Originally Posted by tophcfa
(Post 2225241)
I’ll answer this the best I can, addressing deed restrictions only but not local, state, or federal law. Unfortunately, I felt a need to learn about this because a very poorly run AIRBnB was being operated in close proximity to our home (fortunately the woman running the neighborhood disrupting operation has moved away).
First, let’s talk rentals where the owner of the home is not concurrently living there. There are no restrictions, even for renting by the hour. If you live next to one of these, you are basically SOL. The only protection you have is the hope that the homeowner wants to be a good neighbor, carefully screens their tenants, and rents longer term.
Second, let’s talk rentals where the homeowner rents out space in their home while simultaneously living there. Two deed restrictions come into play in this scenario. A home shall be used as a single family residence and a business shall not be run out of the home. Both of these deed restrictions do not specifically refer to rentals, so an interpretation of the intent of the restrictions is required.
Let’s discuss each restriction:
The intent of single family use is to insure exactly that. It is entirely reasonable for homeowners to have non family member guests visit and stay in their homes. I have some golf buddies that visit for a few days once or twice a year. They are not paying to stay there and are not a revolving door of non stop customers with no other connection to the homeowners other than an income source. Most importantly, occasional visiting guests are not detrimental to the neighborhood and the quality of the neighbor’s lifestyle.
The intent of restricting running a business from one’s home is also an attempt to insure an operation is not detrimental to the neighborhood and the quality of the neighbor’s lifestyle. Someone working from their home on line, who does not carry business inventories or have customers coming and going from their home clearly doesn’t fall within the intent of the restriction. On the other hand, someone running a revolving door rental operation, for profit, with renters (paid business customers) constantly coming and going, creating parking issues, and making excessive noise, certainly does fall within the intent of the restriction.
I get it that both of these deed restrictions are subject to reasonable interpretation of their intent. Given that, I couple years ago I calling community standards to report a poorly run AIRBnB operation in my neighborhood. They informed me that they do not enforce deed restriction violations that are considered internal to the home. I asked who did and they told me it’s the developers responsibility. I asked who I could contact and they transferred me. I asked the individual I was transferred to if he was a representative of the developer, and his response was I am the developer. I then explained the situation in our neighborhood and referenced the two deed restrictions I believed were being violated. He responded that based on my description two deed restrictions were in fact being violated. I then asked what steps were necessary to have the operation shut down. That’s when the backpedaling began. I was told how difficult it is to gather proof of violations and enforce internal deed restrictions as homeowners typically don’t respond to inquiries or aren’t truthful in their responses. It’s easy to see a little white cross on someone’s property, but difficult to prove they are running a rental operation inside the home while simultaneously living there. I mentioned that it’s easy to identify an AirBnB, simply go the the website and see the listing. As I talked with this individual it became very clear that pursuing this any further was an effort in futility as they have made a conscious effort not to enforce these deed restriction violations. As has been previously stated in this thread, the deed restrictions say that violations may be enforced, not that they shall be or are required to be enforced. One can speculate about the motives behind the developer’s decision to not enforce these violations, but they clearly acknowledged the violations and have chosen to exercise their right to not enforce them. In my opinion, selective enforcement totally discredits the whole intent of having deed restrictions at all.
So anyone living in close proximity to one of these poorly run businesses has two hopes. First, the homeowner suddenly decides being a good neighbor is more important than generating income from their home, or they have a conscience and don’t want to knowingly violate deed restrictions even though said violations are not enforced. Second, the deed restrictions are enforced, which appears won’t happen. The only way I can reasonably see the deed restriction violations possibly being enforced would be if another third party is charged with the responsibility of enforcement, or if new homebuyers, in large numbers, express hesitation of purchasing new homes to their Villages sales representatives because of the out of control short term rental situation.
Hopefully this information will shed some light on the situation : )
|
