a rental in the next neighborhood billed as "a Disney hotel without the Disney prices". The neighbors use it as a destination to let their dogs poop! If they have garbage they dump it it that yard. I'm told now the place is getting bad reviews because it looks so dirty. Sometimes you fight fire with fire......:1rotfl:

Too late to establish a minimum time/rental length for existing owners. If a vote to change is held, and an existing owner votes no to setting a minimum length, they are not required to follow the change. If they vote yes, or sell the unit, then the minimum stay is in play. Does anyone else disagree with this?

If a parent works for the villages or in one of the approved businesses within The Village, Yes. Just buying or renting a home here in a family area does no just give access to the Charter schools

I admit that I don't know how the process works for The Villages to establish a new rule. But, are you saying that any Villages homeowner can veto any proposed rule? I don't remember voting to shut down 2 of the 3 movie theaters, or to change the operating hours for the rec centers, or to change the type of roof you can install on your house, or to increase the green fees, or the cost to use the exercise rooms, or to expand the non-smoking areas.

I disagree.
What you're implying is that existing owners...who vote NO would be grandfathered in. You are also implying that "the villages" is an HOA. You are not alone in this assumption. Fact is the villages is simply a planned housing development with covenants just like a lot of other neighborhoods in America. It is governed by an elected governing board of a city or county. Here they call them CDD's. Any covenant enforced by a government body should be considered just like any other zoning ordinance. You cannot have a cow on your property in the villages because zoning ordinance to do not allow it. If there is a rental covenant that comes under the jurisdiction of the CDD it is just like any other zoning ordinance. I have not read the actual covenant on rental or commercial property. I assume it exists because people are talking about it. If the commissioners of the CDD will not enforce zoning then they held accountable at the ballot box. The power is in your hands.

. Not exactly. The deed restrictions say one can sue in a court of law. A judge will rule in your favor. Against you. Or arbitrate a new rule(s) if needed.

FS718 condos, FS720 HOA's

First, I am not certain that The Villages is a HOA (I kind of think it is not). Homeowners do not get to vote on the budget or reserves each year.

If it were, it would follow a similar statute as is in 718.110(13)The Florida Condominium Act, in Section 718.110(13), Florida Statutes, limits the ability of a condominium association to amend its documents to impose new rental restrictions. The statute states that “an amendment prohibiting unit owners from renting their units or altering the duration of the rental term or specifying or limiting the number of times unit owners are entitled to rent their units during a specified period applies only to unit owners who consent to the amendment and unit owners who acquire title to their units after the effective date of that amendment.”
OR HOA Florida Statutes 720
of the Florida Statutes will also clarify that a rental prohibition or regulation that does not apply to a current title holder (because that owner did not consent to the amendment) also will not apply to a subsequent title holder following certain “ownership changes”.

If someone invests in a home with the intent to rent out the home weekly, and there is nothing in the Declaration, Articles of Incorp., or Bylaws requiring rentals to be at least 30 days, then if at a later time the association enacts a rule concerning rentals, the existing owner is not required to follow it.

Exactly! It is about zoning ordinances. Posters have squawked at me for stating the same thing. Our ordinance is a 55+ community. If it falls out of that ordinance because of rentals, the rentals could be banned. This is a similar situation that happened in Clearwater. STRs we're banned because of zoning.

Whitley, that’s an additional can of worms — opened?

We used to own a home in an HOA neighborhood with lovely views from small lots. Parking was at a premium but usually worked out. People parked in their own driveways and most in their double garages. (There were no rentals allowed though.) But if entertaining guests, street parking was sometimes needed. We all usually managed to work that out, too. And nobody ever parked in a place that would impede traffic. It was a low speed, private street. We all vaguely knew each other and everybody was polite — in that way of the Midwest.

BUT! There will always be at least ONE control freak in every HOA. Sure enough the one we had decided street parking should be totally eliminated…..

I think her thing was actually the fact that a couple of neighbors still had teenagers at home and those kids drove cars that ended up parked on the street. Those cars were not the nicest of cars, just functional, first cars for regular kids……

I always suspected had those cars been Mercedes or Porsches, Gladys Kravitz would not have been concerned.

A couple of years after we moved there, Gladys managed to get her wishes for no street parking brought up by the HOA board.

When it was learned from the HOA minutes that Gladys’ request was under consideration by the board, a new sheriff in town emerged and sent an email notice to all neighbors that to change the HOA rules to eliminate street parking could devalue our. . . er, I mean the property of others.

Gladys was stopped in her tracks before she could gain any momentum for her cause. (The new sheriff was quietly applauded.)

Now, I know my little story might look like apples and oranges because we already had HOA rules to restrict renting and nobody ever actually caused a real problem with parking. But it is analogous to what can happen if rules are not there in the first place.

I think that is pretty much what Whitley said. I just happen to be in a typing mood today. :)

Boomer

Nightly rentals involve numerous/ frequent customers at the house and money changes hands. It's nothing but a business.

Yes, I disagree.

In some (if not all) cases, the Developer reserved the right to modify the Deed Restrictions and Covenants.

CDD's a Florida phenomena, so I'm far from an expert, but I believe the CCD's can alter/change/revisit the Deed Restrictions.

I know most of the CDD's believe they can, as evidence by the discussion in some Districts of re-visiting the prohibition against "hard landscapes" in some neighborhoods (the "rock" controversy is somewhat different, in that it also has implications to the District's Environmental/Drainage permit).