Province of BC new Short Term Rental Legislation

[Lorne18]

There are many hosts that have been affected by the British Columbia provincial government's new legislation which restricts Short Term Rentals (STR) to primary residence only. This legislation was announced and implemented without consultation with industry hosts, and without any notice. This new legislation affects those hosts who may have only one STR and is licensed and complies with by the applicable city bylaws and regulations. A fine of $3000 per day has been imposed for noncompliance. The new legislation has been enacted to create more long-term rental properties, however, creates dire hardship for those hosts that rely on the short-term rental income to support their family and retirement income. The new legislation will also have a significant impact on tourism in BC, and for families to have access to cost efficient options for private homes that can be shared with other families and allow for cooking facilities to reduce high food costs. 

[Helen3]

I'd be incredibly surprised if no consultation had taken place at all around the introduction of a new STR piece of legislation or that it was introduced with no notice . Most take a couple of years to go through and have extensive consultation. @Lorne18 

in the first part of your post you say hosts can do STR for their primary residence and then later in your post say the legislation impacts on families with one home - which is it? @Lorne18 

What new requirements do you need to meet to run your STR business .

I can see you are a new host - is this an investment property -  a quick search on Google shows there is a good amount of coverage online/in the media so surprised it didn't come up when you did your market research . 

in fact it was talked about by your local government as far back as 2021 https://www.ubcm.ca/sites/default/files/2021-11/Policy%20Areas_Housing_Priorities%20for%20Short-Term...

[Paul7222]

Hi @Lorne18 

Thank you for bringing this forward to the community.  

I think that everyone would agree that housing in British Columbia is an issue and that overall 'balance' is needed.  

However, the Eby government is painting the entire situation with the same brush.  Another major change is to the definition of short-term from less than 30 days to less than 90 days! This policy is ignoring all the people that actually do need 1-3 month stays in BC.  

- Doctors and nurses on 1-3 month work assignments - our healthcare is already in crisis!

- patients getting treatments

- new immigrants adjusting to life in Canada

- Construction workers, who build the apartments we need

- Canadians returning to BC and looking for permanent housing

- people on temporary work assignments, contributing to our economy

- the list goes on

The change from 30 to 90 days for short-term stays is nothing but short sighted thinking of David Eby NDP government.  It will not only affect the people that work hard as long-term hosts, but also the people that contribute to our economy.

[Joshua977]

Hi @Lorne18 , I totally agree with what you're saying about the negative impact these changes will have on owners and the economy. Short-term rentals enabled our local hospital to remain open during COVID and the recent highway closures to HWY 4 on Vancouver Island. They provided places for people to stay when their communities were evacuated due to flooding and fires. They offered companies affordable ways to temporarily house their crews as homes and businesses were being constructed. We're proud to have been apart of all of this.

I've experienced homelessness and it took me years to own my first house. As someone who's been without a home, I feel strongly that it shouldn't be the responsibility of home owners to house the public and take on the burden of unplanned immigration. Nor should it be the responsibility of homeowners to manage peoples mental health and/or social issues. Furthermore, short-term rentals are not the cause of the housing crisis! 

My wife and I have tenants in one of our properties and we haven't raised the rent since they moved in 6 years ago - contrary to remarks made in the media, we're not greedy rich people trying to take advantage of others. One one of our other properties is listed as a short-term rental and it will no longer qualify with the new legislation because we don't live there - our daughter does. Prior to it being listed, we had incurred over $20,000 in damages from our tenants, and it was heart-wrenching to say the least.

Perhaps we'll all need to come together and vote accordingly in the next election. I'd be curious to know who others are voting for and if Airbnb has some suggestions. I believe BCUnited was advocating for hosts, and even tried to negotiate 4 amendments to the legislation before it was passed. Obviously, those requests were rejected.

If you hear of any ways we could keep our other property listed without penalties please let me know.

[Paul7222]

Hello @Joshua977

There is a new organization out of Victoria that is trying to make our voices herard:

propertyrightsbc.org

Also, here is a video link from them:  https://screenpal.com/watch/c0XnDkVEPTo 

And, their latest newsletter:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1euxwfRLUMzK9HHoEiwpPcSnjqSsbZBrU/edit

[Joshua977]

Much appreciated!

[Joelle325]

Hi Joshua,

I've just spoken to airbnb twice now and they say they know nothing of what's going on and not sure as to how it will affect us if we cancel our upcoming bookings.

As stated  "Companies such as Airbnb and VRBO have until next May to comply with the new rules but if someone has booked a short-term rental for next summer, they need to make sure they will still be able to stay there."

how do they are have updated info for us yet as to how we all proceed for cancelling our booking without a penalty?  Do you know?

[Joelle325]

Hi Lorne,

I've just spoken to airbnb twice now and they say they know nothing of what's going on and not sure as to how it will affect us if we cancel our upcoming bookings.

As stated  "Companies such as Airbnb and VRBO have until next May to comply with the new rules but if someone has booked a short-term rental for next summer, they need to make sure they will still be able to stay there."

how do they are have updated info for us yet as to how we all proceed for cancelling our booking without a penalty?  Do you know?

[Tara942]

Hi Joelle,

I cancelled all of my summer bookings and Airbnb suspended my account for a week and tried to fine me hundreds of dollars. I called them and it got  sorted out. They absolutely do know about this now, they issued a public statement. This is a huge economic inconvenience for me. It is not my primary residence, but I did put all my saving into it with the intention of Airbnbing it out. 

[Renee720]

Are you interested in a temporary longer term rental for something like 3 to 6 months?  From May 1st. 

[Lodge102]

The recent legislation by the British Columbia provincial government, which limits Short Term Rentals (STR) to primary residences only, has sparked significant concern among hosts and stakeholders in the STR community. This move, aimed at creating more long-term rental properties, has imposed a considerable challenge for hosts who relied on STR income for family support and retirement, as well as impacting the tourism sector in BC. The legislation includes a hefty fine of $3000 per day for non-compliance, stirring anxieties about the future of hosting on platforms like Airbnb and VRBO.

@Joelle325, you've highlighted a critical point of confusion and concern regarding the transition phase, especially about the cancellation of bookings without penalties. It appears Airbnb was initially uncertain about the legislation's impact, though they've since made public statements acknowledging the new rules. For hosts wondering about proceeding without penalties, direct communication with Airbnb's customer service might provide some clarity and potentially penalty-free cancellation options, given the external circumstances imposed by the legislation.

@Tara942 and @Joshua977, your experiences and perspectives underscore the multifaceted impacts of this legislation, from economic disruptions to the broader social contributions STRs have made, particularly during emergencies and to various sectors requiring temporary housing. Joshua, the mention of BCUnited and your efforts to navigate these changes speaks to a collective need for advocacy and potential legal or regulatory avenues to mitigate the legislation's effects.

For those affected, exploring support and guidance through newly formed organizations like propertyrightsbc.org, as suggested by @Paul7222, could offer avenues for collective action and representation. Additionally, the change in the definition of short-term from less than 30 days to less than 90 days, as Paul also notes, magnifies the scope of impact across various stakeholders, including those in need of temporary accommodations due to work, healthcare, or immigration circumstances.

@Helen3, your skepticism regarding the process of introducing this legislation is notable. While it's essential to verify the extent of consultation and notice provided, the expressed concerns from hosts suggest a gap between the policy's intent and its perceived and actual impacts on individuals and the broader community.

For everyone involved, staying informed through direct communication with platforms like Airbnb, seeking advice from organizations advocating for property rights and host interests, and exploring all legal and political channels available may provide some pathways forward. Additionally, engaging in dialogues with policymakers to ensure a balanced approach that considers the diverse needs of homeowners, tenants, and visitors to BC could be crucial in navigating the challenges posed by this legislation.

[Joanne938]

I hope there is collective action not just about stopping these STR changes but suing for current damages as well as what is projected to impact people with the financial stress, loss of income and the health consequences of that. No one expects Canadians to be on the offence - we are all too nice. These STR changes are one of many happening behind the scenes that will eventually make it more and more impossible for regular people to own homes in Vancouver, then BC and eventually Canada.  The United Nations driven UNDRIP strategy has already made headway in Vancouver, with the aim of eventually hitting BC and the rest of Canada.  Notice how in schools, business communications and even churches for more than a decade we are repeatedly acknowledging that we are living on ceded (stolen) land.  That would be predictive programming and the next step that is already underway in Vancouver that will be an additional UNDRIP home tax that when added to mortgages, property taxes and other taxes will have the outcome of a large portion of home owners being pushed out. Approx 62% of Vancouver house holds own their home and this percentage is going to drop substantially.  Non-home owners will support these measures because homeowners are presented as wealthy - no one understanding the long term ramifications on the society as a whole.  I believe the STR regulation changes are part of this larger land grab using fake concern for rental shortages when it comes to STR's and fake concern for Indigenous people when it comes to UNDRIP.  There are indigenous activists highlighting that UNDRIP is a UN program massive land grab masquerading as restitutions.  UNDRIP will not bring the right to self governance of indigeneous people like the narrative is selling.  And to speak out about the STR changes makes you rich/bad and to speak out about UNDRIP makes you a racist/bad.  It's all very clever going one step at a time.  People not effected by the STR changes now might not be worried but it will impact them eventually too.  By doing it step by step they stop larger amounts of people from protesting all at once.  And if anyone believes that the powers that be care about Indigenous people,  consider that prior to covid some 3 people dying from fentynal a day has risen to 7 a day, with indigenous people being over represented in those deaths.  There is nothing Canadian governments have done or will do to improve the situation for Canadians, including Indigenous.  Very likely all part of the 15 minute city agenda's - we will own nothing and be happy.  I know someone that was working with an Indigenous politician to get clean water into all the reservations and he was later told to abort the program because there was "no political will."  He was later threatened when attempting to offer the water system for free to one reservation so they could demonstrate the positive health outcomes. 

[Paul7222]

Hi @Lorne18    @Joshua977 @Joelle325  @Tara942 

Have you all seen the part of the government’s new STR changes regarding  the Principal residence requirement and the changes to legal non-conforming use?    See below.  This is in addition to the change to the definition of short term to anything less than 90 days (previously anything less than  30 days).

Principal residence requirement 

As of May 1, 2024, the Province is implementing a provincial principal residence requirement which will limit short-term rentals to:

• The host’s principal residence 
• Plus one secondary suite or accessory dwelling unit  

This requirement does not apply everywhere. Find more information on the provincial principal residence requirement here: Principal residence requirement

Changes to legal non-conforming use protections

As of May 1, 2024, protections for non-conforming use of property will no longer apply to short term rentals. In some areas, these protections have allowed short-term rental hosts to continue to use their property for short-term rentals even when it was against the bylaws set by the local government. 

• Protections for non-conforming use of property will continue to exist for other land uses

[Lorne18]

Good morning Paul. Yes I am very aware of the legislation which essentially shuts us down. I have been active pursuing this matter with the City of Penticton, our MLA, and Karin Kilpatrick with respect to her Private Members Bill. 

[Paul7222]

Thanks @Lorne18.  It seems that most homeowners, with a single suite,  are not aware of the implications around the legal non-conforming status . Around  80% of suites in private homes are currently legal non-conforming.  

Hosts who thought that they would have a principal residence exemption are going to be severely  disappointed.  

Have you seen any detailed information or response from Airbnb on the new regulations?