[NAGDU] Airbnb

[Al Elia]

In response to questions regarding whether service animals can be 
excluded from Airbnb’s, and whether Airbnb’s search criteria about 
permitting “assistance animals” is unlawful,  it’s complicated.

First there is the question of whether the lodging offered is all 
lodging offered by Airbnb, or each individual property on Airbnb. This 
is akin to the question of whether Uber is responsible for driver 
refusals to transport service animals. Taking the most conservative view 
– that Airbnb is merely a listing agent for millions of individual 
short-term landlords: The ADA excludes from its definition of “public 
accommodations” lodging places that have five or fewer rooms for rent 
and that is “actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment 
as the residence of such proprietor.” 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7()A). If the 
owner rents their house/apartment home  only when they are not present, 
it is arguably not “actually occupied” by the owner at the time that 
the renter is present, and is therefore arguably covered under the ADA. 
However, if the Airbnb is for a single room in a house that is actually 
occupied by the owner during the renter’s stay, then it would likely 
be excluded from ADA coverage..

The more liberal approach is to treat Airbnb as a giant world-spanning 
operator of public accommodations made up of millions of properties. 
Under this view, all properties would have to accept service animals 
under all circumstances. Whether the conservative or liberal approach 
prevails is an open question, as internet -enabled lodgings and 
transportation are relatively new. However, since the Airbnb contract 
and terms are between the renter and Airbnb and the property-owner and 
Airbnb, not between the renter and the property-owner, there is a strong 
argument to treat Airbnb as the landlord/lessor, and thus take the 
liberal approach.

Besides the federal law, many states offer disability-discrimination 
protections that  may or may not be more protective than the ADA. For 
example, Massachusetts, Washington, and the District of Columbia do not 
have any owner/occupier/size limitations on public accommodations. Mass. 
Gen. Laws Ch 272 § 92A; Rev. Code Wash. § 49.60.040(2); D.C. Laws Ch. 
14 § 2–1401.02(24).

All of that said, it is possible that Airbnb is using “Assistance 
Animal” to mean assistance or support animals that are not service 
animals, which are not covered by the ADA and, depending on the 
circumstances and state, may or may not be covered under state laws.

I hope that is all helpful.



On 11 Dec 2021, at 12:58, Michael Forzano wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Today as I was searching for an Airbnb, I noticed that when selecting 
> the number of people staying as part of the search criteria, there is 
> a dropdown labelled "pets, bringing an assistance animal". If one 
> increments this option, the search results are restricted to Airbnbs 
> that allow pets. I don't remember seeing this in the past though I 
> can't be 100% sure if this is a new option or not. Either way, it is 
> extremely disappointing to see Airbnb lumping together pets and 
> service animals. Someone using this option might not even realize 
> their search results have been limited. In my case, the filtered 
> results did not even include any Airbnbs in the city I searched for, 
> while the unfiltered results had several available options in that 
> area.
>
> I know that the NFB and Airbnb have entered into a partnership. Does 
> anyone know the status of this? I'm surprised and disappointed that we 
> aren't taking a firm stand against this clear violation of Our rights 
> as guide dog users.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
> Sent from my iPhone