Forum
« Outdoor Fireplaces? Plumbing + Electric + Roof »
August 13, 2009
Eviction for Owner Occupancy
I know that related questions have been asked here before, but I'm looking for thoughts on a particular element of it. Though I'm also planning to talk to a lawyer, as well. Assuming I'm looking to buy a new house, and there is a non-senior tenant in a rent-stabilized garden apartment, and I as the new owner am looking to move into the Garden apartment, I know I have the right to evict that tenant, but I'm unsure as to the timeline of it.
Can I give notice to the tenant upon taking ownership of the building, or can it only be done within the window of the lease renewal?
I'm looking here:
http://www.housingnyc.com/html/resources/dhcr/dhcr10.html
"Under the Rent Stabilization Law, an owner may begin an eviction proceeding when the current lease expires, but only after the tenant is given written notice that the lease will not be renewed. This notice must be served at least 90 and not more than 150 days before the current lease term expires."
So if the tenant signs a 1-year lease with the previous owner immediately prior to selling, do I, as the new owner, have to wait until 150 days prior to the end of that lease to serve notice?
Now, my hope is that this can be done amicably and that I could look to support the tenant with moving fees and such, but I'm really looking to understand the letter of the law as well.
Comments
We dealt with something similar during our closing. We demanded the house to be deliver vacant by closing (90days). The owner gave written notice to tenant (no lease) that they have to leave in 60 days and they agreed. The tenant immediately stops paying rent. When we went to get an update 1 month before closing.. the tenant were still there and had no plans on leaving. They gave some BS excuse to the owners and asked them for moving fees. The owners were pissed off and their lawyer told them they will handle it from this point to start eviction. In the end, the owners ended up paying to the tenants to leave. Reason is the tenants knew they have the upper hand.. if they did not give in to the money.. the buyers will walk away from the deal.
Don't quote me since I'm not an expert but I think you are stuck with fulfilling that lease. Judges/Law always side with the tenants. Also eviction is not a fun and fast process.. it can drag.
Good Luck
Posted by: namahs at August 13, 2009 1:01 PM
good luck you are going to need it
Posted by: brickoven at August 13, 2009 3:26 PM
Walk away from the deal. Real estate is simple now. For bottom-feeding buyers that is.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at August 13, 2009 3:57 PM
seems pretty clear from what you quoted that if current owner signed a lease you have to honor it. It is a binding contract.
Posted by: Petebklyn at August 13, 2009 4:44 PM
Mixicon, are you planning to convert each level into a one family home? If not, would assume you could move into one of the higher floors and wait out the lease?
As has been commented on in other forum posts, an eviction process for a rent stabilized tenant is a long and tedious process and with good reason - ultimately, the tenant would need more than moving fees to be made whole as they will likely have to pay higher rent going forward upon moving.
I assume you're focused on the garden because you want access to the backyard? If not, any reason, you need to move into the garden apartment? Just seems like you're asking for a lot of headache when you could more easily move onto other floors.
Posted by: bkhabitant at August 13, 2009 4:55 PM
See if you can negotiate a buy out with the tenant before, and as part of the purchase. The money spent will likely be less than the legal fees and many months it will take to evict a non cooperating tenant. It will also give you a sense of what the tenant will be like in litigation. If you follow the law you will probably win...eventually but it is a lot of grief. Housing court is somewhere between level 3 and 4 in Hell
Posted by: edifice rex at August 13, 2009 5:04 PM
>>bkhabitant<<
We were thinking of a garden/parlor duplex and converting the upper 2 floors each into an apartment. Right now the garden is the only real, livable space, we'd like to be able to live in the building while refurbishing it.
Out of curiosity, even if we waited for the lease to end, wouldn't we still really have to go through the eviction process (with a bad tenant) since a rent-stabilized unit essentially auto-renews the lease (I believe the only requirement is the tenant asking for renewal)?
On the flip-side, I'll be honest, were we to leave the person in the unit, we couldn't afford it, the rent is low enough that it does not contribute a significant enough amount to the mortgage based on the space it uses in the building. Were we to move in and keep the tenant, we could at best have 1 market-rate unit and realistically be unable to configure the building into a worthwhile apartment arrangement.
I'm sure there are renters on this board who hate landlords kicking people out of apartments, but there are also those of us struggling to go from renters to owners (and hopefully good landlords) and having to find more "complicated" purchases to make it happen.
Posted by: mixicon at August 13, 2009 6:17 PM
Mixicon, sounds like you guys have no room for error financially. That's a tricky place to be in, when trying to buy. Maybe it's too soon for you? Buying a mostly unliveable house WITH a tenant because that's all you can afford sounds to me like you're pushing it. And you want to renovate? I don't want to discourage you because I'm a big believer in stretching yourself, but this sounds like a potential financial disaster.
Posted by: iz at August 13, 2009 6:38 PM
Yeah, the 90-150 day notice applies no matter what.
You could try talking to the stabilized tenant and feeling him/her out in advance.
But I'd expect a fight, especially if the stabilized rent is far below market.
And since the seller obviously wasn't able to easily remove the stabilized tenant, I'd assume it won't be easy for you either.
Just be prepared for extended litigation as the worst case scenario.
Posted by: IronBalls at August 13, 2009 6:43 PM
You are asking really for legal advice here. Someone needs to see all the paper work. BTW its the landlords obligation to serve on a rent stabilized tenant notice of renewal so the tenant can chose a one or two year lease as required under RS rules. If that notice was not given to your tenant, he can claim the one year lease was illegal and he was entitled to a two year one. Also are you sure your house is subject to RS(less than 6 units are generally not RS).....spend the money see a lawyer.
Posted by: smeyer418 at August 13, 2009 6:49 PM
and the notice has to be given with in the window. early notice is no notice at all....
Posted by: smeyer418 at August 13, 2009 6:49 PM
You don't have a prayer.
If you take an upstairs apartment, forget about kicking out the downstairs tenant without a MONSTER fight.
If the tenant is disabled (or claims to be), forget it.
If you can't afford the place with the tenant in place, you can't afford the lawyer to kick the tenant out OR the risk that you won't get the tenant out or the lack of rent for 5+ years.
Good luck, but I'd pass on this deal.
Posted by: thwackamole1 at August 13, 2009 8:30 PM
You don't have a prayer.
If you take an upstairs apartment, forget about kicking out the downstairs tenant without a MONSTER fight.
If the tenant is disabled (or claims to be), forget it.
If you can't afford the place with the tenant in place, you can't afford the lawyer to kick the tenant out OR the risk that you won't get the tenant out or the lack of rent for 5+ years.
Good luck, but I'd pass on this deal.
Posted by: thwackamole1 at August 13, 2009 8:31 PM
nightmare situation..if the tenant could have been evicted, the owner would have done it, and received a way higher price for the building.. the tenant will win every round in court and you will have zero rental income and be liable for triple damages..if you do not have at least a hundred thousand set aside for years of litigation...walk away
Posted by: eman1234 at August 13, 2009 9:20 PM
You should deal with it before the closing, and only green backs will work.
The house might be the current owner's biggest headache.
And as far as I know, there's not a lot of people buying R/S homes nowadays.
I'd renegotiate the purchase price and be sure to include the buyout fee.
Posted by: jack slade at August 13, 2009 9:26 PM
"there are also those of us struggling to go from renters to owners (and hopefully good landlords) and having to find more 'complicated' purchases to make it happen."
No no no no no! I just hopped out of a time machine from the future. Your future self told me to tell your present self to walk away from this deal. Trust me, when NY Case-Shiller YOY turns positive, you will be burdoned with choosing between five properties with no tenant issues at the same price as this one or less.
***Bid half off peak comps (Thompson for Mayor)***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at August 13, 2009 11:19 PM
I don't understand why you're being discouraged from doing this. An owner has the RIGHT to evict a tenant for purposes of owner occupancy. As long as you can prove good faith intention and the notice is served in the lease renewal time window.
Go for it (always see a lawyer first).
Posted by: starfish1948 at August 14, 2009 2:33 PM
we are just letting the poster know how expensive and difficult it is to evict a rent stabilized tenant..this is reality, not a town hall meeting
Posted by: eman1234 at August 14, 2009 10:02 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.