Landlord Requiring $US, won't accept $AR

[nikad]

I suggest you read the jurisprudence on art. 2. Since it clearly says: "Las locaciones de viviendas con muebles que se arrienden con fines de turismo, en zonas aptas para ese destino". All courts of the city of Buenos Aires consider that "zonas aptas" refer to vacation areas. And the city of Bs. As. isn't a vacation area.

I don't intend to be rude, but I have experience with temporary rental claims. Even though I hate that type of law...

Excuse me but the city of Bs As IS a tourist destination for people from other cities, provinces and countries. That is why there are many institutions destined to regulate tourism and touristic activities in the city...

 

[mariposa]

optcsa ,

Also many of the apts. bylaws (with application of law 13512) say that temporary rentals can't be in apt. buildings. So it's a huge legal discussion, but the fact is all of buenos aires civil courts understand that there is no TEMPORARY RENTALS allowed in apt. buildings in the city of buenos aires...

just out of curiosity, what if you rent a whole house as a temp. rental in the city of BsAs?

 

[French jurist]

I suggest you read the jurisprudence on art. 2. Since it clearly says: "Las locaciones de viviendas con muebles que se arrienden con fines de turismo, en zonas aptas para ese destino". All courts of the city of Buenos Aires consider that "zonas aptas" refer to vacation areas. And the city of Bs. As. isn't a vacation area.

I don't intend to be rude, but I have experience with temporary rental claims. Even though I hate that type of law...

Hola Doctor !

I'm not a lawyer although I studied to be so, and this is not my country so I have every excuse to be wrong.
I thought that the definition of "zonas aptas para el turismo" was based on the person renting the flat (in short = a "zona apta para el turismo" is when the person renting does not usually live where he/she's renting).
Furthermore (not knowing at all the jurisprudence regarding this point, but I welcome any reference proving me wrong. We learn from our mistakes), if that's right that the judges will try in those cases to understand what was the intent of the legislators, times have changed since this law was passed (nearly 30 years ago).
BA was certainly not a major touristic destination back in the early 1980s, during the 1990s the peso was too strong to make this city attractive enough, but the real development of such temporary rentals in CABA started after the corralito. I find it odd that judges would decide nowadays that BA is not a "zona apta para el turismo".

Any light you'll shed, I'll welcome it! Especially links to jurisprudence (I'm a curious guy).

On a side note, it's great to have lawyers on the forum, opened to discussion.

 

[TheBlackHand]

Let's just say there is room for interpretation as far as Argentinian law is concerned.

Moral of the story is, don't sign a contract if you don't plan on abiding by the terms and conditions found therein. Simple as that.

 

[optcsa]

I agree that B.A. is a tourist destination. I also agree that temporary rentals should be allowed.

Here's the full situation:

Art. 2 of the rental law states: "Plazos. Para los contratos que se celebren a partir de la vigencia de la presente ley, el plazo mínimo de la locaciones con destino a vivienda, con o sin muebles, será de dos años. Dicho plazo mínimo será de tres años para los restantes destinos. Los contratos que se celebren por términos menores serán considerados como formulados por los plazos mínimos precedentemente fijados.
Quedan excluidas del plazo mínimo legal para las contrataciones a que se refiere la presente ley:
a) Las contrataciones para sedes de embajadas, consulados y organismos internacionales, así como también las destinadas a personal diplomático y consular o pertenecientes a dichos organismos internacionales;
b) Las locaciones de viviendas con muebles que se arrienden con fines de turismo, en zonas aptas para ese destino. Cuando el plazo del alquiler supere los seis meses, se presumirá que el contrato no es con fines de turismo;
c) Las ocupaciones de espacios o lugares destinados a la guarda de animales, vehículos u otros objetos y los garajes y espacios que formen parte de un inmueble destinado a vivienda u otros fines y que hubieran sido locados, por separado, a los efectos de la guarda de animales, vehículos u otros objetos;
d) Las locaciones de puestos en mercados o ferias;
e) Las locaciones en que los Estados nacional o provincial, los municipios o entes autárquicos sean parte como inquilinos."


As everybody can see section b) establishes temporary rents for zones that are touristic destination. The idea behind the law (parliamentary transcripts) was that it was for vacation destinations, basically beach communities. The City of Buenos Aires, is not considered a touristic community. Yes we all know that it is now... And the second aspect is... Most apartment buildings have bylaws that state that the apt. is for living. When an apt. is used as a temporary rent, it isn't considered living. The court rulings in that aspect: Feris, Adela I. v. Folcini, Ángela L. M. (20-NOV-09); Granero, Virginia y/o v. Cade, Roxana E. y/o s/Cobro ejecutivo de alquileres (14-OCT-03); Consorcio de Propietarios Libertad 1031/33/35 c/ Teryazos, Michael William s/ Acciones del Art. 15 de la Ley 13.512.


In the last case, which is considered a "lead case" the court said: If the building is supposed to be for living, the units can't be rented to people who are vacationing or traveling through the city for a short period of time.


The rental laws in Argentina are very backwards. The landlord rules in Argentina, and the tenant is always screwed... If anybody wants to read the cases send me a PM, and I'll send you a copy.

Anyway, maybe one day Argentina will change, but not in the near future...

Hola Doctor !

I'm not a lawyer although I studied to be so, and this is not my country so I have every excuse to be wrong.
I thought that the definition of "zonas aptas para el turismo" was based on the person renting the flat (in short = a "zona apta para el turismo" is when the person renting does not usually live where he/she's renting).
Furthermore (not knowing at all the jurisprudence regarding this point, but I welcome any reference proving me wrong. We learn from our mistakes), if that's right that the judges will try in those cases to understand what was the intent of the legislators, times have changed since this law was passed (nearly 30 years ago).
BA was certainly not a major touristic destination back in the early 1980s, during the 1990s the peso was too strong to make this city attractive enough, but the real development of such temporary rentals in CABA started after the corralito. I find it odd that judges would decide nowadays that BA is not a "zona apta para el turismo".

Any light you'll shed, I'll welcome it! Especially links to jurisprudence (I'm a curious guy).

On a side note, it's great to have lawyers on the forum, opened to discussion.

 

[Mahara]

Just a further note to this. We rented for six months late last year and earlier this year. We are Canadians and do not have access to American funds any more than we have access to Chinese funds. We were not coming from Canada, but from Europe. We paid in pesos but at the exchange rate Reynolds Properties gave us, which was slightly in their favour, but naturally so. We would not be able to rent if only in US$.

 

[mariposa]

optcsa,

once again my question: what if you rent an entire house in BS AS as a tempoary rental? is it "legal" according to these laws?

we do rent our house whenever we are not in BS AS for a few months (to foreign visitors). and we get paid in u.s. dollars.

 

[optcsa]

It's a gamble... I represented a client a CEO of an OIL COMPANY, that rented a house as a temp, and I got it converted into a full 2 year contract...

It's not really my specialty in law, but I wouldn't do it. You are free to do whatever you want. And HOPEFULLY you'll never have that sort of problem!

optcsa,

once again my question: what if you rent an entire house in BS AS as a tempoary rental? is it "legal" according to these laws?

we do rent our house whenever we are not in BS AS for a few months (to foreign visitors). and we get paid in u.s. dollars.

 

[nikad]

In the last case, which is considered a "lead case" the court said: If the building is supposed to be for living, the units can't be rented to people who are vacationing or traveling through the city for a short period of time.

I guess the court ruled based on the building´s Reglamento de Copropiedad where this must have been stated, I know some of these explicitly forbid temp rentals, but there might be some that allow it, just like some allow Apto Profesional rentals, etc (?)

 

[optcsa]

An "apto profesional" would be easier, but once again, the court in the lead case, ruled that the city of bs.as. isn't a tourist destination.

Anyway it doesn't make much of a difference, if you're the tenant, you can always extend your stay to two years.

I guess the court ruled based on the building´s Reglamento de Copropiedad where this must have been stated, I know some of these explicitly forbid temp rentals, but there might be some that allow it, just like some allow Apto Profesional rentals, etc (?)