Tenant in brownstone currently on market

Know that at every OH I've ever been to with tenants the broker says they are not paying market rates. IOW expect the new landlord to raise the rent if they do let you stay. Maybe it's best to start looking and, of course, saving for a downpayment for your own place.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 1:48 PM

You may be paying market rate, but that won't help you if the buyer pays an amount for the house under the expectation of getting more rent. They will raise your rent because they will need more to cover their mortgage. Finding someone else may end up being their problem, but it's their expectation of more that will be your problem in the meantime.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 2:40 PM

Why don't you try to buy the place? If you like it that much, why not try to put together the $ with someone else? You say the seller doesn't want to sell. Maybe you can buy just your apartment from her and she can afford to keep the rest.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 2:43 PM

you're a tenant. That's it. The owner can do whatever she wants. Your only claim is that your current lease has to be honored. Why would you have any other rights beyond that??? You don't own the property.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 2:57 PM

Please ignore the idiot comment @ 2:43. Theh law protects you up until Dec. '08. The new owner may very well decide not to renew your lease. I purhcased my building with an existing tenant. She made an effort to get to me. I felt there was no need to displace her and she stayed with us here until she decided to leave on her own 4 years later. I never bothered to raise her rent. If the new owner is planning on keeping your unit as a rental, you would want to impress up them that you are the IDEAL tenant.

The reason potential buyers fear existing tenants is because they don't want to inherit someone else's problems.

It was attractive to me that there was 1 less tenant that I would have to find.

But you need to be realistic. You're a tenant and at the mercy of the owner outside of any contractual obligation.

If you don't mind my asking, how much are you paying?

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 3:08 PM

As a rental tenant in Brooklyn, you really are in control of the house, not the owner.
If you refuse to move, they will need to take you to court, and listen to me, no judge in Brooklyn will evict you. It is a thing with judges like the other judges won't speak with them at lunch or something if they evict someone. Eventually - I mean years, the sheriff will come and evict you but you can stop paying rent, put it in escrow with an attorney, and the beauty part is that you can negotiate with the sucker buyer to be bought out so that you give him back his own house. It's the way the game is played in NY. Of ocurse if your new owner is a Soprano type, you may end up in the river -that is another aspect to the game, but if they are law-abiding types, you have the upper hand. Many posters on this site do not understand that. They think this is Florida or Texas where owning a piece of property actually entiltles an owner to take possession. they are very mistaken.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 3:20 PM

Just an addendum to my prior post.
If you are over 62, the house is yours for life. No worries at all.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 3:23 PM

you're only protected till Dec. than the owner can elect to evict you or renew your lease. If they evict you it's a matter of monthes. But do you really want an eviction on your credit history, may harm you when you're looking for a new rental.

Sometimes if the new owner really wants the tenant out right away. They will offer money. You can negotiate. A friend of mine did and walked away with $3000, the last 3 monthes rent free and moving expenses and the owner paid for realtor fees for finding a new place.

Good luck and keep us updated.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 3:24 PM

An owner can take full possession if they are converting it to a one-family.

And the tenant has no rights after the lease is expired.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 3:26 PM

I would demand at least $10,000 "relocation fee" from the new owner plus moving costs plus several months free rent while you find a comparable place. Be sure to talk to an tenant-landlord attorney. You will be shocked (and grateful you are a renter in this renter's town). I wouldnt even admit you have a lease, tell them you lost it.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 3:30 PM

"An owner can take full possession if they are converting it to a one-family"

-RIGHT, and every child in Brooklyn is entitled to a first-rate education and the legal system treats everyone equally.

what the law says and what the real world is like can be 2 different things. You ain't in Kansas any more. Talk to an attorney before you buy a house with renters or squatters in residence. It can years to evict people and if you harass them in any way you will be facing jail time.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 3:44 PM

"you're only protected till Dec. than the owner can elect to evict you or renew your lease. "

Not true. The third alternative, the normal one, is to NOT RENEW YOUR LEASE. That is not the same as eviction, at all. The owner can choose not to renew your lease once it is over, and that is their right. You are not rent-stabilized, so you have no further "rights". You are a market-rate tenant on a standard lease, from what you've described, and the current or new owner can choose to not renew your lease. Period. You have no recourse in that situation.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 4:00 PM

"You have no recourse in that situation"

Not true.
If you do not wish to leave voluntarily the courts have to rule for eviction. try it sometime. good luck.
That is why a smart owner will induce a renter to leave voluntarily with a nice relocation package (ie: cash).

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 4:16 PM

4:16,

You have no idea what you're talking about. Most of you knuckle heads are trying to tell the OP how to "get over" instead of trying to make the best of the situation.

OP, if you indeed like the place, you need to be in communication with the owner. Ask the owner to keep you informed about the potential buyers. Try and meet the buyer and see where their heads are. If they want to keep the unit as a rental, let them realize that YOU are their best option.

In terms of being realistic about your future. I'm sure you don't want to live in a hostile environment. The new owners will be obligated to honor the lease until Dec. '08 unless there is a clause that goes into effect as a result of a sale. After that, they can choose to begin holdover proceedings to get you removed from the house. Don't be fooled to thinking that a judge will allow you to stay. The judge will be fair, and won't throw you out, but he will tell you that you'll have 30 days to find suitable living.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 4:27 PM

This thread is pathetic. Most commenters are indeed advising the tenant on how to get over on a new owner and extort him/her. One of you idiots even went so far as to suggest the tenant lie and say there is no lease. Do you think the owner wouldn't have a copy of the lease?? Of course they have a copy of the lease. Ridiculous.

If the tenant is market-rate (i.e., not rent-stabilized) then a landlord is under no obligation to renew your lease once it expires. If you truly think you can force a landlord to continue to rent to you simply because you don't want to leave, and you are looking for ways to extort said landlord, then you are an unethical scam artist. And all you sickos who are suggesting the tenant do this are even sicker.

And FYI, I am a longtime NYC tenant, not an owner.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 4:46 PM

4:27 is right. Did happen to us when we bought the bldg with tenant. We waited until the lease ended and not renewed the lease. We have stopped accepting the rent after that and took her to court. Yes, she has been properly informed that this will happened and she had few months to move out. Guess what- the judge gave her two months to move and pay the back rent. And we did not do it to be mean, we had to renovate the whole house, no joke, and having the tenant in place would rather make it impossible, so we showed the judge the approved plans for renovation and she made the right decision. On the other hand nobody wants to go thru this process, specially if you can find a next nice apt for yourself. Too early to judge if you even have to move out, the new owner may want you as tenant if they do not plan to extensively renovate the place for themselves.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 4:56 PM

"That is why a smart owner will induce a renter to leave voluntarily with a nice relocation package (ie: cash)."

Not true. That only applies when a landlord has to buy-out the lease of a rent-regulated tenant (stabilized or controlled. If you're a market-rate tenant the landlord will not throw any money your way unless he wants you out BEFORE the lease expires. And a judge will rule in favor of the landlord, as 4:27 says, and will give you a month to get out.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 4:57 PM

OP says "As a renter, I'm not sure of my rights."

If you are not a rent stabilized tenant then once your lease expires you have no rights. Unless you want to become a squatter and then fight your landlord in court. No judge will support you since you are in effect breaking the law.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 5:10 PM

Moving is a pain, but try to be positive about it. I know people who have bought homes who were happy to keep good tenants - one less thing they had to deal with, and they had rent money coming in from the day of closing, not a few months later. They also didn't have to think about what renovations they'd have to do on the place to spruce it up to attract new market-rate tenants. That was worth more to them than potentially raising the rent. A lot of first-time (and other) buyers are really streched for cash when they close.

So, ask your current landlord to tell potential buyers (or the broker to tell them if they're using a broker, or talk to the broker yourself) that (1) there are tenants who are excellent tenants who would be happy to rent from the new owners, (2) that they are paying a nice rent, and are willing to work with new owners (implies willing to negotiate with them if market is then a bit more - beats moving) (3) to please keep in touch with you so you can plan ahead.

If it gets sold to someone wanting to renovate to a single family or to make your place two rentals, all is not lost. They may not have the money to do the renovations right away (and even if they do, may be lining up architect and/or contractors - this can take months) - and so may be willing to keep you for awhile, months (or years) until they are ready (if I were buying and planning on doing this, I'd do that, rather than find new, short-term tenants I'd then have to kick out in a matter of months, or 1 year after their lease was up - that's a harsh thing to do to someone you've just rented to.)

Don't "demand" a big relocation - that's a real turnoff and might backfire - just try to negotiate some money (and the other stuff mentioned by 3:24) when the time comes, as easier, cheaper and quicker for them, but no sounding like you've decided to dig in and not move unless forced out. (If they are renovating right away, they likely are not strapped for cash and you CAN negotiate.)

If you seem like a responsible type, the new owner is going to figure that you aren't wanting to go through an eviction and have that show up on records, so your best bet is relatively friendly bargaining - take the attitude with them that you "just want it to work out best for everybody." (Used this in negotiating severance from a job once - worked well.) Hell, if you remain friendly or neutral to them, they may even feel bad about kicking you out and have friends with places to rent who will rent to you. (Landlords have been known to do that.)

Not a landlord (but would not be an a-hole when/if I were one)

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 5:21 PM

I'm sorry, but to all those who are suggesting "relocation cash": once the lease is up the landlord DOES NOT have to "negotiate" anything with the tenant!!! The landlord can go to court (just time consuming, but no big deal) and have a judge order your ass out. Period. You are not entitled to any cash or other payments if you are not rent-regulated.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 5:29 PM

Prior to purchasing my home, back when the landlord tenant courts were even more lenient with tenants, I thought that I would be slick and have the landlord "make me an offer." I stopped payinig rent and told the court that it was because the landlord didn't make requested repairs. This dragged the process out for about eight months. Bottom line was that the eviction was eventually ordered after numerous "orders to show cause" and "72 hour stays", I lived in a hostile environment for almost a year, had to take days off from work to go to court and a judgement was entered against me which was reflected on my credit and which is why I was intially denied a mortgage. I had to pay the money to satisfy the judgement and it took ten years to get that crap off of my credit. I was listening to my ghetto ass sister-in-law who BTW is now 65 still scheming and still living in the PJ's. It was not worth the trouble.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 5:53 PM

If you're paying more than market rent (500-800 more for a comprable unit). why not move to a comprable apartment at market rent and save your self some cash...DUH.

Why are you throwing your money away?

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 6:02 PM

Given that the poster says floor thrus would go for $1300, I took that $500-800 a month over market with a grain of salt. (And anyway, 6:02, moving is very expensive if you have a floor thru of furniture and stuff.)

5:53's comment is a good one. Which is why friendly negotiation is best - while you are entitled to nothing, landlords with any sense know that it takes months to evict, and might be willing to give you something to move it along faster. Especially if they want to start renovating your place even BEFORE your lease is up (they might, and then you DO actually have real bargaining power.) Contrary to what 2:59 says, time IS a big deal to landlords - it can equate to money - especially if they are living somewhere else - that's costly - and attorney's fees certainly are money.

Good luck. And do find out what your rights are - so you won't be misinformed - look up metropolitan tenants council (met council).

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 6:27 PM

You should know that this is a very anti-renter blog. Actually at times it is an anti-everyone-and-everything blog. But renters and residents of Carroll gardens (who knows?) come in for the most disdain.
The truth is that landlords cannot evict. Only the courts can evict. The landlord can opt not to renew your lease but that is not the same as eviction. Not in NYC anyway. Nice people move out when their landlords ask them to. Not so nice people do not. There are both kinds in NYC. Consult with an attorney to find out your rights. As a renter you have more power than you may think, and certainly more rights than the property rights morons who post on this blog think. Most of these rednecks do not even accept historic landmark regulations let alone renter protection laws that date back to FDR's day and the New Deal.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 8:05 PM

No one in their right mind would buy a place with a renter unless you got it at a steep enough discount to cover the attorneys fees for about a year and a half. but the wear and tear on your psyche and nerves really has no price tag. Avoid other people's tenants. Remember that they would have gooten rid of them themselves if they could have in order to sell the place "vacant" and thus command a higher price.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 8:24 PM

As a renter...more rights than the property rights morons who post on this blog think.

Property Rights Morons - I love it. Only in New York (And Maybe Cuba or Venezuela)do so many people call others who beleive in property rights morons...

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 8:47 PM

Cuba and Venezuela are two very different societies when it comes to property rights.
Perhaps you meant to say Cuba and North Korea.
There is still a viable middle class in venezuela. Chavez has not been in power that long.
But generally speaking in the US, property rights advocates tend to be southern, non-urban, conservative and Republican. They are usually also pro-life, anti-gun-control, anti-zoning, etc. They are not the most enlightened nor the most progressive segment of the population. You may identify with them out of some contrarian urge stemming from what you perceive as a semi-socialist tinge to Brooklyn politics, but you probably would not be happy with them as neighbors, nor they with you.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 9:04 PM

9:04 - I think I understand where you are coming from 9:04. But I happen to beleive in property rights and I think your "Property Rights Morons" comment pretty much equated Property rights with Morons.

I trust you understand why some people may think otherwise.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 9:08 PM

So, owning your house and deciding not to renew an expired market-rate, non-regulated lease makes you a "property rights moron"? Interesting.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 10:16 PM

As a previous poster said, "Nice people move out when their landlords ask them to. Not so nice people do not." Those who do not are thieves and will be thrown out by the courts. Judges aren't blind.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 10:18 PM

once the lease is up. the tenant has no particular rights to stay as this is not a rent stabilized or controlled apartment. and no, judges will not indiscriminately give you three years to move out, they will ask you for a reasonable estimate for a time to get out and by law, that time will not exceed 6 months. It is after all, the owner's property. This ain't China, yet.

Posted by: guest at March 4, 2008 10:53 PM

There is quite allot of hyperbole on this post. I am an attorney, and I work out of Brooklyn Housing Court, EVERYDAY, so please stop with the drama.

If a tenant is not covered by rent stabilzation, rent control, or does not reside in a building that receives financial subsidies from the city/state/feds, then odds are, they are a 'market-rent' tenant. Once their lease expires, and if there is nothing in writing as to the rights to a lease renewal, then that is it. They have to vacate the apartment if requested by the landlord in writing w/ 30 days notice, unless the lease terms state otherwise.

In Brooklyn Housing Court, unless you have some extreme disability, or of very advanced age, the Judges will not give you more then a month, maybe two, to move out.

And, for the record, I find the Judges of Brooklyn Housing Court to be on the conservative side. They tend to be a bit more pro-tenant in Manhattan.

There are hundreds of landlord/tenant stories, and every situation can pose its own defenses and/or claims, but to state it clearly....

Having a 'market-rent' tenant in your building is not the drama, that the above comments would have you beleive.

If it takes you many months, and lots of money, to evict a 'market-rent' tenant, then I suggest you hire a new attorney because you are getting ripped off.

Posted by: guest at March 5, 2008 9:54 AM