Short-term rentals, the Tar annuls de visu identification. Dialogue between managers and ministry continues
The November 2024 circular banning keyboxes was rejected. From the associations the request to simplify and modernise recognition procedures
3' min read
Key points
- The Fare requests
- Sector entries
3' min read
Annulled the circular of the Ministry of the Interior on the obligation to identify de visu guests in short lets. With its ruling 10210, filed on Tuesday 27 May, the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio (section one-ter) upheld the appeal lodged by the Federation of Associations of Extra-Hotel Accommodation (Fare).
The ministerial circular of 18 November last year (protocol 0038138), in which the procedures for check in remotely of guests in accommodation facilities were deemed not to comply with public security regulations, and in particular with Article 109 of the Tulps, had come under fire.
The circular had disconcerted the operators in the short-term rental sector, who had already obtained the opening of a round table with the ministry at the end of last year. After the meetings, the Viminale's willingness to issue a new circular had emerged, sanctioning the possibility of de visu identification of guests even remotely - and not only in person - through apps, videos and other technologies.
The new circular was expected within days. And it was at this point that the ruling of the Lazio Regional Administrative Court arrived.
The Fare demands
.La Fare requested the annulment for a number of reasons, starting from the fact that the text conflicts with the reform of Article 109 carried out in 2011, which had eliminated "the form filled out and/or signed by the guest, the head of the family or the group leader" in the case of non-hotel facilities, providing only the mandatorycommunication to the police headquarters' web portal Alloggiati web. Secondly," the appeal emphasised, "the 2024 circular is not suitable for achieving its stated objective, since identification de visu per se does not eliminate the risk that the lodger, after identification, hands over the keys of the property to another unidentified person. Moreover, it creates unequal treatment with respect to other categories such as persons renting motor vehicles. Finally, again according to the applicants, it ends up introducing a new offence with an act of secondary rank, as it does not provide for an administrative penalty in the event of a breach.
