Phuket condo owners warned 'holiday rentals' less than 30 days risks fines, jail time

[gandalf12]

Its mainly seems a fightback from Hotels which i found virtually empty in Pattaya.

As a long time and frequent AirBnb user ( about +50 rentals in different places over 3 years ) i can say its far better value for money than Hotels:

Lot more space , home feel , big TV , no need to deal with incompetent staff.

Try to ask for an extra fan or something like that in a hotel in Thailand ... When you complain on AirBnb you can something rather quickly.

I have beento some hotel before where water was cold year after year and always given the same sorry excuses.

The that Tourist are annoyance in Asia is rubbish in general while it may make sense in minor case like near walking street in Pattaya

For instance i have been staying at 'The Chezz' in Pattaya and the main noise was due to a hen making noise all the day from the house of a long term tenant , if not owner.

Or the noise of local doing Karaoke in the Philippines ,or their uneducated children shouting all the time.

Or the Thai / Korean living next door slamming doors and putting TV loud.

Or the long term expat which like Thai leaves the door open as a cheap charlie not to pay the air con. Whith childrens from his Thai wife shouting , playing in the appartment or when goingto the pool. Or TV switched on while door is open.

Or the perpetual men at work in the building because all long term owners 'supposedly educated' can't agree on common date to make the repair in the building to ensure that some month be completely quiet , without hammer noise

or whatever.

Or noise due to poor maintenance ( swimming pools , lifts , water pipes ) not broken by tourists.

Or the many dogs barking at night in the neighborhood , not dogs from tourists as well.

Who can claim nois manily comes from tourists, seriously? In my experience its just a small contribution to the environmental noise in Asia.

In the MANY place i stayed in Pattaya , Bangkok , Manila, Angeles City , Cebu , ... 95% of the annoyance ( summarized before ) where due to local activities , not tourists. It might be different in Europe but in Asia thats just laughable.

Asia is noisy by definition so Western tourist can be nice Neighbor because more quiet and also if the rental rate is not 100% some appartment are empty , which is not noisy by definition.

Condominim have rules that should be enough to vote at the yearly assembly to decide wheather short term rental is OK or not. This will give power to the majority so if the majority is doing short term rental its ok for the building.

The real problem is that nobody gives a shit when something goes wrong and its easy to put a blame on foreigners when the local management does not enforce building laws.

For me hotel is a thing from the past.

This will probably impact the condo market because many are built for short term rental. And also Thai governement wants to prevent long term expats so its squeezes the market. But who want to stay in overpriced hotels nowadays in a country

where the fun is gone , if not at the sea side or tourist only spots?

My experience is that it is pretty much the same in Europe

[denkiblue555]

For those posters thumping their chests about their right to do whatever they want with their condo, including renting it out daily, a reminder that you bought a residence, not a hotel room, and one that comes with condo rules to be obeyed, such as no pets, in some cases. An earlier poster mentioned raising pigs and I'll use it, too. If you want to raise pigs, buy a pig farm. If you want to rent rooms daily, buy a hotel or guesthouse. You knew going in that there were rules and laws involved with condo ownership so it's a bit weak to protest after the fact. A lot of the postings have focused on the daily renters being noisy, behaving badly, and not obeying the condo rules and that is a huge problem but it's more than that. If you have a condo with 500 units and just 10% are being offered for daily rental, that means potentially 50 to 100 people or more a day milling about in the lobby with all their luggage waiting to be let into the condos. It means potentially 50-100 people a day moving in and out with all that luggage banging about everything because they don't care--they don't live there and will be gone in a day or two. It means the condos need to be cleaned daily so 50 strange cleaners roaming the hallways with their cleaning carts--and damaging the walls and elevators going in and out all the time. It means 50-100 clueless renters going to the reception desk bothering the staff and wasting staff time asking for another roll of toilet paper and more towels or to solve tourist problems. It means clueless or lazy daily renters not knowing where the trash room is so they leave their smelly trash in the hallway for the 'hotel staff' to remove. It means lazy or too-busy condo owners calling the reception desk and asking staff to 'check-in' their daily renters and show them to their rooms because they aren't there to do it. Meanwhile, regular condo residents have to wade through all this when they go to reception with a normal condo problem. Hope you're getting the picture. There's a reason daily/weekly rentals are against the law with condos and I hope the law will start to be enforced in Pattaya.

Completely agree.

And also add to your points the security issues. Most large condos 'try' to have some sort of security where you need a pass or something to enter the building. The examples above make an absolute joke of any security - as you have that many 'strangers' entering the building that it is laughable.

I think the AirBnB model is great and works well......... in places where there is a shortage of accomodation. Thailand, for the most part, is not one of those places.

As another poster mentioned, if you are cool with daily rentals in a condo you live in then how about if another enterprising condo owner rents their room out not daily, but hourly...lol You still want to live next to that??

[gandalf12]

How does this scenario fit in with this, You buy a condo but dont live there permanently you use it for holidays and breaks between jobs. A friend is passing through Thailand on their way to a job and you suggest he can stay in your condo.

So you dont charge but you are essentially renting it to him for a few days as zero cost. Presumably this is also not allowed. Anyone any ideas on this?

[LivinginKata]

I'm not sure who would rent their condo out for less than a month anyway, perhaps to friends and very hard to prove, I don't think this is targeting those people

<snip>

"I'm not sure who would rent their condo out for less than a month anyway" the millions using AirBnB for a start

I know plenty of condo owners who bought to make rental income. Almost all expected to attract very long stay guests (like year contract) but ended up taking what they could get and signing up with the likes of AirB&B.

[asialife]

Since my post has been deleted I will have to re-post.

How can you say it is off-topic? From the responses, you would think that this only happens in Thailand.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-airbnb-complaints-orange-county-20160519-story.html

Here is a quote from the article:

In Orlando, code does not specify what a short-term rental is, said spokeswoman Cassandra Lafser. If a complaint comes to the city, it would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

In Key West, a license is required to operate rentals less than 30 days.

This gives some perspective to people jumping on the tea money bandwagon. These laws are not only in Thailand. What would the outrage be if the Thai article would read " complaints are reviewed case-by-case."

But if Thailand bashing is the norm, and there is no room to give some perspective, then by all means delete this post again.

Yes yes...we hear you but it is not so much about enforcing the frivolous laws for the benefit of the citizens at large rather it is the intent that is being questioned, it is the intent that is being scrutinized.

It seems that you and others do not realize this effort made by the authorities to enforce the regulations and laws are not based on enforcing the regulations of the Hotel Act for any worthwhile legitimate reasons rather they are throwing their weight around and bullying people into having to stay in hotels rather than choosing to stay in a condo....or say a bed and breakfast affair that could be offered.

The sensible thing to do and what is done in other countries that have a large flow of tourist coming and going is to request the citizens owning condos or houses or properties that could or would rent out those properties on a short time basis to obtain a yearly license for a reasonable registration / licensing fee.

If not done that way then everything does and or will go underground and considered illegal and then the whole innocent affair is criminalized....such is the stupid decision making of the powers that are and the authorities that have vested interests in making sure there is less competition or no other alternatives....all in the guise of enforcing the laws and doing a proper job of it while they can argue they are doing the right thing according to the law...but resulting in their monetary favor and monetary benefit..... of course.

Real smart...criminalize it rather than accommodate it.

Cheers

I'm glad that you could hear me :-)

I hope you also heard that I didn't give my opinion on the issue. It a worldwide problem that lawmakers are dealing with. In Holland for example there is a big campaign from the IRS and social welfare going. But it's clear that the pressure is coming from the parties that are losing money.

Your ideas seem reasonable, but what about the complaints of people who have to deal with these holiday makers? I often rent condos for a week or even less, but I'm pretty sure I'm not a nuisance. However, it's understandable that people are not happy with such a business enterprise next door.

On Airbnb, roomorama etc... home owners list the minimum days you have to rent. Whoops!

[denkiblue555]

How does this scenario fit in with this, You buy a condo but dont live there permanently you use it for holidays and breaks between jobs. A friend is passing through Thailand on their way to a job and you suggest he can stay in your condo.

So you dont charge but you are essentially renting it to him for a few days as zero cost. Presumably this is also not allowed. Anyone any ideas on this?

First, I would need a good calculator

As no money is being charged, nobody is renting / leasing anything.

This thread is about holiday rentals not visiting friends. As far as I am aware Thailand doesn't legislate against visiting friends?

[impulse]

Using protectionism --to attempt to rescue failing business models-- in the past -has been shown to be a doomed solution.

It's government protectionism right up until your condo get burglarized by some "vacationers" because your condo security guys (who know the habits of everyone who lives there- but can't possibly know the transients) didn't notice that said holiday makers were casing the place to see which condos are empty, and which occupants work what hours.

And then, no surprise, because there weren't any formal registration requirements, they have no clue who the burglars really were. Meanwhile, they've moved on to their next unregistered vacation lodging.

And even if it doesn't happen, the fact that it's possible diminishes my right to enjoy being secure in my home.

Going back to my previous post, if the condo association members agree to holiday rentals, I take no issue with it. But I won't be living there.

Edited July 3, 2016 by impulse

[gemguy]

Since my post has been deleted I will have to re-post.

How can you say it is off-topic? From the responses, you would think that this only happens in Thailand.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-airbnb-complaints-orange-county-20160519-story.html

Here is a quote from the article:

In Orlando, code does not specify what a short-term rental is, said spokeswoman Cassandra Lafser. If a complaint comes to the city, it would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

In Key West, a license is required to operate rentals less than 30 days.

This gives some perspective to people jumping on the tea money bandwagon. These laws are not only in Thailand. What would the outrage be if the Thai article would read " complaints are reviewed case-by-case."

But if Thailand bashing is the norm, and there is no room to give some perspective, then by all means delete this post again.

Yes yes...we hear you but it is not so much about enforcing the frivolous laws for the benefit of the citizens at large rather it is the intent that is being questioned, it is the intent that is being scrutinized.

It seems that you and others do not realize this effort made by the authorities to enforce the regulations and laws are not based on enforcing the regulations of the Hotel Act for any worthwhile legitimate reasons rather they are throwing their weight around and bullying people into having to stay in hotels rather than choosing to stay in a condo....or say a bed and breakfast affair that could be offered.

The sensible thing to do and what is done in other countries that have a large flow of tourist coming and going is to request the citizens owning condos or houses or properties that could or would rent out those properties on a short time basis to obtain a yearly license for a reasonable registration / licensing fee.

If not done that way then everything does and or will go underground and considered illegal and then the whole innocent affair is criminalized....such is the stupid decision making of the powers that are and the authorities that have vested interests in making sure there is less competition or no other alternatives....all in the guise of enforcing the laws and doing a proper job of it while they can argue they are doing the right thing according to the law...but resulting in their monetary favor and monetary benefit..... of course.

Real smart...criminalize it rather than accommodate it.

Cheers

I'm glad that you could hear me :-)

I hope you also heard that I didn't give my opinion on the issue. It a worldwide problem that lawmakers are dealing with. In Holland for example there is a big campaign from the IRS and social welfare going. But it's clear that the pressure is coming from the parties that are losing money.

Your ideas seem reasonable, but what about the complaints of people who have to deal with these holiday makers? I often rent condos for a week or even less, but I'm pretty sure I'm not a nuisance. However, it's understandable that people are not happy with such a business enterprise next door.

On Airbnb, roomorama etc... home owners list the minimum days you have to rent. Whoops!

Your points are correct and just more aspects amongst several aspects that have to be addressed.

Meantime as pointed out: The authorities in Phuket do not have the best interests of the condo tenants at heart.

Also as pointed out the authorities have vested interests and that in effect convolutes and adds confliction to the situation all the more.

If the juristic body of the condominium or the condo owners association were to have the condo legalities include a clause that clearly and legally states that no condo can be rented for use as a business or hotel like accommodations or sub leased or bed and break fast type of affair, then, as a potential condo owner, you would decide if that is suitable for you or not.

If that is already in the rules and regulations and the by laws of that particular condo then you are already in violation of the agreement and the condo juristic body will deal with you....not the vested interests Hotel Association of Phuket who are going to write the rules as they see fit and to their monetary benefit.

As I said before: Address the problem with sensibilities rather than criminalize the problem while also making criminals out of the condo owners by way of a separate government entity that lords over and dictates what a condo owner can and can not do because it is in competition with the vested interests that the authorities are involved with.

But this is Thailand and comes as no surprise....rather just more discouraging news to consider.

Cheers

[KarenBravo]

That is going to do the Condo market a lot of good. I assume the Thai's complained and are losing money.

Yes, the THA (Thai Hotel Association) complained about "illegal hotels".

They're hurting real bad in Phuket at the moment, so, any strategy to increase profits....

Edited July 3, 2016 by KarenBravo

[MediaWatcher]

What part of the "Hotels Act" is being broken, under the "act" buildings with less than 4 rooms are NOT classified as hotels.

Just ONCE I would like to see the media, print, and online, do a decent job and ask these very simple, VERY basic, questions.

https://www.mayerbrown.com/files/Publication/208bbcbf-ca11-46c7-be27-db99548b84d7/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/ca281ec2-3c88-4e3b-a172-4b379108e414/alert_jsm_thailand_10jun08.pdf

[Maestro]

What part of the "Hotels Act" is being broken, under the "act" buildings with less than 4 rooms are NOT classified as hotels.

Just ONCE I would like to see the media, print, and online, do a decent job and ask these very simple, VERY basic, questions.

...

Don't hold your breath.

In this particular instance, according to the news article in the OP, the Phuket Land Office Acting Chief Wisith Chokchai sent a notice to all condo projects in Phuket and the Land Office in Thalang sent out notices to all condo units registered in that area. The best we can hope for is that a recipient of one of these notices will write to the sender of the notice to ask what section of the "Hotel Act" is being contravened by letting a condo unit for a period of less than 30 days and then post the answer here.

[regfrancis]

Using protectionism --to attempt to rescue failing business models-- in the past -has been shown to be a doomed solution.

It's government protectionism right up until your condo get burglarized by some "vacationers" because your condo security guys (who know the habits of everyone who lives there- but can't possibly know the transients) didn't notice that said holiday makers were casing the place to see which condos are empty, and which occupants work what hours.

And then, no surprise, because there weren't any formal registration requirements, they have no clue who the burglars really were. Meanwhile, they've moved on to their next unregistered vacation lodging.

And even if it doesn't happen, the fact that it's possible diminishes my right to enjoy being secure in my home.

Going back to my previous post, if the condo association members agree to holiday rentals, I take no issue with it. But I won't be living there.

Air BNB and most Internet bookings require a credit card-

As we have all experienced--Credit isnt available to unverified or creditworthy.

As well with internet deals --Tenancy/landlord references are available and inter-checked between past trips- for owners and guests. If owners are not convinced that the guest is worthy- they can reject the booking. Its not worth risking their property afterall.

I dont know what percentage of deals are done without looking at past history--- but its obviously becoming less all the time as internet dependency grows like wildfire

Edited July 3, 2016 by regfrancis

[impulse]

If you open the door to well run (?) services like AirBNB, you're also opening the door to fly by night operators that enter the fray.

AirBNB is the first of the 3 I's

They're the Innovators, soon to be followed by the Imitators, then the Idiots. And even the credit card required by AirBNB is no guaranty against someone using a fraudulent name on a Pre-Paid debit card, another one of the new and disruptive technologies that's exposing us to all kinds of unknown risks for which we don't yet have defenses.

[camble]

Let the AirBnB tourists spend their vacation in a Thai prison, it will teach the uncouth idiots a lesson for leaving dirty dishes in the hallway. LOL

[gandalf12]

As someone who is in a long term rental I support this. The residents where I live have to put up with transient people who having adopted the 'but I'm on holiday so it doesn't matter' mode show little consideration for others.

Drunks in the pool at 4 am are a pain in the backside- they can sleep in all day, we live 'normal lives. Screaming kids running around the pool all day can get on the nerves as well. One badly behaved child can hold an entire complex hostage

People initially bought the condos where I live on the premise that they would be for residents, not transients. Most have changed hands now, with those purchasing them as investment and income opportunities. This is what the Gov't is clamping down on and I see nothing wrong with it.

Some people will regard me as a misery guts for posting the above but hotels are there for a reason. This is my HOME not a holiday, why should I have it disrupted by people who would not behave the same way when they are HOME.

Its a factor people forget when they start bellyaching and all they can come up with 'well, if you don't like it...............'.

And you are sure all these people of which you speak are short term residents? They could own the condos and still be a**holes did you ever think of that? You don't believe that if you own a condo you have any right to make some cash from it if it is short term then. What if it was rented for 2 months that would be ok but you could still have the same a**holes who rent it. I dont see how the length of the rental automatically gets you a better class of renter, please explain.

[gandalf12]

How does this scenario fit in with this, You buy a condo but dont live there permanently you use it for holidays and breaks between jobs. A friend is passing through Thailand on their way to a job and you suggest he can stay in your condo.

So you dont charge but you are essentially renting it to him for a few days as zero cost. Presumably this is also not allowed. Anyone any ideas on this?

First, I would need a good calculator

As no money is being charged, nobody is renting / leasing anything.

This thread is about holiday rentals not visiting friends. As far as I am aware Thailand doesn't legislate against visiting friends?

In theory it is a rental because a person or persons who are not the owner are staying there

[DaveinAsia]

In a free market/democratic society it should be up to people themselves to decide who stays in their house and for how long and what they charge their guests. I guess some rich Thais who own hotels are hurting because of AirBnB so they make up a law to protect them. Of course it's annoying for long term renters/owners but that is not a reason to not allow it. Go and live in the countryside if you don't like strangers in 'your' pool.

In a truly democratic country, it is up to the people, but rules and regulations exist to protect neighboring peaceso that no one who rents out a room or house suddenly operate their property as a hotel business.

Fair enough, good point. This issue is much more complicated than we think. The court is now in recess but will return tomorrow with a verdict

[NamKangMan]

Why don't Immigration Officers just arrest and deport all these condo owners for "working" without a work permit?

Oh, that's right, most of the owners of these condo's have already left Phuket.

[MediaWatcher]

How does this scenario fit in with this, You buy a condo but dont live there permanently you use it for holidays and breaks between jobs. A friend is passing through Thailand on their way to a job and you suggest he can stay in your condo.

So you dont charge but you are essentially renting it to him for a few days as zero cost. Presumably this is also not allowed. Anyone any ideas on this?

First, I would need a good calculator

As no money is being charged, nobody is renting / leasing anything.

This thread is about holiday rentals not visiting friends. As far as I am aware Thailand doesn't legislate against visiting friends?

Actually, under the "House and Land Tax Act." even if non paying friends stay at your house/condo, you must pay tax.

Read this

http://www.thephuketnews.com/phuket-law-is-your-house-or-condo-an-illegal-hotel-57225.php

[JarekN]

Hope the same happens in Pattaya, that will send the apartment prices of those tiny overpriced shit holes where they should be... way down.

Edited July 3, 2016 by JarekN

[mcfish]

Hope the same happens in Pattaya, that will send the condo prices for those tiny over priced shit holes where they should be...

You want to run your original post through google translate again? I dont think it came out right..

[Dumbastheycome]

Wonder what happens if someone initially wants to rent for a month, then decides once they are here that they will instead stay only for two weeks as the two weeks coincide with their flight plans. How does that get enforced if the initial contract was for a month to comply with the hotels act?

If the original contract is for 1month then they pay for the month. If they choose to vacate before time that is their problem. The purpose of this warning is for those operators that skim on a daily basis or contract for a period of time short of the normal duration of stay and then extort for the remainder. All the while operating outside of "hotel" or other regulations avoiding the conditions set for legitimate tourist accomodation business. It is pointless to compare with domestic accomodation which is outside of the same legislation but which is also theoretically regulated.

Typically the bleating is about the application of legislation similar to Western systems but despite complaints about the lack of it in general it also incites outrage when the suggestion is to apply it.

Want to keep your cake but also eat it? History has already demonstrated that results in beheading !

[Dumbastheycome]

How does this scenario fit in with this, You buy a condo but dont live there permanently you use it for holidays and breaks between jobs. A friend is passing through Thailand on their way to a job and you suggest he can stay in your condo.

So you dont charge but you are essentially renting it to him for a few days as zero cost. Presumably this is also not allowed. Anyone any ideas on this?

First, I would need a good calculator

As no money is being charged, nobody is renting / leasing anything.

This thread is about holiday rentals not visiting friends. As far as I am aware Thailand doesn't legislate against visiting friends?

Actually, under the "House and Land Tax Act." even if non paying friends stay at your house/condo, you must pay tax.

Read this

http://www.thephuketnews.com/phuket-law-is-your-house-or-condo-an-illegal-hotel-57225.php

Which is intended to offset the actuallity of a " friend or friends" who are not actually friends and who pay under the table to visit (stay) in an otherwise unoccupied residence. An owner/ occupier who has friends visit and stay are unlikely to ever be questioned unless there is suspicion that constant visitors are "paying".

[NamKangMan]

Wasn't there some Russians renting condos here on 1 year leases, a while ago, but then sub-leasing them for short term rental on hotel sites?

How can the owner be held responsible for this? They may not be even in the country.

Edited July 3, 2016 by NamKangMan

[ericthai]

Let's consider airbnb will be an easy way to track these 'illegal' renters.

They get busted. Condos get sold en masse in BKK etc. The laundry money built projects that already stand near empty in Chiang Mai to name but one, become valueless as their bank debt goes unpaid.

Property market collapses, becomes jokingly known as the poverty market.

What then Thailand?

To the owners of private condos. Airbnb happily works for neighbours everywhere else in the world. But of course TIT.\

Guess you never seen all the old uncompleted buildings in BKK. they are leftover from the 1997 crisis but guess what, plenty of other companies kept on building condos and at that time Thailand was only getting about 8-10 million visitors a year.

The condo market in Thailand is not doomed just because some people renting their units out are not going to be able to do this anymore. Never fails on TV with the doom and gloom of Thailand guys! I'm surprised nobody has made the comment yet "another nail in the coffin"

[arithai12]

In a well-run condo, it should not matter if the occupants are long- or short-term. There are rules and regulations concerning garbage or pool hours or animals or noise or conducting business, and the juristic person should enforce them regardless of whether the owner is living there or renting out, short or long term.

The real purpose of this "notice" is to appease the hoteliers, who have grievances much like taxi associations against uber. Wait and see.

[ctrunfree]

If this is applied across Thailand, it will have a big impact on how we travel. We use Air BnB (and before that VRBO) extensively not only in Thailand but all over the world, except in places where the authorities have cracked down under pressure from well connected hotel interests. (In New York we opted to stay in Jersey City, a ten minute subway ride from Manhattan, where Air BnB is legal, unlike in NYC itself).

We like to stay in condos/apartments as we enjoy the ability to eat what and when we want, and not be tied to a hotel routine. In Thailand we love hitting the local food markets and returning with our baggies for an evening feast with something nice to drink from the local Vila. Being apartment owners ourselves however we appreciate the comments of those who have had bad experiences with short term renters in party mode. What we like about Air BnB is that it provides the means of reviewing both the rental property and the person who rented it. Over time this should lead to those who establish a track record of being inconsiderate of neighbours not being able to rent.

Fortunately there are still some good hotel apartment rentals available in Thailand. We're heading back to the Anantara near Ratchadamari this week, and have previously enjoyed some of the Marriot properties (not to mention places like Kantary Hills in Chiang Mai). All more expensive, but still providing the facilities we look for. Air BnB did give us the opportunity to stay in different areas of Bangkok-like Ari-where such options weren't available.

I suspect if this policy is actually enforced there will be a significant drop in the value of condominiums. A likely work around would be to officially rent the place for 30+ days, but only actually stay the two weeks or whatever you want. As there will be plenty of empty rooms the price will have to be adjusted accordingly.

[DrDave]

<snip>

A likely work around would be to officially rent the place for 30+ days, but only actually stay the two weeks or whatever you want. As there will be plenty of empty rooms the price will have to be adjusted accordingly.

Yes, but remember that if there are two sets of tenants during that 30 days, then the owner would be in violation of the law.

To be in compliance, the unit would have to either be occupied only by the person(s) that contracted for the entire 30 days, or in the event that they vacate before the end of the rental period, the unit would have to remain vacant for the remainder of the period. No "double dipping".

To make it economically feasible for the owner, the rent would have to reflect the value of a full month's occupancy, regardless of how long the tenant is planning to stay.

[ctrunfree]

<snip>

A likely work around would be to officially rent the place for 30+ days, but only actually stay the two weeks or whatever you want. As there will be plenty of empty rooms the price will have to be adjusted accordingly.

Yes, but remember that if there are two sets of tenants during that 30 days, then the owner would be in violation of the law.

To be in compliance, the unit would have to either be occupied only by the person(s) that contracted for the entire 30 days, or in the event that they vacate before the end of the rental period, the unit would have to remain vacant for the remainder of the period. No "double dipping".

To make it economically feasible for the owner, the rent would have to reflect the value of a full month's occupancy, regardless of how long the tenant is planning to stay.

The question for the owners would likely to be: is it better to get two weeks rent in the month, or to have it empty?

[pattjock]

In a well-run condo, it should not matter if the occupants are long- or short-term. There are rules and regulations concerning garbage or pool hours or animals or noise or conducting business, and the juristic person should enforce them regardless of whether the owner is living there or renting out, short or long term.

The real purpose of this "notice" is to appease the hoteliers, who have grievances much like taxi associations against uber. Wait and see.

Short term renters often don’t know or care about condo rules and regulations. They are often there to party for a week and a few warnings are not going to stop them as they will be gone in a few days anyway, and don’t have to deal long term with the neighbours.

In addition; to deal with all these short term renters the condo need to employ more management, security and cleaning staff that will be an economical burden for the owners living there.