That sign in the pillar, if I was driving, I would assume applied to the other lane on the left side of the pillar. I think the intent is to make sure you don't turn left if you are in the right lane of the pillar side, and vice versa.
If a guest were to try this at my Airbnb, I have in my house rules that guests may not disable security devices and an onsite inspection will be performed if they do. And that's exactly the type of guest I would immediately terminate their stay.
Hidden surveillance cameras inside hotel rooms are exceedingly rare. There have been a few isolated incidents where perverted creepy employees installed hidden cameras in rooms but it's not legal or tolerated in the legitimate hotel industry.
There are certainly cameras in hotel public areas where no one has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
And also hotel employees and third party security companies are accountable to the hotels they work for/contract with and often have a handful of cameras watching dozens or hundreds of guests from reasonable distances. Many AirBnBs have 5+ exterior cameras for the single family staying there and who knows who's watching the videos or what they're doing with them. Not to "think of the children" this too much, but there's no way I would take my family to an AirBnB with a pool if there were any cameras pointed in its general direction.
> There are certainly cameras in hotel public areas where no one has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Right and the article clearly states that all the cameras they had trouble with were outside in public areas. I don't think I've ever been in an airbnb that had cameras inside the house.
Ignoring this author for breaking the house rules and thinking he is in the right. The reality is Airbnb's are slowly being regulated away due to both the poor behavior of guests and bad hosts that have allowed guests to remain unchecked. All it takes is one bad stay for your reputation with your neighbors to be ruined. I am on good terms with mine, but realize that, if I hosted a stay that brought too many guests or had a party, I'd lose that good faith instantly.
It takes one bad guest for your neighbors to be against you.
I have exterior cameras (3, recording all exterior entry points) - and noise detection devices. I quickly check the cameras at check-in and then once or twice during each day of stay. Goal is to make sure the number of people matches the reserved guest count and no parties are occurring. I don't allow guests to bring any outside visitors. I have a very strict limit on 6 people max. My house rules can't be any more clear on this - and I've still encountered a few guests that have broken the rules. They risked their stay being terminated without refund.
I charge $725/night for 6 guests - I haven't had any complaints about the cameras. 60+ reviews, 5.0 stars, been doing this for a little over a year. I am super upfront about cameras in the house rules and house manual. If I did not have the cameras, and some of the rule violations I've had, I'm not sure I'd be able to keep hosting (my county requires a special exception). It's tough out there for Airbnb hosts to be good neighbors.
Also, fun fact, Airbnb does NOT protect you from damage causes by pets.
Your paranoia about what bad guests can do doesn't excuse the landlord in the article for being a petty douche. Bringing a friend over who has a pet is not a reasonable thing to prohibit, nor is complaining about his daughter coming "a night early". These are the behaviors of a creepy asshole, not a human being.
It's not paranoia. Illegal parties and large gatherings are a huge problem with Airbnb's. Keep in mind - this article is from the guest perspective, we don't have the hosts perspective. But we have an author who admits to being busted for breaking the rules? Personally, yes, I'd "let it slide" and would not have even broughht it up with the guest. I agree it sounds petty on the host if the author is factual. But my comment is mainly to explain why I have exterior cameras - it's a sad reality that, to be a responsible host, and a good neighbor, I have to have them.
> we have an author who admits to being busted for breaking the rules?
No. If you think the author "admitted" breaking the rules, then we don't agree on how to be a reasonable person while renting someone your property. I don't think anything was in "let it slide" territory. It was in "give benefit of the doubt" territory. It seems pretty clear to me that if what the article said is true, then the author did not in fact break any rules, as others have said to you.
I don't think that, the author states it. Their words - "busted". A reasonable person would not bring a dog to a property where it was already established that dogs are not welcome. What about "no pets" says you can bring a dog, but just for a small amount of time? It's a built-in rule to Airbnb - hosts choose between allowing pets or not. Guests are shown the rules before booking. A reasonable person would message the host first to ask for permission. I don't bring my dog over to a friends house without first asking for permission. You certainly can bring your dog, but you might not be welcome again.
> A reasonable person would not bring a dog to a property where it was already established that dogs are not welcome.
I disagree both that the author "brought a dog to the property" and that a reasonable person wouldn't invite a guest with a dog for a few hours.
> What about "no pets" says you can bring a dog, but just for a small amount of time?
Human reasonableness. Just like like listing says a place can house a specific number of people, it doesn't mean you can't invite more than that number temporarily. The people/animals staying for the night is completely different than guests. That's why.
> it doesn't mean you can't invite more than that number temporarily
We just have a fundamental difference of opinion here :) My own rules explicitly state that I do not allow visitors onto my property (exceptions for service professionals). I also send a reminder to guests within the 48 hour cancellation window on the "no additional guests / no visitors" rule. Insurance doesn't cover them (neither Airbnb nor my STR policy). I have no issues keeping my place booked, and 99% of the guests follow the rules.
Number of guests below six, I'm really not worried about it. But the number of guests on the reservation should be truthful. It's the situations where a guest brings more than six I am trying to prevent. As a host, being a good neighbor is more important than any single guest reservation. I'll end the stay if there are too many people - because it's such a basic rule and emphasized heavily in my listing. If four cars show up, and two people hop out of each car or you bring a dog? Yeah, we're having a conversation and your stay is likely being ended. At that point, I don't know what else you're going to not follow or damage you might cause. It's not worth keeping a bad guest in a nice place that can't follow clear and concise rules.
Honestly, that's absolutely absurd and no one should ever rent from you. Also, reminding someone a couple days before their arrival is no excuse to have confusing and absurd policies like that. Unless your listing makes it really clear "NO GUESTS WHATSOEVER ARE ALLOWED" and make it clear to the renter that that's the kind of person you are, people will assume some level of reasonable leeway. I'd be pretty pissed off if some airbnb listing hid "no guests" somewhere in the listing and then "reminded me" a couple days before I showed up if I was planning on getting together with friends. Uncommon restrictions like that need to have uncommon pains to make clear, otherwise the tentant shouldn't be expected to adhere to your rules.
That's harsh. Reality is, I have no issues keeping my place booked. I've maintained a perfect 5.0 / Superhost status so far on Airbnb - and I generally have no issues with guests following house rules.
> reminding someone a couple days before their arrival
I said I remind them within their free, 48-hour cancellation window. They get a reminder right after they book - allowing them to cancel without penalty if they disagree.
>e pretty pissed off if some airbnb listing hid "no guests"
Uh, yeah, I'd be pissed too. It's a good thing I don't hide it. Where did I say I hide it? I said it is in my house rules - which Airbnb presents to the guest before booking. I then send an automated reply, immediate after booking, so that there is no ambiguity.
Part of the appeal of staying in an AirBnB is to have more flexibility and independence than staying in hotel. But as hosts become more surveillant, at a certain point the roles are reversed and hotels once again become the better place for enhanced privacy and autonomy.
I can relate, as a neighbor frustrated by rogue airbnb guests next door. That being said, as an airbnb customer, I could not imagine a split second renting a place with cameras checking on me. I haven't seen any so far. I may be too 2019, though.
Dog on porch. Some people consider that a breach of the rules. Personally, I wouldn't think it was - the dog didn't enter the house and was only there temporarily. No different than a neighbor walking the dog up for a chat, or a cat/bear/deer/squirrel entering the property.
Why should the landlord believe the renter's claim that the dog stayed on the porch 100% of the time, when he just admitted to lying about the dog being on the property?
> Then he started going on about there being a poop on his property
Really irks me how the author dismisses the landlord's complaint about the dog shitting on his property in this sentence. The landlord has a no pets policy, why should he have to clean up after your friends dog?
Why assume it was the renter's/friend's dog and not some random loose animal? Also, to many people "at the house" means "in the house" - certainly, that's how I interpret it. I wouldn't think twice about a friend stopping by with a dog that remained outside.
The last Airbnb I rented had a "mystery pooper" - gigantic dog poops in the yard every morning. Turns out a neighbor's hound had the run of the area and liked to poop there. I only know it because I heard it outside one night and got the exterior light flipped on just in time. I sure wasn't picking them up - not my dog, not mine to clean up.
Different perspectives, I guess. I'm on 5+ acres, if a guest brought a pet to my property (not just inside the home) - I'd be annoyed about it because it's clear I do not allow pets (service animals being the exception).
Op is probably talking about the additional guest (daughter) a night early and the dog on the property. IMO calling this breaking the rules is a bit of a stretch?
You speak about walking a tightrope with your neighbors and needing a special exception and yet blame for any souring of that relationship falls on guests that you invite to your property.
I had to provide letters of support from my neighbors to the county. I have several house rules - mostly on not exceeding the number of guests in the reservation, providing the names of the guests, acknowledging no visitors, and no loud noise at night. So yes, I'd blame the guest if they brought an excessive number of people to my property, were loud, obnoxious, and otherwise annoyed my neighbors.
I don't have to rent it out, but it is a second/vacation home for me. It's highly profitable and it stays booked. So yeah, I'd prefer to keep renting it (and earning money on it) - the rules/protections I've put in place are to let me keep doing that. My track record so far has kept me on the good side of both my neighbors and guests.
Well yeah, my neighbors appreciated I restored the house that was otherwise not in good condition. It sat empty for years. It was originally designed as a vacation/second home - and was never a primary residence or fully owner occupied home. It's in the mountain on over 5 acres. I'm not fully dismissing your concerns - but reality is, vacation homes are a thing. And they were a thing before Airbnb came around. Yes, I took a risk on renovating a dilapidated property. I worked within the framework the county has for allowing STRs. And I'll protect that investment by putting in restrictions and protections by not letting a bad guest ruin it for me.
I live in the city and it's extremely common for cars to be broken into and/or stolen because of key fobs. It's a common topic on our FB neighborhood group. We store our keys in a Faraday box by the front door now, instead of leaving them out. Not surprised the attack vectors keep growing here.
I was on a business trip in a suit years ago and had to take my belt off. By the time I got through, someone took my belt. TSA agents couldn't find it. Didn't have time to do much else besides suck it up. I was flying w/ a superior mentioned TSA lost it. Not sure if he believed me... but definitely cost a lot to buy a new belt at the next airport. Still had my laptop though.
If you sell software to the government, having a DUNS number is actually a requirement, too. At least to get listed on SAM.gov. You also need a CAGE number. I don't remember it taking me too long to get a DUNS number - and you can definitely avoid paying them any money.
