Our vacation rental had surveillance cameras. The landlord used them a lot

https://www.sfgate.com/travel/article/California-vacation-rental-surveillance-camera-law-16346246.php

by nradov • 5 years ago

63 118 5 years ago

namanyayg• 5 years ago

I believe having one of those anti-spy cam devices is now a travel necessity if you're staying in any modern Airbnb. There's too much to gain and too little to lose for any landlord. And spy cams are so cheap!

cbsks• 5 years ago

Do you have one that you recommend?

lijogdfljk2• 5 years ago

Super interested here. Is there something you recommend?

beervirus• 5 years ago

Do they actually work?

cs702• 5 years ago

Video cameras are continually getting better, cheaper, and smaller, and therefore will be installed everywhere.[a] In coming years, if you're in a building or house that is not yours, odds are there will be one or more cameras taking candid videos/photos of you as you go about your daily life.

[a] Take a look at the size of the lens on the back of your mobile phone. That's how small high-quality cameras already are today.

Tenoke• 5 years ago

There's devices and ways to detect hidden cameras. There's a risk to being caught putting hidden cameras. I doubt they'll be everywhere but it is a problem.

falcolas2• 5 years ago

None of which are universally effective. Some rely upon RF detection, others the presence of IR illumination, and yet others the reflection of the CMOS chip.

But, a hardwired camera with no active illumination, behind an opaque sheet of IR transparent plastic (basically the kind of plastic on many modern electronics) would be incredibly hard to detect (without tearing everything apart).

wokwokwok• 5 years ago

There are certainly people that sell useless tools that purport to be able to detect cameras.

There are certainly devices that can detect localised electric fields, wireless transmissions or make it relatively easy to spot shiny surfaces (such as camera lenses).

…but, and I say this with absolute confidence; there is no device that exists that can detect if you are being observed or not.

So, to some degree, it may be possible to find common wireless cameras, and if you’re some DIY house owner installing their SPY PRO secret camera from Amazon for $50, you can probably find it.

…but, the point the parent comment is making is that there are, and, increasingly will be, cameras you won’t be able to detect.

You’re best off to operate under the assumption you are being filmed when you hire a house, and, increasingly, just when you go around your daily life.

bserge• 5 years ago

I propose everyone has a regular wank in every room. That'll scar the peepers more than the renters.

Was it worth installing the CCTV?

toyg• 5 years ago

That'll scar the peepers

Or entertain them.

CaptainZapp5• 5 years ago

I don't think that I'll find any cameras, hidden or otherwise in a hotel room, which I rented anytime soon.

sgspace• 5 years ago

Depends what city you’re in

adolph• 5 years ago

New upsell checkbox at AirBnB: rent a SCIF for your stay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_compartmented_inform...

iab2• 5 years ago

“So we broke the rules a bit and had pets, so what?” I get that this is a bit dystopian, but not hard to see why the man has installed these cameras

spamizbad• 5 years ago

Having someone's dog be on a porch for a few hours really doesn't seem like much of a violation. Wild animals do the same all the time.

0des• 5 years ago

What if the proprietor has a really bad allergy to animal dander?

iab2• 5 years ago

I take your point, but that’s not really the authors prerogative to decide what does/does not comply.

mtw2• 5 years ago

This is what the article author states. But how certain are you that the dog didn't actually poop on the property or entered indoors?

The author stated before that there were no dogs on the property but was forced to admit that there was indeed a dog. It is therefore plausible he is also taking liberties at his other statements

fimdomeio• 5 years ago

Well this sounds very creepy, but imagine for a moment that the landlord might only be checking if there's child pornography going on at his house, then I guess it would be ok. Also he pinky sweared not to share those images with anyone else. Now imagine the landlord is not a person but instead a fluffy cloud...

throwaway8943453• 5 years ago

Now imagine it's not a rental but a house you bought and the builder installed the surveillance and you have no ability to remove them.

gruez• 5 years ago

and you have no ability to remove them

I'm having trouble imaging why you wouldn't be able to. Worst case scenario you need to head to home depot and get a ladder/drill or whatever, but that's about it.

ed25519FUUU2• 5 years ago

And then imagine that the landlord checks for other vague “things” in order to “keep you and the neighborhood safe”.

“Sorry, I have no control over it” he says, “it’s required by law”

samstave• 5 years ago

We got this amazing Airbnb in Tahoe last year, and it had an electric anti-bear fence around it and a lot of cameras.

The instructions for getting settled in the house were first how to disable the electric fence then how to unplug the surveillance system during the stay, and obviously how to reenable them all on checkout.

This is how it should be done.

emerged• 5 years ago

Then again the cameras might just remain active, having comforted you into believing all the cameras pointed at you are disabled.

esotericsean• 5 years ago

Meta

codyswann• 5 years ago

Or checking that their house isn't be destroyed...

dekhn2• 5 years ago

hmm, seems like the landlord was justified. the client literally lied about having a pet.

newsclues2• 5 years ago

Politicians lie. What surveillance are they subjected to in order to prevent and correct their behaviour?

lijogdfljk2• 5 years ago

Lol this seems like a terrible example, because i _do_ want surveillance/oversight on politicians.

Arrath• 5 years ago

A visitor bringing a pet onto the porch, and not into the residence, hardly seems like a violation of the no pet policy.

dekhn2• 5 years ago

If I say no pets on my property what suddenly allows a small violation to be acceptable? Go find another place.

only_as_i_fall2• 5 years ago

Eh, if you only know someone had a pet because you spied on them I tend to think you're just being nosy.

Obviously it doesn't apply here specifically, but there's a reason evidence obtained illegally can't be used to prosecute criminals. If we accept that two wrongs make a right then everyone is just worse off.

AlbertCory3• 5 years ago

"Evidence obtained illegally" applies to criminal trials. These people were not facing even a civil trial -- they were facing being blacklisted and/or not getting their deposit back.

oakfr2• 5 years ago

Clients lying should not be a good motivation for a landlord to break the law. I'm not saying this landlord did, but am challenging your reasoning here.

Symbiote2• 5 years ago

There's Irish/EU guidance on domestic CCTV [1], which allows it so long as it doesn't cover any public areas (i.e. the street).

I wonder if that domestic exemption still applies once the property is rented out to someone? I hope not.

And as will all laws, if a landlord feels they can't comply with the laws on data privacy, CCTV and so on – then they should close their business.

[1] https://www.dataprotection.ie/en/dpc-guidance/blogs/domestic...

throwiyjdjejh• 5 years ago

there's a trick to find hidden cameras in airbnbs: join their wifi network and use nmap to scan for all network devices in your subnet. then cross reference the mac addresses/try to reach the webinterface of the devices. this should catch most webcams.

pixl97• 5 years ago

And if you're running the spycams, this is why you get a good wifi system with VLANS to separate your traffic.

Not saying you should run spycams, but always practice good network security.

falcolas2• 5 years ago

Or keep them offline, recording to SD cards.

AlbertCory3• 5 years ago

If their router is like mine, a guest joins a separate network, and is not able to join the one I use. So they would not find all the devices.

eplanit2• 5 years ago

Do laws prevent 'regular' hotels from doing this?

CaptainZapp5• 5 years ago

Why would a hotel do that?

Cameras in the lobby, the hallways and the elevators, sure. But in a hotel room?

That's a great way to kill your business in no time.

eplanit2• 5 years ago

Yes, that's my point in asking. AirBnb's have never been appealing to me, neither as a host nor as a guest, for just these kinds of reasons (i.e. lack of regulation like a regular hotel is under). I'm sure it's great for many, but I know of no towns or neighborhoods that express anything positive about the impact and effect AirBnbs have had on them -- _generally_, it's the opposite.

https://www.alternativetravelers.com/airbnb-effect/

https://www.epi.org/publication/the-economic-costs-and-benef...

bradlys3• 5 years ago

But there were no mentions of cameras indoors. Instead they sounded like they were all outdoor cameras. I think that's fair game.

I think like a hotel - these cameras were at the lobby, the hallway, the elevators, and the outdoors. Nothing was viewing the personal space.

mikeyouse2• 5 years ago

If cell phone signal is good enough for decent internet coverage at your rental, just unplug the router so you don't have to worry about being watched all the time. One of the benefits of everything going cloud-based is that most of these stupid devices don't work without wifi/internet.

ed25519FUUU2• 5 years ago

I did this and the landlord contacted me saying the internet needed to stay on because he had a front doorbell camera. I’m not sure what Airbnb’s policy is here so I plugged it back in.

jwlake• 5 years ago

Small amount of googling: https://julianoliver.com/output/log_2015-12-18_14-39

Next time I'm in an airbnb I'm definitely nmap'ing and trying this out. ;)

darkarmani• 5 years ago

That's actually an excellent idea!

blankobj12• 5 years ago

If a guest were to try this at my Airbnb, I have in my house rules that guests may not disable security devices and an onsite inspection will be performed if they do. And that's exactly the type of guest I would immediately terminate their stay.

nradov2• 5 years ago

This is exactly why Airbnb should be banned everywhere.

blankobj12• 5 years ago

Ignoring this author for breaking the house rules and thinking he is in the right. The reality is Airbnb's are slowly being regulated away due to both the poor behavior of guests and bad hosts that have allowed guests to remain unchecked. All it takes is one bad stay for your reputation with your neighbors to be ruined. I am on good terms with mine, but realize that, if I hosted a stay that brought too many guests or had a party, I'd lose that good faith instantly.

It takes one bad guest for your neighbors to be against you.

I have exterior cameras (3, recording all exterior entry points) - and noise detection devices. I quickly check the cameras at check-in and then once or twice during each day of stay. Goal is to make sure the number of people matches the reserved guest count and no parties are occurring. I don't allow guests to bring any outside visitors. I have a very strict limit on 6 people max. My house rules can't be any more clear on this - and I've still encountered a few guests that have broken the rules. They risked their stay being terminated without refund.

I charge $725/night for 6 guests - I haven't had any complaints about the cameras. 60+ reviews, 5.0 stars, been doing this for a little over a year. I am super upfront about cameras in the house rules and house manual. If I did not have the cameras, and some of the rule violations I've had, I'm not sure I'd be able to keep hosting (my county requires a special exception). It's tough out there for Airbnb hosts to be good neighbors.

Also, fun fact, Airbnb does NOT protect you from damage causes by pets.

herodotus• 5 years ago

I am missing something: which house rules did the author break?

elmalto• 5 years ago

Op is probably talking about the additional guest (daughter) a night early and the dog on the property. IMO calling this breaking the rules is a bit of a stretch?

alistairSH5• 5 years ago

Dog on porch. Some people consider that a breach of the rules. Personally, I wouldn't think it was - the dog didn't enter the house and was only there temporarily. No different than a neighbor walking the dog up for a chat, or a cat/bear/deer/squirrel entering the property.

oakfr2• 5 years ago

I can relate, as a neighbor frustrated by rogue airbnb guests next door. That being said, as an airbnb customer, I could not imagine a split second renting a place with cameras checking on me. I haven't seen any so far. I may be too 2019, though.

scarecrowbob2• 5 years ago

" It's tough out there for Airbnb hosts to be good neighbors."

It's possible that it might be a priori impossible.

standardUser5• 5 years ago

Part of the appeal of staying in an AirBnB is to have more flexibility and independence than staying in hotel. But as hosts become more surveillant, at a certain point the roles are reversed and hotels once again become the better place for enhanced privacy and autonomy.

blankobj12• 5 years ago

It's a sad reality. I agree with you though. As an Airbnb host though, it really does take one bad guest to change the dynamics of hosting.

billytetrud4• 5 years ago

Your paranoia about what bad guests can do doesn't excuse the landlord in the article for being a petty douche. Bringing a friend over who has a pet is not a reasonable thing to prohibit, nor is complaining about his daughter coming "a night early". These are the behaviors of a creepy asshole, not a human being.

blankobj12• 5 years ago

It's not paranoia. Illegal parties and large gatherings are a huge problem with Airbnb's. Keep in mind - this article is from the guest perspective, we don't have the hosts perspective. But we have an author who admits to being busted for breaking the rules? Personally, yes, I'd "let it slide" and would not have even broughht it up with the guest. I agree it sounds petty on the host if the author is factual. But my comment is mainly to explain why I have exterior cameras - it's a sad reality that, to be a responsible host, and a good neighbor, I have to have them.

ksm17172• 5 years ago

You speak about walking a tightrope with your neighbors and needing a special exception and yet blame for any souring of that relationship falls on guests that you invite to your property.

blankobj12• 5 years ago

I had to provide letters of support from my neighbors to the county. I have several house rules - mostly on not exceeding the number of guests in the reservation, providing the names of the guests, acknowledging no visitors, and no loud noise at night. So yes, I'd blame the guest if they brought an excessive number of people to my property, were loud, obnoxious, and otherwise annoyed my neighbors.

at_a_remove2• 5 years ago

I wonder if this has any correlation with something I have noticed -- I have yet to do a vacation rental, but when I go shopping online for them and look at the photos, lack of curtains (or the gauziest excuse for them) is almost uniform out in rural Missouri. Everyone wants a peek.

Zelphyr• 5 years ago

We need a Constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy in this country. I know that's way easier said than done but I think it's time we at least move towards such a thing through debate and consideration for what it means.

rhcom2• 5 years ago

Americas do have some rights to privacy, such as discussed in Roe v Wade. A Constitutional amendment wouldn't cover AirBnB and private residences though.

klik99• 5 years ago

Wait.... These are only EXTERIOR cameras? What a click baity title - he seems to imply that you need to "hide stuffed toys" or check the light bulbs for cameras, but sounds like there were no cameras inside. So what's the problem?

mngnt• 5 years ago

A few commenters pointed out that the guest was in the wrong, for having a pet over, not the renter for having security cameras.

The first thing to point out is these are not mutually exclusive, I think both parties have broken some moral boundaries.

More importantly though, if we accept that this guest´s bad behaviour justifies the use of a camera to detect it, does it also justify the owner (presumably) spying on every guest? Even those who don´t break any rule at all? Do we consider that okay - the ends justify the means, the owner has the right to monitor for house rule violations? If so, where´s the difference between this and being spied on by Facebook or other communication platform? You rent your "online presence" from them, pay them by having ads shown, a contract like any other. Why then shouldn´t they spy on you to monitor for breaking any arbitrary rules?

AlbertCory3• 5 years ago

Unfortunately, you do need to read all the disclosures the property has. Airbnb requires them to disclose all the security cameras in the house. Failing to do so will get them dinged and maybe delisted.

You also need to check for cameras yourself, and there are articles on how to do that. You should also ask the landlord point-blank "Are there any cameras in here?" in case he just "remembers" some that he "forgot" to put in the disclosure. Human nature: many people are less willing to lie to you directly.

mtw2• 5 years ago

Cameras & surveillance are a necessity for vacation rentals. People complain about privacy but how would the property manager know that the garbage are placed properly for pickup? Many counties now have automated garbage trucks that won't pickup garbage if the angle or placement is not correct

Same for swimming pool or lawn maintenance. The person renting would be the first to demand a refund if the swimming pool has a strange color/odor or if the garbage is overflowing. The property manager can do a daily video check and ask for pool maintenance person to do a check if the water doesn't look good.

Finally, many vacation homes have their own dedicated water systems. Its perfectly possible that the water source can only cater to 6 adult, or that the septic system can dispose for only a max number of people. If the renter comes with a big group, then there will be no water, or the septic system will overflow and clog. Again, in those cases, the group renting will be the first to complain and ask for refunds. So it is important to check via a camera the number of guests coming and making sure it is below the max number of people that the property can accomodate.

Symbiote2• 5 years ago

None of this requires a surveillance system. The landlord could visit the property before and after the guests stay, or pay someone else to do this.

Cameras achieve a similar result at a low cost to the landlord, but at the cost of the privacy of the people renting the home – I certainly wouldn't want cameras pointed at the swimming pool!

Our vacation rental had surveillance cameras. The landlord used them a lot

Related Stories