TikToker Sean Davis claimed he was charged $10,000 after a guest in his group took a branded selfie while staying at the $2,400-a-night “Invisible House” Airbnb in Joshua Tree.

What began as a dream getaway at one of California’s most famous Airbnb rentals quickly spiraled into a costly cautionary tale for a social media influencer who says he was blindsided by unexpected fees.

Sean Davis, a TikTok creator with a following for his travel and lifestyle content, posted a viral video this week claiming that he was charged $10,000 by the owners of the “Invisible House” in Joshua Tree after a guest in his group took a selfie and tagged a brand on Instagram.

The Invisible House, a mirrored 5,500-square-foot mansion built in 2019 by film producers Chris and Roberta Hanley, has earned international fame for its striking reflective design and luxury amenities, including a 100-foot indoor solar-heated swimming pool.

The home, situated on 90 acres bordering Joshua Tree National Park, costs $2,400 per night to rent and has been showcased on Netflix’s World’s Most Amazing Vacation Rentals. It has hosted celebrities such as Demi Lovato, Lizzo, and Diplo.

But Davis insists that the reality of his stay was far from glamorous. “Looks cool, but is a complete nightmare,” he told his 1.3 million viewers in a TikTok clip that has since racked up millions of views.

According to Davis, his group rented the house with the expectation of taking photos outdoors, not realizing that any photos posted online with branded tags could trigger steep commercial usage fees buried in the rental agreement.

The trouble began when a friend’s girlfriend, part of the group, snapped a bathroom selfie and tagged a brand in her Instagram post.

That post was reshared, which the property’s managers claimed violated rules governing the rental’s use for commercial or promotional photography. Davis said he was subsequently hit with a demand for $20,000, though the fee was eventually reduced to $10,000.

“We didn’t actually shoot any brand content in the house,” Davis explained in a follow-up TikTok. “We shot outside, but they had an issue with a selfie. To me, that’s insane. It was a picture someone took for fun.”

The influencer added that the stay itself was uncomfortable, despite the property’s futuristic appearance. “You can’t see out of the house at night, but you can see in perfectly,” Davis said. “It cracks like a skyscraper all night and is so loud. Sleeping there is the worst part.”

The video triggered a wave of online debate, with some viewers expressing sympathy for Davis and warning others to pay close attention to rental contracts.

But others were less forgiving, noting that the fine print on luxury rentals often includes clauses differentiating between personal use and commercial use.

“My uncle has an Airbnb, and the daily rate is $1,000, but brand shoots are $10K,” one commenter wrote. “Seems pretty standard.”

Another user, identifying themselves as a former property manager for short-term rentals frequently used in advertising, agreed.

“That’s about right. It’s industry standard to pay for locations for commercial advertising use. Welcome to the industry! No one makes this mistake twice.”

Industry experts note that properties like the Invisible House are frequently sought out for professional photo shoots, fashion campaigns, and film projects, making photography rights a lucrative add-on for owners.

While personal vacation photos typically do not carry additional costs, the line can blur when photos are posted online with brand partnerships, sponsorships, or commercial tags.

The Hanleys, who developed the property with sustainability in mind, have marketed the home not just as a rental but as a filming and photography location.

The home’s mirrored walls and desert surroundings create a unique aesthetic that has drawn production crews and social media influencers from around the world. Rates for photo or film shoots are often negotiated separately and can run into the tens of thousands of dollars.

Davis, however, insists he was not informed of those costs upfront. He characterized the fee as a “shakedown” and warned his followers to avoid similar pitfalls.

“Sleeping there is the worst part,” he repeated in his video, describing the disorienting experience of staying in the glass-encased mansion. “It’s basically unlivable at night.”

Despite Davis’s complaints, the viral video appears to have boosted the Invisible House’s notoriety even further. Social media chatter around the incident has reignited interest in the property, with some commenters joking that the $10,000 charge has become its “invisible feature.”

The owners have not publicly commented on Davis’s claims, but the controversy underscores a growing tension in the short-term rental market, where properties double as vacation destinations and backdrops for monetized online content.

With the lines between personal use and commercial photography blurring, disputes like this are likely to become more common as influencers continue to seek out unique and photogenic locations.

For now, Davis has vowed to take his cautionary tale as a lesson learned — and a viral moment to warn others. “It’s beautiful, but don’t do it,” he said. “You’ll regret it.”

The Invisible House remains available for bookings, but travelers tempted by its futuristic façade may now think twice before reaching for their phones.