- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 26,415

So you don't do laws where you are? Good to knowThis is taking place in Ireland? Honestly, I though such ridiculous litigious nonsense was only an American thing.
I'm no fan of the home stay thing myself, it's just sort of icky to me but the idea of running someone out of their home if you agreed to room only is just off the wall. That whole business model isn't doing so great these days anyway.I mean, when you choose to open your home to strangers in the hopes of making money, you subject yourself to all kinds of people. The entire idea of home sharing is so icky to me and I can't imagine anyone who values their personal space and privacy would ever do this in the first place. You open yourself up to absolutely all kinds of crazy situations, which this sounds like. It's a risk you take.
That said, these tourists sound absolutely unhinged and if they are TRULY suing this woman ONLY because she has a disability, that is the dumbest thing I've ever read. However, it SOUNDS like they were worried that she may have a contagious illness and when she wouldn't disclose her disability, they got freaked out. Apparently she may have had some visible medical equipment around, etc. I can sort of understand not wanting to share a space with someone who was potentially sick or who may require medical attention while you are there on vacation.
I don't know the whole story, so I can't just automatically side with either party here. I suppose the judge in this case will be the one to decide how this goes.
I do know that NONE of these home sharing companies have the backs of either the owners OR the guests and I predict this entire industry will crumble eventually due to lawsuits of this nature. Something awful is eventually going to happen and it will be game over.
Stay in hotels, people.
Of course, but it would be much rarer to hear of civil suits being filed solely on the basis of one party being offended by another, without any material loss. But I imagine you knew that before you made the comment.So you don't do laws where you are? Good to know
I think the meaning of the post is that to the rest of the world, the US is Florida-manSo you don't do laws where you are? Good to know
But we don’t know the nationality of the renters.I think the meaning of the post is that to the rest of the world, the US is Florida-man
I must admit, when I read the story, I was also surprised that it happened in Ireland and not in the US.
They could be FloridianBut we don’t know the nationality of the renters.
I'm no fan of the home stay thing myself, it's just sort of icky to me but the idea of running someone out of their home if you agreed to room only is just off the wall. That whole business model isn't doing so great these days anyway.
Of course single women have rented out portions of their home and yes that would include men. You may not be comfortable doing so but there are individuals who do. How airbnb and vrbo and the like got started by people renting out portions of their home. In recent years the trend is more to rent a whole space not a portion of the room and often you're renting without the owner being present at all although that has gone hand in hand with the rise of chore lists. Sounds like you need to do more research really. According to Travel and Leisure in the U.S. women last year made up 59% of airbnb hosts and yes that includes ones who have an extra room or space within their home.I am appalled by the idea of a single woman opening up her home to 3 men on vacation and staying in the house with them. I would NEVER. I can't believe this is even a thing, to be honest.
Apparently it was all a hoax.
I was trying to figure that out too but could only come up with attempting to garner donation money from people to help her in her "troubles".So how was she going to profit from this? I thought it was the guests suing, not her?
Either way, it's good to know someone wasn't actually trying to sue someone else for offending them by being disabled.
I hope it is okay to link this reddit thread. Apparently it was all a hoax.
So how was she going to profit from this? I thought it was the guests suing, not her?
Either way, it's good to know someone wasn't actually trying to sue someone else for offending them by being disabled.
AirB&B is just an online registering version of the old Bed and Breakfast. We B&B'd around the UK for two weeks one wonderful summer. Every B&B we stayed in was wonderfulThe main difference between VRBO and airB&B is that you are renting out the entire house to the renters. Have used VRBO several times and that has ALWAYS been the case. You interact with the owner (or perhaps some management company to get the keys/sign paperwork etc.) but they are NOT living there while you are around. Have never used AirB&B, but as I understand how that works, someone is renting out a portion of their home while still living there. Depending on how the home is configured, there apparently may be some common areas everyone shares. Perhaps that practice is more common outside of the USA, but would never rent someplace where you have to share part of the accommodations.
The whole situation makes NO sense to me from the poorly written article and I still have no idea what someone means when they say they were 'triggered' by the accommodations. Sounds like a vague way of saying something other then they were uncomfortable being around a person with a disability.
So where you are from it's OK to force a person out of their home due to bigoted discomfort of their guests?Of course, but it would be much rarer to hear of civil suits being filed solely on the basis of one party being offended by another, without any material loss. But I imagine you knew that before you made the comment.
ETA: What law do you think applies to this particular suit?
So where you are from it's OK to force a person out of their home due to bigoted discomfort of their guests?
Yours is a curious position, but this ain't my first rodeo so with complete acceptance and no desire to rebut or change your mind on my part, your sentiment is considered a 'for' on the side of the renters.
Not about the lawsuit, the idea is equally useful as a jumping off point.What are you taking about? The FAKE lawsuit was the FAKE renters against the LYING AirBnB host. That is the lawsuit (as stated in the post you quoted but apparently either didn't read or understand "on the basis of one party being offended by another, without any material lose".
How are you turning this into the PP you quoted saying that it is okay to force a person out of their home due to the bigoted discomfort of the guest?
If anything, it is saying the exact opposite - that trying to force someone out of their home because of bigotry is wrong and not protected by law.
Not about the lawsuit, the idea is equally useful as a jumping off point.
I'm more interested in what people would think about such a thing that the actual thing