In case you missed it:
This is great and something that should have been a no-brainer. Plenty of bad listings out there. But it still seems to be vilifying the hosts when the biggest need is to address bad GUEST behavior.
@Mike-And-Helen0 When hosts sign up, they should be required to provide documentation that they are the homeowner, or if not, produce a notarized letter from their landlord, stating that they have permission to list the place. It's not that complicated.
@Mike-And-Helen0 I absolutely think they shouldn't host without their landlord's permission- that's illegal, apart from being rude and inconsiderate and disrespectful. As a homeowner, I would be livid if a had a long-term tenant who was listing the place, or even rooms in it without asking my permission.
If a tenant is listing without the landlord's permission, if the guests stop up the plumbing, do you really think that tenant is going to pay a couple hundred bucks or more to hire a plumber? No, they're going to call the landlord, and expect them to pay for it, and never mention that their heretofore unknown Airbnb guests were the perpetrators.
Another thing that's quite common among these types of hosts is that they instruct the guests to tell anyone who asks that they're just friends. It puts the guests in an uncomfortable situation to be expected to lie on someone else's behalf.
When I signed up with Booking.com several years ago, they posted a letter to the property with a verification code.
Crude but effective.
However, this is an additional barrier to hosts signing up so would be surprised if Airbnb did it.
Exactly! It's not rocket science. No need for complex technology, or machine learning, or AI... as a first port of call, simply do as other sites have been doing all these years, and post a verification code, by regular mail, to the physical address(es) each host has listed. That one simple meaure would eliminate a large proportion on scams/scammers in one fell swoop.
Same here, and they did a skype video call from the apartment too for veracity.
They also closed off new properties on the bdc site when the World Cup 2018 was on to prevent speculative punts and such. Not that bdc is perfection but they at least have a gateway before listing
@Susan17 In my case, Skype could work, but that would have to be set up ahead of time as my computer isn't just on all the time and I don't use a smart phone. But I'd imagine that there are some rustic, remote listings which have neither mail delivery nor internet service.
I am surprised by what I read here :) You don't have to have any ID in the UK? :D
Well, in Croatia we have to get a city license for every unit to be allowed to rent it STR. It's a ton of bureaucracy, forms, various inspections, and paperwork to obtain the licence. It is very easy for Airbnb to verify all listings in Croatia - they should just check if we submitted our VAT number and optionally, our STR license.
But verifying hosts is a solution for just a part of the problem. Guests should be verified too.
With all due respect to you and everyone else encouraged by these proclamations...
1- we've seen this kind of reaction from the leadership before
2- Yes, hosts are currently being villified and implicated as responsible for this tragedy by the management
3- and the real kicker is the definition of "verify."
So far, what that has meant is an internal (within this platform) comparison of the ID name to the form of Payment.
It does NOT mean the ID presented is not fake, it is not a formal background check, and it has meant that profiles can still be changed, use fake names, and cartoon character personas with no uploading of anything further or any additional information provided. The "instant book" options does NOT eliminate any of these loopholes of afford any real additional protections, as many threads in this community illustrate.
It's more marketing that's not backed up with anything solid. The recent press is a repeat of previously alleged promises using a different spin and body language (red face clenched fists, etc) designed to psychologically enlist the viewer.
The current rhetoric is actually carefully worded, calculated distraction from the real systemic issues of safety and ID confirmations we've been discussing here for years, that other platforms have already enacted. This platform already allows "professional hosts" aka commercial management companies hotels/motels, and multi-property listers to enact the internal safeties independent hosts have been clamoring for, and law enforcement and insurance claims require, yet maintains policy that tries to restrict us from doing the same on our own, with carefully worded and often contradictory policy/TOS language and replies to our concerns.
In reality, it is our property, we have the right to ask for legal forms of ID and signatures of agreement at check in, and a responsibility to do so to protect our investment, liability, and safety, and many concerned hosts who still list here do, and many are actually required to by their municipalities in the US and abroad.
This platform has reasons for not wanting us to have that information that are not disclosed to us which are directly connected to profit/fear of making deals outside the platform, and could also mitigate ALL of this by enlisting the same ID/Background checks used by millions of employers/.orgs/child care, and government entities to cover everyone's concerns at huge volume discounts...but has chosen not to, which charging the highest booking fees in the industry, surpassing platforms that already provide this service.
That's a question I'd like to see responded to with the data to back it up.