[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by oldtimes

They are considered a business by the state
Airbnb & Short Term Rental Laws and Restrictions in Florida

Originally Posted by Normal

By law they would have to be if they paid for the property use there was a monetary transaction. Law can differentiate for long term with the verb ages “One Time” written in. This term could be fulfilled if time exceeded a month.

But business aren't banned in the Villages. What are banned are businesses that keep inventory at the home or have customer/clients visiting the home.

Beds and towels are not inventory and occupants are not visiting customers.

But hey, I'm not a lawyer. Go talk to a lawyer and if he/she agrees with you then take the homeowner to court. Don't stop at section 2.10 of your deed restrictions, keep reading down to section 5. Don't look to others to fight your battles for you, do your duty that you agreed to when you signed the deed restrictions.

[golfing eagles]

"U.S Cities That Have Limited Airbnb Operations

New York City is the largest tourist destination in the U.S. and the leading market share for Airbnb. The city has raised concerns that two-thirds of the rental listings on Airbnb are illegal. To curb this trend, NYC introduced laws that necessitated Airbnb and other home-sharing companies to provide details of all rental units in their database. However, Airbnb challenged this policy in court, citing violation of privacy.

San Francisco, which hosts Airbnb, has also implemented even more stringent laws than those in NYC. Only full-time residents can list their units with Airbnb. This policy has helped them see a significant decline in Airbnb rentals.

Moreover, the hosts must register their units with the city officials to facilitate licensing. Those found in violation of these policies have to pay huge fines depending on the number of days rented.

Santa Monica in Southern California has instigated even stricter measures than those in San Francisco. The rules have seen the delisting of 80% of vacation rental units on the Airbnb website.

The laws obligate the host to be living in the residence during the vacation renting. The host must also register with the city officials and remit 14% occupancy tax. These measures have been in effect since 2015 and have adversely affected Airbnb operations in Santa Monica.

Should a City Ban Airbnb?

Local governments have an obligation to safeguard and protect the interests of the public. Through regulations, they can decide whether or not to ban the operations of any company. However, companies also have rights that local governments ought to uphold.

Before banning a company, the adverse effects need to surpass the greater good. Local governments should weigh the benefits a company has against its harmful effects. They also need to look further and see if these adverse effects can be mitigated."

So, the answer is that it(banning STRs) can, and has been done.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by Papa_lecki

If short term rentals are banned, does that mean long term rentals are too?
Isn’t the only difference the term - both are businesses?

Rentals aren’t against deed restrictions regardless of the length, what is against deed restrictions are rentals of space in one’s home while the homeowner is simultaneously living in the home. This violates two restrictions, the home is not being used as a single family residential unit and a business is being run from the home.

Unfortunately, these deed restrictions are worthless without enforcement and the developer has made a conscious decision not to enforce them. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why, the developers primary objective is to sell new homes at full value and limiting rentals would reduce demand from a segment of potential home buyers. If home sales significantly slowed down because home buyers were expressing concerns about AIRBnB’s, enforcement would rapidly become a top priority. $$$$ talks.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Rentals aren’t against deed restrictions regardless of the length, what is against deed restrictions are rentals of space in one’s home while the homeowner is simultaneously living in the home. This violates two restrictions, the home is not being used as a single family residential unit and a business is being run from the home.

Unfortunately, these deed restrictions are worthless without enforcement and the developer has made a conscious decision not to enforce them. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why, the developers primary objective is to sell new homes at full value and limiting rentals would reduce demand from a segment of potential home buyers. If home sales significantly slowed down because home buyers were expressing concerns about AIRBnB’s, enforcement would rapidly become a top priority. $$$$ talks.

If two families cannot occupy the same home at the same time then any of us with non-family visitors must be in violation also. Do you really think having my friends from MD come stay with me is a violation?

As far as complaining that the Developer is not enforcing what you believe to be a violation....

Originally Posted by Bill14564

But business aren't banned in the Villages. What are banned are businesses that keep inventory at the home or have customer/clients visiting the home.

Beds and towels are not inventory and occupants are not visiting customers.

But hey, I'm not a lawyer. Go talk to a lawyer and if he/she agrees with you then take the homeowner to court. Don't stop at section 2.10 of your deed restrictions, keep reading down to section 5. Don't look to others to fight your battles for you, do your duty that you agreed to when you signed the deed restrictions.

[tophcfa]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

If two families cannot occupy the same home at the same time then any of us with non-family visitors must be in violation also. Do you really think having my friends from MD come stay with me is a violation?

As far as complaining that the Developer is not enforcing what you believe to be a violation....

I’m not wasting my time going over this yet again with you.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

I’m not wasting my time going over this yet again with you.

At this point I think it's pretty clear who is renting out their home and who lives next to a rental.......

[Papa_lecki]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

"U.S Cities That Have Limited Airbnb Operations

New York City is the largest tourist destination in the U.S. and the leading market share for Airbnb. The city has raised concerns that two-thirds of the rental listings on Airbnb are illegal. To curb this trend, NYC introduced laws that necessitated Airbnb and other home-sharing companies to provide details of all rental units in their database. However, Airbnb challenged this policy in court, citing violation of privacy.

San Francisco, which hosts Airbnb, has also implemented even more stringent laws than those in NYC. Only full-time residents can list their units with Airbnb. This policy has helped them see a significant decline in Airbnb rentals.

Moreover, the hosts must register their units with the city officials to facilitate licensing. Those found in violation of these policies have to pay huge fines depending on the number of days rented.

Santa Monica in Southern California has instigated even stricter measures than those in San Francisco. The rules have seen the delisting of 80% of vacation rental units on the Airbnb website.

The laws obligate the host to be living in the residence during the vacation renting. The host must also register with the city officials and remit 14% occupancy tax. These measures have been in effect since 2015 and have adversely affected Airbnb operations in Santa Monica.

Should a City Ban Airbnb?

Local governments have an obligation to safeguard and protect the interests of the public. Through regulations, they can decide whether or not to ban the operations of any company. However, companies also have rights that local governments ought to uphold.

Before banning a company, the adverse effects need to surpass the greater good. Local governments should weigh the benefits a company has against its harmful effects. They also need to look further and see if these adverse effects can be mitigated."

So, the answer is that it(banning STRs) can, and has been done.

Coronado, CA banned all short term rentals.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

At this point I think it's pretty clear who is renting out their home and who lives next to a rental.......

If you are referring to me as the person renting out my home, then you need much more emphasis on the "pretty" part of that... I never have and I don't expect I ever will.

I am not a proponent of rentals but neither am I against them.

I am just frustrated at the selective reading and misreading of the deed restrictions by some posters followed by their whining that daddy Developer isn't doing his duty and fighting their battles for them.

"It's the law!" Well no, it really isn't.
"The Developer is neglecting his duty!" Well no, it isn't his duty. However, it *is* every homeowner's duty so go talk to a lawyer and proceed.

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by asianthree

Renting in TV has always been big, abnb is just a newer avenue, of site exposures. Still guessing TV isn’t the top rated area for families going to parks, unless they have family here. But that’s just my opinion, and the last 3 summers seem to have less and less kids in TV, at the pools and kids camp.

Stayed at 2 bed condo, from a Disney influencer, 11 minutes to MK parking, $81 with tax, very clean, No parking fee, and a great pool, restaurants, safe area,( if that really exists anymore). Marriott points, is really cheap, and a great resort stay, not Abnb but far less than anything in TV

And do you get a golf cart with that so you can ride the kiddies around and entertain them when not at Disney? Personally, I’d drive the 45 minutes from the south end of The Villages and stay here rather than super congested Orlando. We don’t do Disney but I’m thinking many plan this way, particularly if grandparents live in The Villages.

The last three summers of lower numbers of children are due to covid and inflation. There are upsides to some because of these issues.

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Papa_lecki

Who’s reporting all the people who actually run a business out of their house?

The people who sell stuff at the market days (i.e. the golf cart screen guy) - actually keeps inventory at home
The handi man or landscaper….

But does the screen guy actually sell them from his house, with people coming and going all day long? My guess is no...

What about the CPA, working from his/her home office? That's allowed, right?

[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

If two families cannot occupy the same home at the same time then any of us with non-family visitors must be in violation also. Do you really think having my friends from MD come stay with me is a violation?

As far as complaining that the Developer is not enforcing what you believe to be a violation....

Don't be absurd. Having houseguests for a week or two is not a violation...

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

If two families cannot occupy the same home at the same time then any of us with non-family visitors must be in violation also. Do you really think having my friends from MD come stay with me is a violation?

As far as complaining that the Developer is not enforcing what you believe to be a violation....

It might be if you CHARGE THEM RENT for their stay.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

It might be if you CHARGE THEM RENT for their stay.

I'll take a "might be." My objection is to "absolutely is."

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

If you are referring to me as the person renting out my home, then you need much more emphasis on the "pretty" part of that... I never have and I don't expect I ever will.

I am not a proponent of rentals but neither am I against them.

I am just frustrated at the selective reading and misreading of the deed restrictions by some posters followed by their whining that daddy Developer isn't doing his duty and fighting their battles for them.

"It's the law!" Well no, it really isn't.
"The Developer is neglecting his duty!" Well no, it isn't his duty. However, it *is* every homeowner's duty so go talk to a lawyer and proceed.

Fair enough. Would it also be fair to say that you do not live next to a revolving door motel to drunken 20 somethings that party all night?

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

I'll take a "might be." My objection is to "absolutely is."

I wouldn't say that---I doubt anyone on this site knows absolutely for sure.