fuzzbucket

Which is exactly the problem - there are very few of us who actually live in Paris (or Berlin, Munich, London...) and who keep up with the news and are willing to report the facts on travel forums.

There are many "regular members" who work behind the scenes on these same forums to assure that the facts become distorted and whole threads deleted, just because they want to continue renting or renting out their investment properties. Most of the people who live in Paris have been banned from participating in these forums, so that could certainly explain why the information isn't front-and-center. In addition, RS, TA and other travel sites are in the vacation rental business, so have a lot to lose if the facts are not suppressed.

On the other hand, the problem exists in the United States and has been well-publicized. In fact, NY, San Francisco, New Orleans, Hawaii (just to mention a few) have taken steps to ban short term rentals. Anyone who lives in a condo in one of these cities is keenly aware of the problems caused by short-term rentals in their building.

Envierges

"How often do you read le Monde, le Figaro, or le Parisien."

One doesn't have to. One can use GoogleNews to google the latest developments on Paris vacation rentals . . . in English even. It's all there for the reading. Forbes, Wall Street Journal, Guardian among many other.

jubilada

I am not making excuses, I will follow the law because I know about it from this forum, so no adolescent excuses involved.

My point is that it is not as easy for potential renters to be informed as it might be if, for instance, the government required notices about this on rental sites and required listings which are legal to have documentation of this.

Whathello

Very true.

Envierges

"if, for instance, the government required notices about this on rental sites and required listings which are legal to have documentation of this."

And that is exactly what the government is working to do as many have pointed out on previous posts in this thread. This will happen but it will take time. Meanwhile . . .

Sarastro

I think that everyone understands that there are those who rent apartments and have no idea that what they are doing supports illegal activity. Vacation apartment users may completely misinterpret a neighbors friendly greetings in casual passing down the hall or in the elevator and never understand that residents detest having a constant flow of strangers in their buildings. The French tend to be very polite and will not share with you what they really think.

The government realizes the difficulty for tourists in understanding the situation which is why the Sénat is attempting to include rental agencies as part of their enforcement action. Hopefully the implementation of laws requiring agencies to list only apartments approved for short term rental use will eliminate confusion and assure visitors that they are not at risk of losing accommodations by having them cancelled at the last minute or being thrown out by the actions of an unhappy homeowners association.

fuzzbucket

Do any US cities provide a continually-updated government-sponsored list of legal rentals?

There was a discussion at a recent neighborhood residents' organization (after the latest taxi strike) involving the reasons why Uber is a bad idea compared to the regular Parisian taxi system. This evolved into a discussion of the "Uberization" of just about everything else, including AirBnB and other online rental portals.

It was very interesting to hear how many people are affected by "Uberization" in the rental industry, and not always in a good way.

If people don't pay declare revenue and pay taxes, the city must raise taxes, making others pick up the slack. Cleaning people are almost always paid in cash and make less than minimum wage (after the people who employ them take their cut). They do not receive benefits of any kind, so if they become injured or ill, taxpayers must pay for their care. Apartments which were meant to hold two people now hold 4 or 5, and besides being a fire hazard, are often the cause of plumbing or electrical damage to the other apartments in the building, since renters don't always understand how to use the machines properly or there is too much "load" placed on the building's system. This results in costly lawsuits that can drag on for years, especially if absentee owners are involved.

So this "sharing economy" is shared, all right - just not equitably.

justineparis

I have not contradicted myself.. I know most vacation rentals are illegal. I myself dislike using them.. but my husband insists.. and frankly this is not my battle but the cities.. as stated repeatedly.. the renter is not breaking a law.
On my own visits ( without hubby) I happily stay in a hotel.. and did just last summer.

I think its absurd to think most folks go into that kind of research.. sheesh. I don't really know anyone who goes on travel forums but me out of my circle of family and friends.. ( most of them don't even understand why I do)

Its conceit to think that just because you do something.. everyone else must too..

I still know people who go to travel agents for goodness sake.. and travel agents still promote rental agencies to their clients.. so who goes behind their travel agent to double check their booked accomadations are legal.. no one.. because they assume them to be so.. only those who go on travel forums would know otherwise.

It IS NOT in our papers or news.. no one peep..

Paris needs to deal with this issue.. and hopefully more efficiently than they have with the bridge locks issue.. ( they didn't even put up signs.. that would have been sooo difficult.. ) instead they go around after the fact and try and clean up the mess.. which I bet cost more than perhaps just having a policeman or bylaw officer patrol the bridges in question( there are two that are most severely affected) they could stop the people I would see putting up locks ( people are not sneaking around doing this.. but very openly. and then they take photos) .. or perhaps the officers could chase away or arrest the lock sellers..

Is everyone who owns property registered somewhere.. well those who own multiple addresses.. call them in and have them show proof they have long term residential renters in their properties. Those who do not.. simply threaten to shut off utilities to their units.. can't rent a place with no water or electricity.. so no income..
OK perhaps that sounds simplistic. but there must be more ways of dealing with the issue than locals beaking off at tourists who may ( and in most cases are ) be completely unaware they are doing anything wrong.. while the owners.. know exactly what they are doing wrong.

So suggest the unhappy locals deal with the owners.. its really the only way things will change.

justineparis

Ps I have no self serving interest in rentals in Paris.. don't make a dime off them .. and do not promote for one company ( although I have used one I like and if asked for names I provide, but do note this. .until about a year ago I DID assume it was a legal rental because I DID ask the owner about it when it really came up on forums and he assured me he had all the permits and paid a lot for them, I have since learned ( and keep in mind I DO go on forums regularily..opposed to most people ) they are likely not legal even with permits as I doubt they meet the other criteria ..

yestravel

Once again I agree with justineparis. Really, the world doesn't revolve around travel and Paris in particular. To think that the average traveller would know about this & research each aspect of their vacation is just absurd.

Meantime poor kelli--hope she got some helpful info.

dreamon

I think that we should not be renting apartments if that has a detrimental affect on the local community. I also agree that hardly anyone who stays in Paris would be aware of the debate, let alone what the rules actually are or how to ensure their accommodation is legal.

I do find it interesting that these heated debates come up regularly on Fodors and they are always about Paris. Venice probably has a worse problem but no one mentions this. And only in passing, any other city.

I love to travel and, ethical issues aside, would far prefer to stay in an apartment than a hotel if I'm visiting for a week or more (and I don't have any illusions about living like a local). But I'm conscious enough of the negative impact of travel to feel that I should do the 'right thing' when travelling. I also often visit small places where there is no or limited hotel accommodation.

So... where is the line between contributing positively to the economy of wherever you are visiting by staying somewhere other than a hotel and negatively affecting the ability for locals to live locally? How big does a town need to be before it becomes a serious issue for that community? And how do you even know whether your accommodation choices are sound or not? I can't help but think about the debate beyond Paris and question what is right and wrong. It has even influenced my own investment choices.

I sometimes wonder when will my guilt about the environmental, social and economic impact of my travel influence me enough so that I just stay home. We used to say that travel broadens the mind and breaks down prejudice but there are so many people on the move now that I'm not sure that holds true as much today. This is a truly interesting issue.

Pvoyageuse

" Cleaning people are almost always paid in cash and make less than minimum wage (after the people who employ them take their cut). They do not receive benefits of any kind, so if they become injured or ill, taxpayers must pay for their care. "

How do you know how they are paid and what kind of cut take their employer? What has this to do with illegal rentals? Isn't the French social security precisely based on solidarity : we all pay for the care of people who are ill and they reciprocate when we need it. Besides, people who have no social benefits (and I wonder if there are many of them even if they are illegal) can apply to CMU or AME and the end result is the same : taxpayers pay for their care.

menachem

I don't understand. Everyone is well aware of what the business model is for AirBnB (and Uber, for that matter). There have been many, many articles about the exploitative nature of this aspect of the "sharing economy".

@dreamon: The same is going on in Amsterdam. However, people persist in renting sublets this way, because it's cheaper. Where do people think these apartments actually come from? They think there's a surplus of rentable apartments in these cities?

Whathello

As I said there is a part of 'I pay and I don't care'.

And people who care are more likely to check on websites.
People who don't will no make the link between San Francisco's ban on AirBnb and Paris, of course.
The world doesn't revolve around Paris as said by somebody (who probably spends all his holiday in San Francisco).

DonTopaz

The weeping and wailing about apartment rentals -- and especially the nonsensical blaming of tourists -- really misses the point. If the city of Paris truly wished to end or severely curtail short-term apartment rentals, they certainly could find a way to do so. Just like those cities who have done so. Put the blame where it belongs: on the people who make and enforce the laws. You elect them. Either convince them to change the laws/enforcement, or vote in those people who will change the laws/enforcement.

And you might get a tad more cooperation from tourists if your elected officials developed better strategies for strikes, which tend to affect tourists far more severely than they do natives. (Not only because many strikes are targeted at transportation-related functions, but especially because non-francophone tourists have very limited access to advance knowledge of strikes.) While I understand that le droit de la greve is part of French law, it seems to me that it’s the rare politician who says, “Yes, you have the right to go on strike, but we have the responsibility to protect the well-being of the People. So, if you exercise your right to strike, I will do everything I can to eliminate the need for your jobs in the long-term. In other words, your strikes will indeed create short-term pain for the public, but they will absolutely create longer-term job losses for you.”

<not entirely apologetic about this tangent>

menachem

@DonTopaz, where AirBnB and similar are concerned, I'm not so sure, since all AirBnB (and Uber) purports to be is a matchmaking site that lets apartment owners and would be renters connect.

Both AirBnB and Uber can thus reject any responsibility for what happens as an effect of their business model. The law as it stands is aimed at regulating an industry. But AirBnB will claim it is NOT in the apartment letting industry at all! Just like Uber maintains their site is not about taxi services.

You want state oppression because of your holiday? Hahahaha!

kerouac

Yes, I was waiting for somebody to recommend the resurrection of the Stasi to solve the enforcement problem.

Envierges

DonTopaz

" . . If the city of Paris truly wished to end or severely curtail short-term apartment rentals . . ."

You've missed the point. The city of Paris only wants to end the ILLEGAL short term renting of apartments.

As always, owners of apartments who use these apartments as their primary residences will CONTINUE to be able to rent their primary residences for up to 120 days/year. The distribution of the 120 days is not specified.

The Stasi is so imformed.

DonTopaz

menachem, kerouac, and maybe Envierges: Your comments are both stultifyingly stupid and frighteningly offensive. A lawfully elected government has both the power and the responsibility to carry out the will of the majority of the people. That is precisely what I suggested. The DDR did not have a lawfully elected government of the people (sham elections do not count). To compare the responsible action of a lawful government to the actions of the DDR police trivializes the repression of the East German state. Shame on you.

And it is you who miss the point. If the governing body in France has the collective will to end certain types of rentals, they can use their enforcement powers to do so. That doesn’t mean burning down buildings. It would not be especially challenging to make the economic risk of what you characterize as “illegal” rentals so severe as to be not worth chancing. I certainly don’t know French tax laws/penalties, but for example there could be a huge tax on certain types of rentals. And if the income from the rentals is not reported, then the penalties could, for example, be tripled. You need both the will and the type of effective politicians who can accomplish the goal.

kerouac

Well, to finance all of this enforcement, I suggest increasing the tourist tax to about 20 euros a day.