Tourist Rentals in Vigo: Guests Refuse to Leave After Booking Ends

Guests Who Won't Leave: The Hole in Tourist Rentals in Vigo

What happens if a guest in a tourist apartment decides not to leave when their booking ends? This has occurred in Vigo. At least ten holiday rentals have been recorded where visitors entrench themselves once their stay is over, and owners cannot remove them even by calling the police or filing a complaint. The phenomenon, until recently anecdotal, is gaining enough volume for real estate mediation firms to list it as one of their services.

What Exactly Is Happening in Vigo

The pattern repeats itself. The booking ends, the guest does not return the keys, and the owner finds themselves with a de facto tenant they cannot quickly evict. The company Desokupa 24 horas acknowledges handling several cases in Vigo and nearby municipalities like Cangas or Marín, describing its intervention as "a mediation service to resolve existing conflicts through visits to the property at various times during the weekend with the goal of recovering the premises and making it available to our client." In other words: someone has turned the expulsion of lingering guests into a business.

The figure cited by the sector is at least ten cases in the city alone, a number that seems small in absolute terms but changes scale considering each guest comes and goes every few days. Some argue that a residential tenant generates conflict risk every few years, while a tourist guest does so every three days, multiplying the probability.

Why a Tourist Apartment Is More Vulnerable Than a Standard Rental

The key lies in the legal framework. In a standard home rental, the owner has specific legal tools to recover the property. In a tourist rental, the relationship is commercial and short-term, creating a gray area: if the guest stays, is it trespassing? Is it a breach of contract? The answer depends on whether the property is the owner's primary residence, which in most cases it is not. This nuance makes quick eviction a slippery slope.

Some claim police can intervene immediately within the first 48 hours if the owner reports it right away, without a judicial order. Others argue that since it is not a primary residence, the incivil route is less clear and the issue becomes entrenched. The practical consequence is that the owner is trapped between a complaint that goes nowhere and private mediation that costs money.

The Business of Tourist Rentals and Its Fine Print

The tourist license is the requirement that theoretically separates legal holiday rentals from illegal ones. It is granted upon meeting certain criteria and must be renewed periodically. Homeowners' associations can also ban tourist apartments in the building under the Horizontal Property Act. The question hovering over the Vigo case is whether those ten apartments had licenses. If not, the owner is in an even weaker position: they cannot invoke regulated tourist use status to force eviction.

The owner profile matters too. It is not the same for an individual renting out a second home as for an investor with multiple properties in rotation. The former usually has less legal and financial muscle to handle long conflicts; the latter can afford lawyers and mediation firms. In both cases, the cost of an entrenched guest is measured in months of lost rent, legal fees, and, if specialized companies are needed, additional invoices.

The Underlying Debate: Victims or Culprits?

This is where things get complicated. One line of analysis argues that tourist apartment owners share responsibility for rising housing prices and neighborhood gentrification, and seeing them in trouble now generates hard-to-hide poetic justice. Another side defends that the problem is not the specific owner but a system allowing anyone to rent without controls, credit checks, or guarantees, and that the solution is not mocking the affected party but demanding licenses, insurance, and ironclad contracts.

In the middle remains an uncomfortable question: if the guest who stays is not a squatter in the classic sense, what are they? They did not enter illegally. They paid to be there. They simply decided not to leave. And that nuance is why the Vigo case does not fit the manuals.

What Might Happen Next

For now, the phenomenon is local and low-volume. But mediation firms have already detected it and offer it as a service, indicating demand exists. If case numbers grow, it is predictable that the tourism sector will pressure for clarity on the legal regime for lingering guests, and platforms will introduce stricter verification mechanisms. Owners might also start demanding higher deposits or contracts with quick-eviction clauses.

Meanwhile, the situation remains unresolved. The ten cases in Vigo do not yet have a clear legal answer, and the owner facing one discovers that their main asset, the apartment, has become a problem they cannot shed. A fine irony for a business sold as effortless profitability.