rentals descriptions

OTA = Online Travel Agency, which means those sites that sell the booking and take the payment for you.
salmoncottage
Posts: 294
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 3:54 pm

rentals descriptions

Post by salmoncottage »

So, if Uber have now been described as being a 'transport company' isn't it about time that booking.com, airBB, tripadvisor and anyone else taking commissions for rentals should be re-assessed too? just wondered :?:
'Oh, I do like to be beside the seaside'
FelicityA
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:54 pm
Location: Cotswolds
Contact:

Post by FelicityA »

Quite. And Owner's Direct and VRBO (Vacation rental by OWNER) should be hauled over the coals for misleading titles.
kg1
Posts: 2347
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 4:23 pm

Post by kg1 »

Not holding my breath :lol:
User avatar
CSE
Posts: 4414
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: Galicia

Post by CSE »

UBER has to comply with the local taxi laws. The court ruling stated something along the lines that UBER is more than an intermediation service. I undserstand the court aslo went on to say Uber had a “decisive influence” over drivers. This was done by determining fares, collecting payments plus UBER controlled the quality of vehicles.

So why do you see a connection with a rental portal? These are simply just the opposite these are an intermediary service between the owner and renter. None of them do what UBER is doing.
There is another issue. There are normally not any requirement(s) to register a vacation rentals in most of Europe.
Never try to out-stubborn your guests.
COYS
Posts: 795
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 1:24 pm
Location: Greek Islands

Post by COYS »

Was that tongue in cheek casasantoestevo?
I’d disagree almost entirely
They may have started out as an introductory portal & still like to pretend they are an intermediary when things don’t go their way, but if that were the case, they wouldn’t be imposing terms for cancellations & minimum weeks booked, taking total control of rental payments & disbursement nor denying pre-paid contact disguised as security. They are anything but an intermediary. Just as Uber is to all intents & purposes a taxi service without any actual taxis of it’s own, so OTA’s are accommodation providers without any actual accommodation of their own. Both impose restrictive trading terms on their ‘service providers’ whilst pretending that they are all in complete control of their small businesses in order to limit liability.
I agree in part with your last comment but it is no coincidence that the rise of OTA’s or ‘sharing community’ has added vast numbers of non registered rentals & part time landlords. Whilst they are keen to accept any listing that ultimately fills their pockets, none of them deem it necessary to ensure compliance with local regulations & law. Ring a bell?
This time next year Rodney, we'll be millionaires.
User avatar
CSE
Posts: 4414
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: Galicia

Post by CSE »

It was not tongue in cheek at all that post just reported what the ruling stated according to various newspapers.
Some links
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ers-ecj-eu
https://www.ft.com/content/6232b1b6-e59 ... 6d4fbac0da
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/ ... ng/548873/
It is now down to the multitude of licensing authorities within the EU to choose how to make their regulations fit the ECJ ruling.
EU law protects online services from undue restrictions. However, (to quote from the Guardian):
In its ruling, the ECJ said an “intermediation service”, “the purpose of which is to connect, by means of a smartphone application and for remuneration, non-professional drivers using their own vehicle with persons who wish to make urban journeys, must be regarded as being inherently linked to a transport service and, accordingly, must be classified as ‘a service in the field of transport’ within the meaning of EU law”.
IANL but it is clear cut that "our service providers" (portals) will never be affected in the foreseeable future.
This is far from the end of UBER it just means that the business model will have to change. The use of licence divers and cars.
Service called UberX and UberBLACK will be allowed to operate. Whether licensed taxi drivers want or are willing to pay a commission is a choice they will have to take. Personally expect that they will at first object but as some gain more work then they will gradually switch. Just like "us on the forum".
Never try to out-stubborn your guests.
COYS
Posts: 795
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 1:24 pm
Location: Greek Islands

Post by COYS »

Of course it’s not the end of anybody, but yes their business model should be under review or reclassified so as not to ride roughshod over employment, training, insurance or safety law.
Admittedly I have utter contempt for much of our adopted US business practices, but I see some parity with OTA’s - happy to plunder the benefits of facilitating rental contracts, but distancing themselves of all responsibility when it suits.
As the ECJ classifies Uber ‘as a service in the field of transport’ (i.e not just a phone app as they claim) I see little difference between OTA’s being regarded as anything but an introductory platform. They control listing acceptance, placement & compliance & have all but enforced in house online booking with control over every aspect of payment & disbursement, thus controlling choice & rental contracts from both provider & consumer perspectives. Even better when you get to charge both while having contractual responsibility to neither.
Yes, we are unlikely to see much change in the short term but that doesn’t make it right or acceptable & you never know, maybe the CMA will give them a kick in the pants. For now we can agree to disagree :wink:
This time next year Rodney, we'll be millionaires.
ManxRed1
Posts: 229
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 9:52 am
Location: Polperro, Cornwall, UK

Post by ManxRed1 »

Are OD/VRBO et al renting out the property or is the owner?

OD like to claim to travellers that it is them - that they have full control via online booking and taking payments.

We would prefer it if we the owners had control over the booking, but that's not the case now is it?

I would see potential cause for concern over liability for when things go wrong - the book with confidence guarantee is non-existent. If a traveller thinks they have booked via OD, and something goes horribly wrong, then OD should sort it out, not the owner.
User avatar
CSE
Posts: 4414
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: Galicia

Post by CSE »

I feel as if you have might have missed the reasoning behind this ruling.
The ECJ stated they are considered a public transport platform. The EU/ECJ has other laws to control the issues on public transport.

The EU/ECJ do not have issue(s) with internet platforms as a whole.
What you(we/all) are doing is selling goods/service we offer through one of many of the online platforms.
EU/ECJ has no issues with eCommerce platforms. Quite the opposite, from what I have read, they wish to encourage them. It seems eCommerce platforms can prescribe listing conditions to suit their business models.
Never try to out-stubborn your guests.
COYS
Posts: 795
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 1:24 pm
Location: Greek Islands

Post by COYS »

casasantoestevo wrote:It seems eCommerce platforms can prescribe listing conditions to suit their business models.
And then completely change their business model & charging structure on a whim, or mid contract?
Why would any regulatory body 'encourage' such practice? let alone consumers support it.
The term e-commerce would now cover any business, large or small that is carried out predominantly via the internet, so will every one have the blessing of the EU/ECJ to do just as they please without fear of regulation or consequence in the business arena? Hmmm.
I think you would have to be wearing the rosiest of rose tinted glasses to see the current OTA model as merely an e-commerce facilitator. That ship has long since sailed no matter how they try to dress it up when things go wrong & questions are asked.

ManxRed1 is correct, total control (of any business) should not come without liability.
Taken further, monopolism should never be allowed to flourish & that I'm afraid is the holy grail for both the pseudo-taxis & OTA's
This time next year Rodney, we'll be millionaires.
Post Reply