Short-Term Let Regulations Archives - Page 68 of 95

Housing and Short-Term Lets in Scotland: The Facts

Posted on November 15, 2021April 10, 2025 by Fiona Campbell

Short-term lets are often presented as being a leading cause of Scotland’s housing crisis. However, it is important to place the debate in a holistic context – for instance, noting the number of empty homes in Scotland, demographic changes, and the need to build more homes – while recognising the value of tourist accommodation to the Scottish economy and local communities.

The ASSC welcomes the opportunity to share data about the holiday let sector which we believe will contribute to a more informed conversation about the appropriate regulatory framework.

Self-Catering in Scotland

Self-catering properties have been a longstanding presence in communities for generations, especially in rural/remote communities, and provide an economic boost for local areas and enhance Scotland’s tourist accommodation offering.
Latest figures show there are 17,794 self-catering units on Non-Domestic Rates. These properties generate: 4 million visitor nights per year; £867.1m total visitor spend; and support 23,979 FTE jobs.[1]
Such self-catering properties are legitimate, bona fide businesses whose owners depend on the money generated for their livelihood – it is not a hobby or a way to supplement their income. This is entirely separate from the ‘homesharing’ concept, or those amateur operators who utilise online marketing platforms but are not subject to the same levels of existing regulation.

The Need for Robust Empirical Data

Underpinning any decision to regulate the short-term letting sector is the need for robust, empirical data. Unfortunately, there has been a tendency to focus on scraped data from Airbnb – based on inaccurate information and flawed methodologies – leading to misleading conclusions about the nature of the short-term letting landscape.[2]
The ASSC is not averse to regulation and has proactively shared evidence-based policy papers and recommendations[3] since 2017 about the nature and scale of short-term letting in Scotland but unfortunately this has been ignored by a focus on this unreliable data from one marketing platform.
The Scottish Government’s draft BRIA for short-term let licensing references research noting that there were approximately 32,000 active listings on Airbnb in May 2019.[4] However, this does not mean that there are 32,000 short-term lets which would be readily available on the long-term housing market as many have erroneously claimed.
The number of listings on online platforms in any given area is not necessarily an indication of impact on long-term housing. For example: (a) many of these properties are already the primary residences of individuals involved in ‘homesharing’ who share a room(s), or their entire home while away; (b) each listing does not represent a single housing unit. A property can have multiple listings; and (c) marketing platforms like Airbnb contain a diverse range of accommodation including hotels and B&Bs, as well as unconventional accommodation like yurts, barns, boats, and campervans and one train, which cannot be seen as housing stock.
Parliamentary answers from the Scottish Government[5] confirm the BRIA figures were from scraped data provided by InsideAirbnb (not from Airbnb directly) and that they could not break this down by property type – be it a single/shared room, entire property, or unconventional accommodation. This means the estimation there are 32,000 “short-term lets” is wholly unreliable. It is also based on pre-pandemic 2019 figures. Moreover, they admit “we do not have an estimate of how many short-term lets will return to the long-term housing market.”[6]11

A Holistic Discussion on Housing

The housing challenges facing Scotland are far more multifaceted than the existence and growth of short-term and holiday lets alone. For instance:

There are currently 47,333 empty houses in Scotland (of which 7152 are in Edinburgh, 3536 in Glasgow, 2943 in Fife, 2595 Highland).[7] These empty homes could be utilised for far more productive purposes and provide homes for those who need.
The number of households in Scotland continued to increase in 2020, reaching 2.51 million. This was an increase of 142,800 (6%) since 2010. The growth in the number of households is partly due to an increase in the population, but also because people are increasingly living alone or with fewer other people. More than a third of households are single person households. An estimated 900,000 people are living alone.
There were 2.65 million dwellings in Scotland in 2020. Of these, 90,500 dwellings (3%) were vacant and 24,500 (1%) were second homes.[8]
Empty and second homes are concentrated in different parts of the country. For example, remote rural areas have a higher percentage of empty and second homes than urban areas[9]. However, City of Edinburgh is a hotspot for empty homes in Scotland.
172,170 houses were built between 2010-2019 (18,118 in Edinburgh)[10] – and we need many more. Homes for Scotland have argued that Scotland has amassed a housing shortfall of 85,000 homes and that we need to build at least 25,000 per year to meet the demands of our population.[11]
Progress on housebuilding is not fast enough. For instance, the Scottish Government have only spent half of their £25m Rural Housing Fund which aims to build affordable homes in rural areas.[12]
City of Edinburgh had the largest increase in absolute number of households (17,300), an increase of 8%.[13]
Over the last ten years, the proportion of dwellings which are second homes has increased in five council areas and decreased in 24 council areas.[14]
When housing demand and the level of empty housing is set against the number of self-catering units, it suggests self-catering activity is not of a scale sufficient to affect housing supply issues in Scotland. Ultimately, building too few homes remains the core cause of Scotland’s housing problems, not the holiday let sector.

Conclusion

Policymakers should not use holiday accommodation as a means to solve housing challenges in Scotland, instead focusing on building more affordable homes and tackling the scourge of empty properties.
Any short-term let regulations taken forward, either at a national or local level, need to be informed by robust empirical data. Scraped data from online platforms can lead to misleading conclusions about the nature of the short-term letting market.
The Scottish Government’s BRIA accompanying their licensing proposals states: “A benefit of licensing will be improved access to affordable rented homes.” This claim is entirely unfounded and lacks an evidence base.
Any housing issues in relation to short-term lets should be addressed by the Planning Act 2019 – through the introduction of control zones underpinned by robust quantitative data – and should not play a part in the licensing proposals which are meant to focus on health and safety.
Small businesses like self-catering, present in communities for decades, should not be used as a convenient scapegoat for wider failures in housing policy.
The Scottish Government needs to back legitimate professional businesses and our renowned tourism sector as we recover from the effects of Covid-19, allowing visitors at home and abroad to benefit from our unique hospitality and fantastic range of accommodation.

Footnotes

[1] https://www.assc.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Economic-Impact-Study-%E2%80%93Scotland-Report.pdf

[2] This is evident in both the Scottish Government’s BRIA accompanying their licensing proposals, as well as City of Edinburgh Council’s plans for a short-term let control area.

[3] For instance, see ASSC, Far More Than Just Houses: The Benefits of Short-Term Rental in Scotland (2018). Url: https://www.assc.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/MoreThanJustHouses.pdf; and ASSC, Forward Together: A Collaborative Approach to Short-Term Letting (2020). Url: https://www.assc.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2020_ForwardTogether.pdf

[4] https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/impact-assessment/2021/06/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme-planning-control-area-legislation-draft-business-regulatory-impact-assessment-bria/documents/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme-planning-control-area-legislation-draft-business-regulatory-impact-assessment-bria-consultation/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme-planning-control-area-legislation-draft-business-regulatory-impact-assessment-bria-consultation/govscot%3Adocument/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme-planning-control-area-legislation-draft-business-regulatory-impact-assessment-bria-consultation.pdf

[5] Parliamentary answer to S6W-02111. Url: https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers/question?ref=S6W-02111

[6] Parliamentary answer to S6W-02109. Url: https://www.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/written-questions-and-answers/question?ref=S6W-02109

[7] https://goodmove.co.uk/empty-housing-hotspots/

[8] Vacant properties include those classified as: long-term (six months or more) empty (47,300, 1.8% of all dwellings); unoccupied exemptions (43,200, 1.6% of all dwellings) such as new homes yet to be occupied and dwellings undergoing repair or awaiting demolition. See: https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/household-estimates/2020/house-est-20-publication.pdf

[9] https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/households/household-estimates/2020

[10] https://www.gov.scot/publications/housing-statistics-for-scotland-new-house-building/

[11] https://yourviews.parliament.scot/session-5/local-gov-sustainability-covid/consultation/download_public_attachment?sqId=question-2020-06-10-3171498657-publishablefilesubquestion&uuId=866941340

[12] https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/politics/scottish-politics/2493715/snp-ministers-under-fire-over-failure-to-spend-25-million-rural-housing-fund/

[13] https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/household-estimates/2020/house-est-20-publication.pdf

[14] https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/household-estimates/2020/house-est-20-publication.pdf

The Impact of Short-Term Let Licensing on Local Authorities

Posted on November 12, 2021April 10, 2025 by Fiona Campbell

The ASSC maintains that the extra cost burden to local government who will be responsible for administering the scheme are unreasonable. This includes: human resources, digital infrastructure, committee approval, inspection, enforcement, appeals.

This view is supported by responses to the August 2021 Consultation.

Several local councils have expressed concerns about the impact of licensing. For instance, Highland Council has estimated a need for 6-17 staff just to implement licensing (this does not even include preparations for planning control zones). These staff will need permanent contracts but given the last 10 years of cuts and voluntary / redundancies, how such councils be able to afford this HR cost? Overall, the ASSC contends that the Scottish Government have not properly addressed the concerns from local authorities, or indeed the Law Society of Scotland.

Additional burdens will be placed on local authority planning and licensing teams to manage the requirements of a new scheme at a time when they can least afford it – despite claims that councils will be able to recoup this later down the line through fees.

Local Authorities are under extreme financial and capacity pressures as a result of austerity compounded by the Covid-19 pandemic. It seems, therefore, that not only is the Scottish Government determined to dismiss the views and data provided by the sector that this will have the most impact on, but pleas from the delivery agents of Licensing are also to be ignored with similar disdain.

Background

Legal experts have long since predicted a surge in licensing applications for short-term lets for when the scheme goes live, potentially overwhelming local authority departments.

The unprecedented scale and resource implications for local authorities were well summarised in January 2020 by licensing expert Stephen McGowan of TLT LLP[1]. Mr McGowan, who is chairman of the Institute of Licensing Scottish region, and accredited by the Law Society of Scotland as a specialist in licensing law, and member of the Short-Term Let Working Group, explained that the regulation will … have a significant impact on local authorities and other local services[2]. He said:

“Provision will need to be made to deal with the impact of such a magnitude of applications on local authority resources. A massive rush of applications of this order could bring licensing administration to a halt, and have a knock-on effect on reporting obligations with Police Scotland and other authorities such as Fire and Building Standards, who will likely have to comment on each application. This could impact on processing times for other types of civic licence.”[3]

Mr McGowan also noted the following on the implications of licensing and provided a comparison with changes made to the liquor licensing regime:

“It has been put to me that councils can “gear up” and bring in temporary staff to help process these applications, but that would only take us so far. There are approximately 32,000 properties in Scotland registered on the successful Airbnb platform alone. By contrast, when the liquor licensing regime changed in 2009 there were around 16,500 applications to process and it was a mammoth task for everyone concerned. The licensing system is supposed to wash its own face and it will be for local authorities to determine a fee for these applications to cover projected costs, but even that is not the full picture. Licensing is a specialist area and the impact of the new regime is not just about the cost of employing temporary office staff to process bits of paper. It’s also about the inspections that will have to occur in order to produce reports that the properties meet the required safety standards. There is also the impact on police resource. Every application will need to be reported on and every person checked for criminal convictions and so on. The police may also be asked to report on evidence of antisocial behaviour. The police will see no percentage of the licence fee, and all of this will be happening on top of the other licensing business that both the council and the police are dealing with. It is not too wild a projection to see how the licensing system itself could creak and create delay and logjam, without the right precautions being taken”[4].

The Law Society of Scotland also warned on the cost of the regulations and that local authorities may not be ready from a resourcing perspective: “There are unlikely to be resources in place at present in local authority licensing or planning departments to cover such additional and in certain areas, extensive work.”[5]

The policy intention is that the fee levels should cover adequately the staff and administrative costs. However, that ignores the considerable cost of establishing the scheme:

“There are often significant infrastructure costs in introducing new schemes, for example new IT systems, which cannot always be fully recovered…We question whether it is proportionate for applicants to be fully liable for costs of establishing a system, including preparing staff to run the scheme. We suggest that it is appropriate to consider this question in the context of balancing the extent of the mischief which the scheme aims to regulate with the potential gain to the wider public of regulation.”

“In addition, there are likely to be practical challenges with this approach. How may each local authority calculate expected numbers of applications be quantified to be able to work out what the costs should be per application? What is the approach to be by local authorities to differing circumstances, for example, those undertaking home sharing versus those undertaking secondary letting? The omission of a BRIA, or partial BRIA, from this consultation make these questions particularly pertinent.”[6]

The Licensing Law Committee of the Law Society of Scotland has emphasised the importance of piloting the new licensing scheme ahead of implementing the new powers – but the Scottish Government have no plans to do this.

It is clear that increased regulation will place additional burdens on local authority planning and licensing teams to manage the requirements of a new scheme at a time when they can least afford it. A proper impact assessment of the costs is required urgently as part of the Business Regulatory Impact Assessment process.

Local Authority Responses to the 2020 Consultation

The Scottish Government continue to maintain that the fees charged will make the system cost neutral but the local councils clearly state that does not address:

The initial costs of setting up licensing schemes – are the SG going to fund this?
The impact of Covid-19 on local authorities from a financial and personnel perspective and how this will be impacted by the additional burden of licensing.

COSLA

“It will be necessary to understand the administrative burden that this may place on local authorities and how this will be resourced.”[7]

Aberdeen City Council

“We believe that the 12-month lead-in time to establish our Short-term Let regime will be resource intensive and there will be no ability to recruit additional staff when resources aren’t available until licence applications are submitted and fees paid. This poses staffing issues for the council. Consequently, we believe that the Scottish Government should fund the start-up costs.”[8]

Borders Council

“…it is considered essential that Scottish Government provide specific funding for additional resources required by LA’s to cover the initial set up costs, including the transitional and compliance elements of the new legislation.”[9]

Comhairle nan Eilean Siar

“We have no indication of what the full impact of any COVID-19 fallout will be as the situation is ongoing. Economic recovery may be protracted and we may be dependent on our Tourism Sector to inject life into our economy. Providing us with as much flexibility as possible with regard to regulations would help us in the long term.”

“The evidence gathering, consultation and mechanism to set up a control area will require resourcing, finance and additional staff time to deal with retrospective planning applications where these are required during the transitional period. This legislation will have significant implications for both Development Plans & Development Management, ever diminishing teams against a background of annual budget cuts.

The issue of enforcing regulations and the extra work this will entail is likely to fall on Planning and Licencing staff. In the current climate, the Comhairle is undergoing consultations on cuts that will need to be made to balance support given during lockdown. There is no budget available currently for the recruiting and training of staff and although it is anticipated that potential fees will pay for any staff, there is an initial outlay required, which has not been planned for in budgets. We propose an initial start-up grant or loan from Scottish Government.

Each application would require due consideration and income from planning fees for Change of Use, at current levels, would be unlikely to cover additional staff time for this work.”

“Paragraph 6.4 all local authorities must have a live licensing scheme open to receive licensing applications by 1 April 2022.
• There are 18 months until this needs to be in place, and probably about 12 months once we know the outcome of this consultation and see guidance in the spring. There are policies to be written, consultations to be carried out with public and stakeholders, committees to seek approval from, staff to be employed and trained etc. We are still working from home and under restriction, and with the best will in the world, 18 (or 12) months to get everything underway, when we don’t know what is happening with our workplace, or indeed the way we are working, seems ambitious.”[10]

Glasgow City Council

“It is anticipated that there will be significant resourcing issues for the Local Authority in setting up a licensing scheme. Significant staff resourcing for set of scheme/verification process/carrying out inspections/enforcement etc. would be required.”[11]

Highland Council

“The new regulatory responsibility of both licensing and control areas are anticipated to have significant, budgetary and regulatory impacts on the Highland Council; invoking responsibilities in relation to the status and safety of a very large number of properties across a dispersed geographical area…”

Highland Council also estimate that they could receive as much as “10,000 potential applications” on licensing and that while the “scheme permits a phased approach over a 3-year period but this will still present considerable administrative and operational undertaking for dealing with the initial applications. Ongoing resource will then be needed for renewals and new premises.

The workload will necessitate additional staff for the following teams:

Licensing team – additional administrative licensing staff
Planning team – additional full-time posts (professional support officers) for a two-year period. There would still be resource required after this two-year period to cover new and renewed licence enquiries, however this is anticipated to be at a much lower level.
Environmental Health additional full-time posts (technical officers) for a two-year period. There would still be resource required after this two-year period to cover new and renewed licence enquiries, however this is anticipated to be at a much lower level.
ICT systems – a review of the on-line tools to enable self-service and on-line payments to streamline the application and payment process.”[12]

North Ayrshire Council

“Councils are to set up a new system, complete with new conditions and an inspection system involving Housing, Protective Services and Planning by 1 April 2022 at the latest. This would be a substantial task at any time, but it is particularly onerous when Council staff, working remotely, are facing increased demands to provide services to the public due to the coronavirus pandemic and Councils are facing unprecedented challenges, particularly with regard to licensing due to the coronavirus pandemic.

(a) if premises are to be inspected, Council staff must be available for this;
(b) Council staff are already having to work under pressure as the Coronavirus restrictions are regularly changed. In the case of STLs, where there are objections or representations to Licence Applications, delegated powers are not available to Council officers and the Application must be considered by the Licensing Committee. If there are to be around 327 Applications in North Ayrshire, then a portion of them will need a ‘virtual hearing’ compliant with ECHR 6. This would place a burden on Licensing Authorities at a time when they are least able to bear it.

2.2. Although Councils will be able to choose when the licencing scheme will start locally, it must be within 12 months after 1 April 2021.

2.3. The new STL system commences at most 18 months away, and Councils have not seen the secondary legislation on which the new system will be based. It will be laid in Parliament in December 2020 and has not been issued in draft. It has not been stated whether Application forms and other documentation will be prescribed, or whether they are to be drafted by individual Councils.”[13]

South Ayrshire Council

“…there is an element of concern regarding the proposed lead in time for implementation of a robust licencing regime, the resources this will require and the added pressure to workloads required of staff and services.”[14]

Stirling Council

“The implementation, management and enforcement of the [licensing] process is considered particularly resource intensive for local authorities, with little guidance given around who would be expected to lead the process.”[15]

West Dunbartonshire Council

“For smaller authorities with fewer short term let premises it may be difficult to fully resource an effective and efficient service without the fees being very high and thereby creating a wide and varying fee structure across the country. There is a concern about the level of Fees that a smaller Local Authority may charge where they are not dealing with a large volume of applications and have limited resources to deal with such applications. The fee structure may not be of a sufficient level to meet resource concerns and the adverse comparisons by the public as to differing fee structures around the country as can happen in Civic Government Licensing.”[16]

Financial Support from the Scottish Government to Local Authorities to Implement Licensing

On 22nd January 2021, the following answer was provided to Finlay Carson MSP:

Finlay Carson (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party): To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the responses from local authority stakeholders to the consultation on short-term lets, whether it will provide grants or loans to councils to assist with the costs of setting up a licensing scheme, and how many have (a) requested and (b) indicated that they might require additional funding. (S5W-34589)

Kevin Stewart: Local authorities will be able to charge fees to cover the cost of establishing and running their short-term lets licensing scheme. The Scottish Government has no plans to provide grants or loans to local authorities to do so. A total of 23 local authorities responded to the Short Term Lets: Consultation on a licensing scheme and planning control areas in Scotland (14 September 2020); see www.gov.scot/publications/short-term-lets/ for the consultation paper and report. Three of those responses expressed the opinion that the Scottish Government should provide grant or loan funding to support the establishment of the licensing scheme. Outside of the consultation, no formal requests for additional funding have been received.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Financial Sustainability of Local Government in Scotland Consultation

The Impact of COVID19 on the Financial Sustainability of Local Government in Scotland Consultation[17] responses further illustrate that Local Authorities have neither the funds, or time to spend on implementing a License scheme.

Joint Submission from COSLA, Solace and CIPFA Directors Of Finance[18]

COVID-19 has demonstrated that the status quo and fiscal environment is unsustainable, restricting, and unfit for purpose.
The COVID-19 crisis has presented unprecedented challenges to the whole of the public sector, not least for Local Government across Scotland which serves as the prime anchor for support to communities in need; children, young people and families; local businesses; and for services that enhance physical and emotional well-being. Local Government works with communities every day to affect change and to make the voice of local people heard across all public services. This has not changed during the pandemic, nor will it change as we deal with recovery and renewal.

COVID-19 has presented extra-ordinary financial challenges across the whole of the public sector, but these have been especially felt by Local Government who continued to provide essential services and vital supports throughout the pandemic. Councils were already under significant financial pressure, and during the crisis committed to considerable expenditure without a guarantee that the additional expenditure would be met by Scottish Government. Nevertheless, key core services continued, and new responsibilities were taken on, in order to buffer local communities from the impacts of COVID-19. This is not sustainable and, in the current post-COVID context, demands real and more flexible investment to avoid redundancies and cuts to services.
COSLA, Directors of Finance, and SOLACE have worked closely to assess the significant financial impacts of COVID-19 on Councils. COSLA coordinated several cost collection exercises, the most recent of which assessed the full- year financial impact (March 2020 to April 2021) of the pandemic, which revealed a £500m gap, even after the additional funding from UK consequentials and any cost savings by Councils are taken into account.
Councils are also contending with significant challenges around loss of income due to the closure of leisure facilities, libraries, schools, museums 􏰅 and many other facilities that support the cultural, learning, and wellbeing needs of our communities. Sales, fees and charges that play a key part in balancing budgets were also, and continue to be, lost 􏰅 for example fees from planning, building control, licensing, trade waste, and parking. Since the beginning of lockdown, initial estimates show that Councils have lost c£423m of income that is critical for the continued funding and delivery of services. These losses will have longer-term consequences for budgets as Councils must balance what the continued provision may look like in the future, with the duty to ensure overall financial sustainability.
Local Government across Scotland is navigating an extremely challenging financial position, due not only to a rise in demand for services as vulnerable individuals and families require support, but compounded by a sharp loss of income and increasing costs in relation to complying with the relevant public health guidance.

It is important to re-emphasise that when the COVID-19 crisis began, Local Government was already facing significant financial challenges. The Scottish Budget for 2020/21, whilst providing full funding for Scottish Government policy initiatives, far from closed the financial deficit faced by Local Government and was once again only for a single year (revenue and capital). This makes medium- and longer-term financial planning challenging, something that has been commented on by the Accounts Commission in its recent Local Government Overview Report.

The Accounts Commission’s Overview Report[19] on Local Government for 2020 highlights that, while Local Government revenue funding increased in 2020/21 by 1.5 per cent (real terms) from the previous year to £10.7 billion, since 2013/14 it has reduced by 3.3 per cent (in real terms). The Report points out that Councils have less flexibility in how they use funding. Funding dedicated to national policy initiatives increased from £1 billion in 2019/20 to £1.5 billion in 2020/21, equating now to 14.1 per cent of council funding from the Scottish Government.
In addition to the pressures presented by the COVID-19 response, this upcoming year will see significant policy and legislative changes that will have potential substantial implications for Local Government resourcing and delivery, including the introduction of the Redress for Survivors (Historical Child Abuse in Care) Bill; the incorporation of the UNCRC into Scots law; and the implementation of ‘The Promise’, a detailed strategy which arose from the recommendations of the Independent Care Review, to name only a few. Local Government supports these policy intentions, but without real, additional investment across the whole of Local Government – and not just for specific policy initiatives – there is a serious risk that Councils will not be able to deliver on these areas to the best of their ability.

Local Government needs absolute flexibility to manage funding locally and to respond to need, rather than be pressed into areas of specific spend or to be limited to using funding by an artificial deadline or within financial year. The outcomes that were jointly agreed in the National Performance Framework (NPF) should govern how well Local Government’s performance is measured and a much greater focus on how Local Government is achieving over 60% of priorities in the NPF, rather than the current landscape of siloed pots of national funding, with micro-management of each. A more strategic approach is also required to enable Local Government to address the inequalities with our communities in a holistic manner. Ministerial engagement must demonstrate respect for Local Government and for Ministers to trust Councils to get on and do the work they were democratically elected to do[20].

Submission from Argyll & Bute Council[21]

With regards to the commentary provided by Argyll and Bute Council for input to the Advisory Group Economic Recovery (AGER) report, there were a number of suggestions on how the Scottish Government could provide support to local economies going forward. These are reiterated and added to below:
- Engage with the Scottish Government and its agencies, for a greater level of public sector decentralisation to fragile rural, remote rural and island communities.
- Continuation of NDR relief to businesses, particularly those in the tourism, hospitality and food & drink sectors that are going to be acutely impacted on by the pandemic for some time to come (as noted on page 50 of the Benny Higgins report).
- Within the tourism and hospitality industry there may be a need to have more flexibility in allowing extensions of licences for the operation of their business into public realm areas or within the grounds of their premises/land holding to enable them to deal with social distancing requirements; this could also mean a relaxation in planning requirements too; it should be noted that extension of licensing hours should not form part of this flexibility for premises servicing alcohol to minimise incidents of anti-social behaviour.
- Overall, the Economic Recovery report recommendations need to provide more focus on not just a regional approach, but a local placed-based approach to recovery, which recognises the challenges of rural, remote rural and island communities and how opportunities such as the decentralisation of public sector activities could assist areas, such as Argyll and Bute, with dispersed and complex geographies.
- The biggest and most visible economic impact faced in Argyll and Bute has been in connection with the tourism and hospitality industries that form a major element of Argyll and Bute’s private sector. Prior to COVID-19 the 2020/21 tourism season was looking very promising with significant bookings being reported back and while the industry faced some very real and ongoing challenges in terms of intense competition, the future availability of staff and rising costs of operation, the industry looked set to expand further in Argyll and Bute.
- The prospects of delivering economic growth in a number of accessible rural, remote rural and islands communities will be hugely challenging in the months and years ahead. There is now an opportunity to reassess what is achievable in these communities and change the emphasis not solely focused on economic growth, but on an approach to support and enhance community resilience and wealth building.
- Economic recovery from the situation we now find ourselves in will take an enormous international, national and local effort sustained over many months and years. A place-based approach, led by Local Government, in collaboration with other public, private and third sector organisations, is required to develop an inclusive sustainable economy going forward. Collaboration is the key, together with additional fiscal and policy support at a national level to tackle the issues pertinent to each region of Scotland. The economic recovery in Argyll and Bute has already started in line with the Scottish Government’s road map to recovery. Our local businesses are starting to operate again, construction has re-started on many sites, visitors are returning to Argyll and Bute and new funding has been attracted to assist with the recovery process. Support will have to continue however into the next winter period as the level of income generated over the remaining part of the visitor season is likely to be insufficient for many businesses, including the supply chains that support these businesses.

Additional Concerns from Local Authorities

West Lothian Council:

On 9^th October 2021, West Lothian Council released a press release stating that STL licensing will “add needless workload to council staff who have seen a 3000% increase in their caseload since the start of the pandemic”.[22]

“They have urged licensing lawyers to ask questions of the Scottish Government why legislation designed to tackle a problem in cities – where lets have caused very obvious problems – is needed in areas such as West Lothian.

“It outlined the size of the workload generated by changes needed to licensing laws because of Covid regulations.

“There is now a-six month backlog in applications going before the Licensing Board when historically there was none.

“In her draft response Audrey Watson, the council’s Licensing Solicitor questioned why the proposed licensing should be mandatory rather than optional for local authorities.

“She said: “The licensing schemes which are mandatory involve public safety issues such as knife dealer and skin piercing and tattooing licences but public safety is not likely to be a factor in most applications for short term let licences.

“Fellow Conservative Alison Adamson branded the proposed legislation as a piece of “centralised control freakery.””

Highland Council:

Highland Council’s Medium-Term Financial Plan- Update[23] “provides an update on the approach to medium term financial planning for the Council, a key element of good financial management as required by the CIPFA Financial Management Code”. This outlines a £50million budget deficit in 2022/23, rising to £124million in 2026/27. This does not include the financial burden of short-term let licensing or planning control zones. To expect Highland Council to front load the development and administration of licensing (to be in place by October 2022), when applications are not to commence until April 2023 puts the local authority at a funding disadvantage. It may result in impact on core funding activities across the region.

Highland Council passed the following motion on Thursday 28^th October 2021[24]:

(4) Council strongly urges the Scottish Government to drop its proposed licensing scheme for short-term holiday lets and instead adopt the registration scheme proposed by the Association of Scottish Self Caterers. This would be far less costly for operators and less onerous for the Highland Council to administer, whilst providing proven health and safety protection. The proposed scheme is not appropriate for the Highlands.

Conclusion

The short-term letting and wider tourism industry has repeatedly called for the Scottish Government to listen to expert industry concerns and to opt for a more flexible, proportionate, and business-friendly registration scheme.
Scottish self-catering is a vital part of the country’s world-famous tourism offering and Scotland is well-renowned as having some of the most stunning and welcoming places to stay.
If licensing is brought in, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic which has decimated the industry, there is the real possibility that many small businesses may see their livelihoods threatened.
New licensing schemes appear to be the last thing that local authorities need in terms of financial resource or manpower.
A one size fits all approach is not supported by local authorities.
Local Authorities should not be additionally burdened at this time or in the foreseeable future.

Footnotes:

[1] Stephen McGowan is the author of Local Government Licensing Law in Scotland (2012), the only legal textbook on the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 – under which the new licensing schemes will be adopted.

[2] https://www.assc.co.uk/potential-flood-of-licensing-applications-for-short-term-lets-in-glasgow/

[3] https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/licensing-expert-warns-of-flood-of-short-term-let-licences-1

[4] https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-65-issue-02/system-overload-licensing-short-term-lets/

[5] https://www.lawscot.org.uk/media/363183/19-07-19-plan-lic-short-term-lets.pdf

[6] https://www.lawscot.org.uk/media/369667/20-10-16-plan-lic-consultation-short-term-lets-regulations.pdf

[7] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=900&uuId=552786991

[8] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=480&uuId=738532527

[9] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?show_all_questions=0&sort=submitted&order=ascending&_q__text=borders&uuId=648059965

[10] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=780&uuId=458288928

[11] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=900&uuId=52867059

[12] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=840&uuId=880423694

[13] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=780&uuId=560815682

[14] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=900&uuId=900902345

[15] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?_b_index=900&uuId=465853950

[16] https://consult.gov.scot/housing-services-policy-unit/short-term-lets-licensing-scheme/consultation/view_respondent?show_all_questions=0&sort=submitted&order=ascending&_q__text=West+Dunbartonshire+Council&uuId=124670121

[17] https://yourviews.parliament.scot/session-5/local-gov-sustainability-covid/

[18] https://yourviews.parliament.scot/session-5/local-gov-sustainability-covid/consultation/download_public_attachment?sqId=question-2020-06-10-3171498657-publishablefilesubquestion&uuId=804853480

[19] https://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/report/local-government-in-scotland-overview-2020

[20] https://yourviews.parliament.scot/finance/scotlands-public-finances-22-23-and-impact-covid/consultation/download_public_attachment?sqId=question-2020-06-10-3171498657-publishablefilesubquestion&uuId=1017974980

[21] https://yourviews.parliament.scot/session-5/covid-19-economic-recovery/consultation/view_respondent?sort=excerpt&order=ascending&uuId=368969193

[22] https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/holiday-home-licensing-branded-control-21900975

[23] Medium Term Financial Plan- Update 28^th October 2021: https://www.highland.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/78893/9_medium_term_financial_plan_-_update

[24] https://www.highland.gov.uk/meetings/meeting/4504/highland_council/attachment/78888

ASSC Submission to Edinburgh City Council Short-Term Let Control Area Consultation Response

Posted on November 4, 2021April 10, 2025 by Fiona Campbell

The ASSC has submitted a response to Edinburgh City Council Short-Term Let Control Area Consultation Response

Read the ASSC press release.

Edinburgh Briefing – ASSC

Do you support the designation of a Short-Term Let Control Area for Edinburgh?

Yes No Unsure

The Association of Scotland’s Self-Caterers (ASSC) welcomes the opportunity to respond to the City of Edinburgh Council’s consultation on establishing a Short-Term Let Control Area for Edinburgh. Founded in 1978, the ASSC are the leading source of knowledge on short-term letting and holiday homes in Scotland and are the only trade body representing the interests of the traditional self-catering sector. We represent over 1300 Members, operating tens of thousands of self-catering properties throughout Scotland, from city centre apartments to rural cottages, to lodges and chalets, to castles. The ASSC commits its members to maintaining the principles of “quality, integrity, cleanliness, comfort, courtesy and efficiency” and to offering visitors to Scotland consistently high standards within their self-catering properties.

The ASSC opposes the designation of a Short-Term Let Control Area for Edinburgh but wishes to put this stance in context, setting out our responsible and proactive regulatory position, before commenting in detail on the deficiencies in the City of Edinburgh Council’s approach.

First and foremost, the ASSC is not averse to regulation; but we do challenge policies that are pursued while lacking a firm evidence base which will damage the livelihoods of our members and Scotland’s vital tourism industry. Overall, we want to ensure a balanced and proportionate approach for business, tourism and local communities and get a regulatory framework in place that works for all. We will work constructively with all stakeholders, including City of Edinburgh Council, to achieve this crucial objective.

Moreover, we proactively worked with MSPs and the Scottish Government on the short-term let provisions in the Scottish Government’s Planning (Scotland) Act during the Bill’s passage through the Scottish Parliament which will now enable local councils to introduce Control Areas subject to satisfying certain conditions and achieving Ministerial approval. The introduction of Control Areas, in areas of housing stock pressure with a demonstrable link with short-term lets, is in line with the ASSC’s Long-Term Approach to Short-Term Letting Policy, published back in February 2019. [1] This underlines the fact that the industry is in fact supportive of regulations when they are targeted, proportionate and balanced.

However, the ASSC holds a number of concerns with the proposals as set out by City of Edinburgh Council for a Control Area covering the entire local authority. We cannot support this policy for the following three reasons:

The Council’s proposals will entail a negative impact for operators, potential visitors and the local economy that tourism supports. Indeed, it comes at a time where our tourism industry should be supported by local and national government for a sustainable recovery, especially when so many businesses remain in survival mode. Taken together with plans for short-term let licensing, this is a perfect storm for small tourism businesses, and jeopardises a self-catering industry that boosts Edinburgh by £70m per annum. [2]
The proposals lack a firm, reliable and robust evidence base to justify the entire local authority area being captured by a Control Area. If the aim is to control the number of short-term lets due to pressures on housing stock, the ASSC maintains that this has to be properly evidenced using robust data and not rely on anecdote or unreliable ‘scrapings’ of data using third-party websites like AirDNA and Inside Airbnb. The ASSC have previously argued that there is a lack of data showing an empirical link between short-term lets and housing shortages and that a more holistic approach needs to be taken to the issue. Housing challenges are multifaceted and the growth of short-term lets should not be used as a convenient scapegoat for wider policy failures; namely the failure to build more homes or bring empty homes back into use. Thus far, no evidence has been published in Scotland that demonstrates a concrete link between short-term letting and the Scottish housing supply.
The proposals will pose significant resourcing implications for City of Edinburgh Council which have not been properly assessed. The ASSC believes the Council needs to undertake an economic impact assessment in terms of costs of introducing a city-wide Control Area. At a time when there are severe constraints on local government finance, additional burdens will be placed on planning teams to manage the requirements of the Control Area. With the absence of any estimations in the Council’s plans, the Financial Memorandum for the Planning (Scotland) Bill estimated that the cost to planning authorities of additional applications resulting from short-term lets would be between £358,207 and £2.7m per year. Given that this was prepared in 2017, the costs may have increased further.[3] Moreover, research carried out by the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) in connection with the implementation of the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 estimated the costs of a planning authority designating all or part of its area as a short-term let control area between £640,710 (lower estimate) and £14,756,800 (higher estimate). [4] The RTPI also commented that the “increase in demand for planners comes at a time when there is a diminishing resource base with planning authorities’ budgets decreased in real terms by 40.8% and staff numbers cut by 25.7% since 2009.” [5] Likewise, the Law Society of Scotland warned that local authorities may not be ready from a resourcing perspective: “There are unlikely to be resources in place at present in local authority licensing or planning departments to cover such additional and in certain areas, extensive work.” [6]

Self-catering properties have been a longstanding and welcome presence in the capital for decades, enhancing the tourist offering and boosting the local economy. For a city that is renowned for its hospitality, it is very disappointing that local policymakers are looking to solve multifaceted housing challenges in Edinburgh by concentrating on tourist accommodation and damaging small businesses in the process.

Sources for Question 8:

(1) ASSC, Long Term Approach to Short-Term Letting (2019). Url: https://www.assc.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/ASSC-Policy-Paper.pdf

(2) Frontline Consultants, Economic Impact of Self-Catering Sector to the Scottish Economy (2021). Url: https://www.assc.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Economic-Impact-Study%E2%80%93Scotland.pdf

(3) Scottish Parliament, Planning (Scotland) Bill. Revised Financial Memorandum (2019). Url: https://archive2021.parliament.scot/S5_Bills/Planning%20(Scotland)%20Bill/SPBill23AFMS052019.pdf

(4) Royal Town Planning Institute, Financial Implications of Implementing the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 (2019), p10. Url: https://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/1211/rtpi-scotland-financialimplications-of-implementing-the-planning-scotland-act-2019.pdf

(5) Royal Town Planning Institute, ‘Short Term Lets: RTPI Scotland’s response to the Scottish Government’s Consultation on a licensing scheme and planning control areas in Scotland’, 06/10/20. Url: https://www.rtpi.org.uk/consultations/2020/october/short-term-lets/

[6] Law Society of Scotland, Consultation Response: Short-Term Lets (2019), p13. Url: https://www.lawscot.org.uk/media/363183/19-07-19-plan-lic-short-termlets.pdf

Do you agree with the proposal to designate the entire Council area as a Short-Term Let Area of Control?

Yes No Unsure

The ASSC argues that designating the entire Council area as a Short-Term Let Control Area is wholly disproportionate and lacks an empirical evidence base to underpin the proposals. The Council have set out a proposed Statement of Reasons, as well as a Background Report. We contend that a city-wide Control Area will not achieve the policy objectives, and that the Background Report does not provide sufficient data, or a proper evidence base to justify it. Our response to this question will, in turn, assess the assertions set out in both the Statement of Reasons and its accompanying Background Report.

For ease, we have framed our remarks around four areas identified in the Council’s Background Report: (a) the scale of short-term letting in Edinburgh (b) the housing market (c) impacts on communities and residents; and (d) visitor accommodation.

The Scale of Short-Term Letting in Edinburgh

In the Background Report (p1), the Council acknowledge that “the precise scale and scope of the short-term let (STL) industry in the city is currently unknown as there is no requirement to register such a property with the Council.” The Council’s proposals also rely on pre-pandemic listings from two online platforms only (Airbnb and VRBO) and this does not provide an accurate reflection of the short-term letting landscape in Edinburgh. While they do recognise that “Airbnb is not the only platform of its type”, they then also state that the figures “may be a conservative estimate of the total number of short-term lets operating within the city.” (p1) Such statements simply underline that the Council do not possess adequate data to make such significant policy changes. There also appears to be no real differentiation between legitimate small businesses, such as self-catering, and casual amateur hosts, who utilise online marketing platforms but are not subject to the same levels of existing regulation as professionals.

Again, the Council’s Background Report highlights that “in 2019, 31% of all Airbnb listings in Scotland were in the city of Edinburgh”. There is no discussion of the fact that listings do not necessarily equate to the number of houses that would be available on the long-term housing market, that a single property may have multiple listings, or even acknowledge the diverse range of accommodation on the platform. For instance, a cursory search of the accommodation available on Airbnb in Edinburgh shows hundreds of listings for “unique stays” encompassing bothies, campervans/motorhomes, stables, boats, farm stay, and a castle; guest suites; chalets; guest houses; and hotel rooms. Moreover, there are also private rooms within the permanent residences of homeowners listed on the site. None of these listings will solve housing challenges in Edinburgh but are still included as part of the Council’s Background Report justifying the need for a city-wide Control Area.

In addition to the failure to understand the diverse range of accommodation on Airbnb, the Council are unable to distinguish between data that has been provided by the platform itself and those who claim to provide analytics, as seen in the following comment: “Data provided by Airbnb indicates the number of days within a year that properties are available.” (p2) This was not data provided by Airbnb but taken from ‘Inside Airbnb’ which instead uses unreliable scraped data.

Unfortunately, there has been a tendency to focus on scraped data, based on inaccurate information and flawed methodologies, which leads to misleading conclusions about the nature of the short-term letting landscape. The number of listings on online platforms in any given area is not necessarily an indication of impact on long-term housing. For example:

(i) many of these properties are already the primary residences of individuals involved in ‘homesharing’ who share a room(s), or their entire home while away;

(ii) each listing does not represent a single housing unit. A property can have multiple listings; and

(iii) marketing platforms like Airbnb contain a diverse range of accommodation including hotels and B&Bs, as well as unconventional accommodation like yurts, barns, boats, and campervans, which cannot be seen as housing stock.

Furthermore, properties can also be advertised across multiple platforms, be it Airbnb, Expedia or Booking.com – referred to as ‘cross-listing’ – creating the mistaken perception that there are more properties available for short-term let than there actually are. Properties can be listed multiple times on one or many platforms. Whole homes or single rooms in the same house often appear on more than one platform.[1] We find it deeply troubling that a Background Report which is meant to provide “an evidence base” to support the Statement of Reasons fails to understand such basic information about how properties are advertised on accommodation marketing platforms.

The Council’s Background Report also breaks down the number of listings per council ward and further breaks it down by the entire property registered for let, entire property listed for let for more than 90 days, entire property registered for let for less than 90 days, room only registered for let. According to the report, there are 13,766 “properties registered (entire property and room only)” and of this, 5,796 are room only and 4,437 are entire properties registered for let for less than 90 days. These cannot be regarded as properties which would be available on the long-term rental market as this is the owner’s primary residence. This ‘data’ is based on 2019 figures and is now entirely irrelevant in the context of Covid-19. We also wonder what the relevance of 90 days is, apart from referencing planning legislation in London.

The Housing Market

More widely, short-term lets are often presented as being a leading cause of Scotland’s housing crisis. However, it is important to place the debate in a holistic context – for instance, noting the number of empty homes in Scotland, demographic changes, and the need to build more homes – while recognising the value of tourist accommodation to the Scottish economy and local communities. Policymakers should not use holiday accommodation as a means to solve housing challenges in Scotland, instead focusing on building more affordable homes and tackling the scourge of empty properties.

There is no baseline data on which to evidence a link between short-term letting and loss of housing stock or increasing house prices in either Scotland or within Edinburgh. This assumption is based on anecdote and narrative. In addition, any figures should be placed in context. For instance, as of 21 October 2021, according to data from the Scottish Assessors Association, there are 1462 self-catering properties on the Non-Domestic Rates roll within Edinburgh.[2] This is an insignificant number when set against the housing needs in the city and the number of existing dwellings, not to mention the number of empty homes which could be put to more effective use. Figures released from GoodMove showed that Edinburgh was Scotland’s empty home hotspot, with over 7,000 in the capital. [3]

City of Edinburgh Council should also be aware of the unintended consequences of their approach. The Statement of Reasons (p4) notes that “the loss of housing to short term-let use results in a city wide problem of reduced housing availability and issues of affordability.” Many professionally run self-catering units, located in prime locations in Edinburgh, could not in any way be described as affordable housing within the reach of those on an average salary, if the owner decided to place it on the long-term housing market. Moreover, even if a property did not receive planning permission under the Control Area proposal, there is no guarantee that the owner will either sell the property or make it available on the long-term rental market; they could use their property as a second home, something which would only benefit the individual owner while damaging the tourism economy in the process. This consideration is absent in the Council’s Background Report.

As already outlined in our answer to Question 8, the ASSC supports Control Areas in places where there is a demonstrable, evidence-based link between short-term lets and loss of housing stock, and robust evidence that reducing the capacity of short-term lets will directly benefit the availability of housing. The Council has singularly failed to provide that. Indeed, the Background Report essentially makes our point: “It is very difficult to track how much housing has been transferred to short-term letting” (p14). In essence, the Council hold no empirical evidence to validate their claims about the impact of holiday letting on the housing market.

The research that the Council does hold falls short of what is required. The Background Report highlights pre-pandemic work commissioned by the Council from Rettie & Co in 2018 – which, given the company’s commercial interests is far from independent – assessing the impact that the short-term let sector was having on rents within Edinburgh’s traditional private rented sector, and the availability of residential property in the city. This research claimed that there was a “loss of around 10% of private rented homes to short-term lets in recent years” while “between 2014 and 2017 the city saw 2,700 more properties per year listed as available on Airbnb, while private rented sector stock fell 560 per annum” (p14). However, there are several reasons why private rented stock may have decreased which may not be to do with short-term lets. Private residential tenancy legislation from 2016 has acted as a disincentive for long-term rental and has pushed many landlords into short-term letting due to the inflexibility of the system.

As previously stated, Airbnb listings do not necessarily equate with homes which would be available on the housing market. Any short-term let regulations taken forward, either at a national or local level, needs to be informed by robust empirical data. Scraped data from online platforms can lead to misleading conclusions about the nature of the short-term letting market.

The Background Report states the following: “There is concern that increased numbers of short-term lets reduces the supply of available homes for longer term lets, which would tend to increase the cost of renting. Research also indicates a displacement of demand, with rents rising significantly above average (between 20-27% over the period 2014-17) in areas bordering a high concentration of short term lets. Private rents have increased by more than 30% over the last five years. Research indicates rising rents occurring in those areas bordering a high concentration of Airbnb, suggesting a displacement of demand. In those areas bordering the city centre, rents increased around 20-27% over the period 2014-2017.” (p15)

“There is concern” does not mean hard evidence – and once again, the paper is referencing dated figures, this time at least four years old. Rents will rise for a whole host of reasons but this is not explored or explained within the paper. Nonetheless, the Private Housing (Tenancies) (Scotland) 2016 Act granted Scottish councils the power to ask Scottish Ministers to designate a Rent Pressure Zone (RPZ). To date, no Scottish council, including City of Edinburgh Council, has made an application for a RPZ which would limit rental increases for tenants with private residential tenancies.

When launching their plans, and in the associated documents, the Council emphasised that their Control Area proposal does not amount to a de-facto ban on short-term lets within Edinburgh. However, that is the situation that many professional operators will find themselves in: a city-wide control area coupled with no letting within tenemental properties is a ban in all but name. Indeed, it also does not match the statements made by leading Council officials. To take one example, the Convener of the Planning Committee, Councillor Neil Gardiner, has said: “Once we get the legislation in place, these properties will be returned to homes and strong neighbourhoods restored across the city.” [4] It is difficult to read such remarks and not conclude that the real agenda is to eliminate short-term letting.

Edinburgh Council’s draft proposals for a short-term let control zone covering the entire city are disproportionate and lack an empirical evidence base to substantiate claims that such accommodation has reduced housing stock. When housing demand and the level of empty housing is set against the number of self-catering units, it suggests self-catering activity is not of a scale sufficient to affect housing supply issues in Scotland. Ultimately, building too few homes remains the core cause of Scotland’s housing problems, not the holiday let sector.

Impacts on communities and residents

The Background Report (p8) makes the following claim:

“Regular use of any tenement flat as a short term let is inconsistent with tenement living, and often leads to anti-social behaviour and undue nuisance to other residents. This generates a high number of complaints. The issue is not restricted to this type of accommodation. Residents have experienced persistent difficulties as a result of anti-social behaviour in properties which have a shared or common space. The transfer of noise into neighbouring properties is another well-known problem, especially in tenement flats but can also lead to complaints from residents in detached or semi-detached accommodation.”

Similarly, on p10, it states:

“Analysis of some cases received indicates that most complaints received relate to low level disturbance, which nonetheless can have a serious impact on residential amenity. For example, visitors who use flats will often arrive and depart at anti-social hours and in the process of doing so will disturb neighbouring properties when moving through communal areas. Many hosts allow two-night minimum stays and there have been several cases where one night stays have been permitted by the host. In these circumstances, the likelihood of disturbance, with guests changing over on a more regular basis, also has a tangible impact on residential amenity.”

However, the Council do not provide a proper explanation as to why users of a short-term letting property would exhibit behaviour markedly different from permanent residents – be it families, students, or those with employment/leisure interests which may enter/leave the property at different types of the day and night. Anti-social behaviour can occur from permanent residents in tenemental properties and councils have powers to deal with this type of ASB and anti-social behaviour associated with holiday lets.

The Background Report (p11) notes: “Concentrations of entire property STLs let full-time in common stairs often results in daily disruption and stress caused by constant ‘visitor use’, rather than residential use – noise, disturbance, buzzers, door knocking, littering, anti-social behaviour, the loss of a sense of community and security where the majority in both the close, and within the wider local community, were constantly changing strangers.” We find the use of the term “constantly changing strangers” to be an interesting use of language – do permanent residents only invite a select few people into their abode? The differences in behaviour between visitor and residential use has not been adequately explained by the Council.

Back in March 2018, the ASSC obtained legal advice from Brodies LLP on the requirement for planning permission for self-catering properties. Some of the main points from the legal advice include the statement that: “…the commercial element (in self-catering use] is broadly similar to a residential property being occupied by a tenant paying rent…The question is therefore whether short stay occupation necessarily has different planning considerations/impacts. Short stay occupation involves people living in the property, just for shorter periods. However, that does not necessarily mean the nature/impacts of the occupation are different.”

The advice goes on to discuss how permanent residents can have different movements depending on a variety of issues, including employment, leisure interests, family circumstances, health. For instance, a family with teenage children might enter and leave the property many times during the day and night. Therefore, the advice maintains that: “Users of a self-catering property are therefore unlikely to exhibit markedly different characteristics to more permanent residents. Disruptive or anti-social behaviour is just as likely in residential use as self-catering use.” The advice concludes with the following: “…reasonable arguments can be made that self-catering use does not involve a material change of use from residential use. That has been the outcome in individual cases decided by appeal reporters/inspectors and upheld by the courts. It is also impliedly supported by the statements in the Scottish Government Circular 4/1998.” [5]

Regarding other community and residential impacts, the Background Report does not provide a breakdown of the number of anti-social behaviour complaints against short-term lets (or indeed how they compare to complaints made against other tenants). Through contact with City of Edinburgh Council officials in September 2021, we were informed that when the Council records an ASB complaint, it can be logged against the following tenures: Short-Term Let, City of Edinburgh Council, Private Sector Leasing, Owner Occupied, Private Rent, Housing Association, and Unknown.

In July 2021, the ASSC made an FOI request of all 32 local authorities in Scotland, including City of Edinburgh Council, to ascertain the level of reported ASB complaints attributed to holiday lets from 2018 to 2021, as well as making a comparison with ASB complaints made against other types of housing tenure, and to gauge how councils were utilising existing ASB legislation in response. Across Scotland, the number of complaints made against short-term lets remains rare. In response to our request, City of Edinburgh Council said that complaints related to short-term lets were as follows:

2018 – 14

2019 – 58

2020 – 29

2021 (Jan-Jun) – 3.

While these figures are relatively low, they also need to be viewed in context, both in terms of the total number of short-term let properties in Edinburgh, as well as how this relates to other types of property. Unfortunately, unlike other local authorities who readily supplied information, City of Edinburgh Council did not release figures showing the total number of ASB complaints made against other types of housing tenure, data which we know the Council collect, which would enable a proper comparison to be made and to view the matter in a more rounded way. What we do know from responses from other local authorities is that ASB complaints made against short-term lets are minute when compared to other housing tenures. Similarly, City of Edinburgh Council did not provide data relating to incidences when they deployed anti-social behaviour legislation both in response to short-term lets and other housing tenures.

While making passing reference to it, data from the Council’s complaint system should be included in the Background Report. The Council also need to show that they are using the powers available to them to tackle any anti-social behaviour associated with short-term lets. If not, we can only assume that they are not using the Antisocial Behaviour Notices (Houses Used for Holiday Purposes) (Scotland) Order 2011, which the former Minister for Housing Kevin Stewart described as, “quite comprehensive powers to deal with antisocial behaviour and noise nuisance”, before noting that “I expect them to use those powers effectively…I challenge local authorities to consider using it [Order 2011] and other antisocial behaviour powers, as well as the powers in relation to noise and environmental health that are currently at their disposal.” [6]

In terms of background, Part 7 of the Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Act 2004 enables local authorities to serve an Antisocial Behaviour Notice on a private landlord when an occupant or visitor engages in antisocial behaviour at, or in the locality, of the property. The Antisocial Behaviour Notices (Houses Used for Holiday Purposes) (Scotland) Order 2011 granted local authorities the power to deal specifically with the problem of antisocial behaviour in properties let for holiday use. To again quote the Minister formerly in charge of short-term let regulation, Kevin Stewart MSP: “The [ASB] powers may not be being applied properly, which might be the difficulty in all this…Under the order that I mentioned, the antisocial behaviour notice is served not on the people in the property who are causing the problem but on the landlord. That is extremely important. Folk having left a property should not affect in any way, shape or form the serving of a notice on the landlord.” [7]

More recently, the Cabinet Secretary for Housing Shona Robison MSP stated that “We expect all relevant authorities to use the powers available to them to deal with antisocial behaviour”. [8] If the Council are not utilising these powers, they need to explain why and also whether they think the Scottish Government’s legislation is deficient, with a view to getting this strengthened for the benefit of local residents. The Scottish Government state they have no plans to review the Antisocial Behaviour Notices (Houses Used for Holiday Purposes) (Scotland) Order 2011 but are “always open to listening to the police, local authorities, the court services and communities to see how we can improve the approach being taken to tackle antisocial behaviour for the benefit of all communities.”[9] We would therefore recommend that the Council engages with the Scottish Government if it feels that the existing regulatory powers are not fit for purpose.

Overall, the Council needs to exercise full transparency and provide more data to:

(i) show the total number of ASB complaints made against short-term let properties over the last few years;

(ii) compare the number of such ASB complaints against other types of property and tenant (see the aforesaid types of tenure logged by the Council) over the same time period;

(iii) highlight how many times they have utilised existing anti-social behaviour legislation in respect of short-term lets over the last few years; and

(iv) explain whether they believe that the existing ASB legislation from the Scottish Government provides them with sufficient means to act on such complaints.

Without such data, the Background Report falls woefully short of providing an evidence base for the Statement of Reasons regarding the impact on communities and residents. The Council needs to recognise that the vast majority of operators in Edinburgh are responsible. Rather than such a broad-brush approach, we should instead focus on removing bad actors within the system rather than penalising hardworking professional operators who have been present in their communities for a number of years with no negative impact on their neighbours.

Visitor Accommodation

It is extremely disappointing that the Council’s Background Report does not elaborate in any great detail about the economic benefits of short-term letting to Edinburgh, other than to highlight that homesharing is exempt from the Control Area (p10), which is in any case already part of the regulations passed by the Scottish Parliament. Regrettably, the Council completely ignore the economic contribution from the traditional industry which Frontline Consultants estimated as providing a £70m annual boost to the city. Short-term letting also adds to the diverse range of accommodation available within the capital and responds to consumer trends towards more authentic local experiences. The fact that consumer trends are shifting towards short-term lets and self-catering is illustrated by the fact that hotel chains are moving into this market and why they list rooms on popular booking platforms like Airbnb and Booking.com.

Traditional short-term letting activity, such as self-catering, is a small business like any other, with dedicated full-time professionals striving to provide positive experiences for guests and visitors. Given the competition to maintain standards, holiday let owners often spend money more frequently on additional property maintenance than they would on their own property. Their guests spend money in local food shops, cafes, gift shops, galleries, restaurants, tourist attractions etc – many of which would simply be unviable without visitor spending. Therefore, the impact of a city-wide Control Area with the aim of reducing the number of properties, will not be limited to self-catering and short-term letting overall as there will be a significant negative impact to businesses in the wider supply chain. This emphasises the value that short-term letting provides to the wider economy (especially within the context of Covid recovery) from the operators themselves, with negative knock-on effects on hospitality, local activity providers and local attractions. There will also be a negative impact on laundry providers and cleaning services and guests, not to mention property managers, and the onward tech supply chain.

Short-term letting also adds to the economic vibrancy and success of Edinburgh in other ways. The following comment comes from one of our leading members in the capital, Dickins Edinburgh Limited (who have been operating for nearly 25 years), who explain exactly the sort of offering they provide and how it benefits Edinburgh beyond simply providing tourist accommodation:

“We let to blue chip companies bringing staff here – Baillie Gifford, Rockstar, Cirrus Logic etc. We work with a number of consulates. We are recommended by Edinburgh University for visiting academics and when they have special projects here and need to provide accommodation. We house Fullbright scholars. We provide temporary accommodation for people relocating to the city, whilst they try to buy or to rent long term (and as we discussed, the realities of renting a long-term flat are not at all straightforward). We look after local families whilst they have renovations done or need alternative accommodation during an insurance claim. We house Edinburgh people who now live abroad and are visiting family in Edinburgh. We’re currently housing a lot of people connected to the new film studio in Leith. None of these people would be able to stay in a hotel.”

In the determination to use short-term lets as a scapegoat for much more complex housing challenges, this is just one example of what Edinburgh could lose through these damaging proposals for a disproportionate city-wide Control Area.

When discussing visitor accommodation, the Background Report contends that: “there is considerable supply of serviced visitor accommodation in Edinburgh, along with student halls which provide visitor accommodation at key times of the year. A study carried out on behalf of the Council, Edinburgh Visitor Accommodation Sector Commercial Needs Study, January 2019, Ryden identified almost 16,000 rooms within 422 properties.” (p16) While there may be ample numbers of hotel rooms and hostels in Edinburgh, this is not necessarily reflective of consumer trends who may want a more authentic local experience through short-term letting and may prefer the flexibility and convenience afforded by self-catering accommodation. [10]

Furthermore, it remains extremely doubtful that, if one excludes short-term lets, that there would be sufficient capacity amongst those sources of visitor accommodation to house visitors during key events in the city’s cultural calendar such as the Festival, Hogmanay, and large sporting events. When looking at the problems associated with hosting a major international conference of the scale of COP26 in Glasgow, would Edinburgh be able to rise to the occasion if short-term lets were regulated out of existence? Nonetheless, it goes without saying that the Council should not be preferring one type of accommodation – be it budget hotels or serviced apartments – over another.

The Background Report mentions that out of term student accommodation could “provide short-term accommodation suited to visitors. There were 37 student halls identified by the study in Edinburgh, 35 of which are available to rent during summer (nine are exclusively let during the festivals in August). These provide self-catering managed accommodation within purpose-built units.” (p17) We seriously question whether this is the sort of quality accommodation the Council think is appropriate for visiting guests to the city, an important cultural capital in Europe.

The Background Report concludes with the following (questionable) statement: “Purpose built tourist accommodation in the form of hotels, hostels, apart hotels, guest houses and bed and breakfasts is readily available throughout the city. Along with student halls, which provide visitor accommodation at key times of the year, this accommodation is better suited to meeting the vast majority of tourism needs in Edinburgh while balancing its impacts on neighbourhoods. Short-term lets will continue to have a small role to play in addressing visitor accommodation. It is appropriate to control short-term lets to ensure that they are only allowed in appropriate locations and circumstances.” (p22) It should be remembered that many guest houses and B&Bs were previously residential properties and some are contained within tenemental properties. Given the movement of guests, would this also be considered as unreasonable as short-term lets and self-catering? If not, the Council need to explain this anomaly.

Conclusion

The ASSC want to work with policymakers at a national and local level to establish fair, proportionate and balanced regulations that work for affected stakeholders – communities, businesses and Scottish tourism. Unfortunately, we are not in a position where we can support City of Edinburgh Council’s plans for a Short-Term Let Control Area.

In summary, we believe that the Statement of Reasons and the associated Background Report:

Fails to assess the cost of introducing a city-wide Control Area for Edinburgh at a time when the Council’s resources are stretched.
Fails to provide empirical and robust data to show a link between short-term letting and the housing market in Edinburgh.
Fails to understand the nature of the short-term letting landscape within Edinburgh, instead utilising pre-pandemic figures and unreliable scraped data which leads to misleading conclusion about the size and scope of the market.
Fails to provide a proper holistic examination of the various housing challenges in the city and instead discriminates against one form of tourist accommodation that has benefitted the city’s economy for decades.
Fails to adequately explain the differences in behaviours between those using visitor accommodation and permanent residents, nor does it set out how it has used existing legislation to respond to anti-social behaviour complaints against holiday lets.
Fails to appreciate the substantial economic contribution that professional self-catering business make to Edinburgh and how it adds to the diversity of tourist accommodation that a modern, vibrant and competitive tourist economy requires.
Fails to provide assurance to operators in Edinburgh that the city-wide Control Area would not amount to a de-facto ban on short-term lets.

For these reasons, the ASSC cannot support the proposals for a city-wide Control Area. We would respectfully recommend that the City of Edinburgh Council withdraw their plans as drafted and work constructively with stakeholders to improve the regulatory regime at a local and national level for the benefit of all.

Sources for Question 9

[1] Airbnb, Short-term Lets Registration White Paper (2021). Url: https://news.airbnb.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2021/06/UK_RegistrationWhitepaper_2021.pdf?_ga=2.58889198.2135609438.1634834161-1390504533.1634834161

[2] Data from search through the Scottish Assessors Association website, 21/10/21. Url: https://www.saa.gov.uk/search/?SEARCHED=1&ST=advanced&SEARCH_TABLE=valuation_roll_cpsplit&TYPE_FLAG=C&STREET=&TPTLA=edinburgh&POSTCODE=&ASSESSOR_ID=&CLASS=&CORE=SELF+CATERING&CORE2=Self+catering&FEFFECTIVE_DATE=&TEFFECTIVE_DATE=&MIN_RV=&MAX_RV=&searchtype=listing&AS_UARN=&DISPLAY_COUNT=10#results

[3] Goodmove data (2021) Url: https://goodmove.co.uk/empty-housing-hotspots/

[4] Cllr Gardiner quoted in I. Swanson, ‘Action over report on Airbnb-style lets in Edinburgh rejected’, Edinburgh Evening News, 02/10/20. Url: https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/action-over-report-airbnb-style-lets-edinburgh-rejected-2990143

[5] Legal opinion provided by Brodies LLP to the Association of Scotland’s Self-Caterers, March 2018.

[6] Kevin Stewart MSP quoted in Scottish Parliament., Official Report, 08/11/17. Url: https://www.parliament.scot/api/sitecore/CustomMedia/OfficialReport?meetingId=11177 [Accessed 10/08/21]

[7] Ibid

[8] Shona Robison MSP, in answer to Parliamentary Question S6W-03022, 01/10/21. Url: https://archive2021.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx?SearchType=Advance&ReferenceNumbers=S6W-03022&ResultsPerPage=10

[9] Shona Robison MSP, in answer to Parliamentary Question S6W-03021, 29/09/21. Url: https://archive2021.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx?SearchType=Advance&ReferenceNumbers=S6W-03021&ResultsPerPage=10

[10] Transparent, ‘Short term rental trends: Why STR is dominating the travel industry (and why it’s going to stay that way)’, 24/08/21. Url: https://seetransparent.com/blog/short-term-rental-trends-2021/

Category: Short-Term Let Regulations