Hot/Neutral reverse

Likely, it will be treated as a sale for mortgage and tax purposes, which will involve a bunch of closing costs that are just money down the drain. My suggestion would be to talk to a real estate attorney first, but take out a landlord's insurance policy that covers the liabilities you might be exposed to - this will be far cheaper than setting up a LLC and transferring title to it. Your mortgage company might not be thrilled at the idea of you transferring your obligations to a LLC.

Posted by: bohuma at November 5, 2009 10:48 AM in response to Deeding a Rental to a LLC

In most parts of the world the owner pays an agent to find a tenant, the agent works for the owner - "He who pays the piper calls the tune." New York is a heavily regulated market, however, which results in their being a chronic undersupply of rental apartments, so tenants are willing to pay a broker to find an apartment for them. If the tenant pays the fee, the broker is working for them. The broker prepares a rental package for the tenant that presents them in the best possible light for the landlord, most brokers know the landlords in their market so won't send tenant packages that the landlord won't approve, e.g. they won't send a pet owner to see an apartment when the owner doesn't allow pets.

If you pay, they work for you. If the tenant pays, they work for the tenant.

Posted by: bohuma at November 3, 2009 1:52 PM in response to Landlord Paying Broker?

I broke a lease a couple of years back. First thing I did was contact the management company and ask what the deal was. They said for that particular apartment, I probably wouldn't have trouble finding a tenant for them. I contacted the brokerage that I used to find it and asked them to find the replacement tenant. It cost me half a month's rent because I moved out mid month so the landlord could make sure it was in tip top condition for the new tenants. The management company even advised how I could buff out the scratches in the hardwood floors. I made sure that the apartment was spotless all the time so the brokers could show prospective tenants through. I moved out April 15, the new tenants moved in May 1, the landlord didn't lose a penny. I also tipped the super generously on the way out to make sure I wouldn't have any issues.

If I were you I'd tell your tenants that they're responsible for finding an acceptable new tenant, and that they could contact local brokers and make the apartment available to the broker to show. If the new tenants end up paying less rent the original tenants are responsible for the difference for the remaining part of their lease. When you sign a contract, you have to honor it.

Posted by: bohuma at November 3, 2009 1:46 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease

Meow.

Posted by: bohuma at October 30, 2009 1:28 PM in response to Mice in Bed-Stuy

Market rate month to month rental arrangement, he can give you thirty days to quit or vice versa. Chalk it up to experience. If your roomie wants the 5th floor walk up, she should negotiate for a lower rent.

Posted by: bohuma at October 29, 2009 2:00 PM in response to Shifty Landlord or Poor Planning

Most coops and condos will not approve wet over dry (e.g. a bathroom over a bedroom), so make sure you find out what a particular board's view is before you buy.

Posted by: bohuma at October 28, 2009 12:53 PM in response to Creating a Second Bathroom?

When it comes to flushable litter, less is more. You can flush the daily/twice daily scoopings, but don't try flushing when you change the litter completely, that will block old pipes. I live in an apartment building so I am obliged to discard my cats' litter with the daily trash. Another thing you have to be aware of, particularly with indoor/outdoor cats, is that their stools may contain parasites that are harmful to marine mammals if the sewerage system doesn't deal with them effectively (and I don't believe it does). I've used Feline Pine and Yesterday's News in the past and they were both pretty good (using Scoop Away clumping litter now).

Posted by: bohuma at October 28, 2009 12:51 PM in response to Cats in the House

I haven't worked in a grocery store since I was in high school and don't plan to do so again if I can help it. I am unwilling to make the commitment to work three hours a month for me and my spouse, therefore, I don't join the coop. The math is not that hard. If membership of the coop has value to you, you follow the rules. Skipping out on your shift is like deciding you're not going to pay the rent/mortgage/maintenance this month - it's an option, but it has serious consequences. I walked past the coop at 11.30 a.m. yesterday, it was packed to the gills and there was a line of people waiting to get in. I'll stick to Costco and Key Foods thanks.

Posted by: bohuma at October 26, 2009 1:46 PM in response to NYT: Food Co-op Exile's Story Demands 2,000 Words

I agree with Christopher, put everything in writing. You might also ask her to agree to meet with you after a month to discuss whether any other residents have complained about noise or vibration. If noise becomes a problem she should ensure that the lid of the piano is closed, and her particular model may have a practice pedal or a pedal that can be used to dampen the sound and vibration. Her practice times are 11 a.m. - 3 p.m., it is actually reasonable to make some noise at this time as opposed to 11 p.m. to 3 a.m. You might also consider the other occupant of the building and whether this is likely to bother them. If everyone else currently living in the building works outside their home, 9 - 5, they won't even be home to hear the music.

Posted by: bohuma at October 26, 2009 1:26 PM in response to Rent to a Pianist - Crazy?

This is a matter for your attorney, you need to take legal action against the tenant. BTW, it is now possible to change the configuration of rental buildings so that tenants are responsible for paying for their own heat and hot water, but you have to reduce their rent. I would follow this course if possible (your attorney will explain the process) as the amount of the rent reduction is not nearly as much as it costs per apartment to provide heat and hot water - you will find it harder to attract good tenants to vacant apartments if you provide expensive to run heating appliances (avoid electric base board heating).

Posted by: bohuma at October 26, 2009 5:57 AM in response to Tenant Leaving Water On

Sometimes when a person seems to disappear off the face of the earth, their creditors start looking for them and find people with similar names. I used to get calls at work from my bank about someone with almost the same name who was not paying his mastercard bill. Eventually they realized they were calling the wrong person. I actually use a credit monitoring service offered by Bank of America - it gives me peace of mind knowing that I'll get an e-mail every time there's a hard inquiry on my credit report, and they send me a full report quarterly. Maybe it is a waste of $12.95 a month, but what the hell, it's less than the cost of a bottle of mediocre wine.

Posted by: bohuma at October 23, 2009 11:01 AM in response to Someone's Using My Address

I hate this block, every Sunday the whole block is crammed with churchgoers double parked up and down the street and NYPD Traffic does nothing about it. It is also a major thoroughfare for people heading from PH/CH to Atlantic Terminal/Center.

Posted by: bohuma at October 22, 2009 11:04 AM in response to House of the Day: 544 Washington Avenue

It's a buyer's market at the moment. Developers don't like to see the official sale price go too far below the list price, but you can get them to throw in a lot of extras to make you pay the list price. That said, there's still a pretty healthy market for the less expensive studios and one bedrooms, so you may not have as much bargaining power as someone willing to pay close to list for a two or three bedroom. The worst that can happen is that the developer says no. So consider offering 95% of the list price, with the developer kicking in for closing costs, and maybe throwing in a 52" plasma screen TV or a parking space. Ask for Manhattan, you might get a slice of Brooklyn.

Posted by: bohuma at October 16, 2009 2:23 PM in response to New construction condo buys?

Our broker was paid by the bank, but we are paying for it through our mortgage. Ask your broker how they get paid, if your broker is part of a firm that rights a lot of business (think The Manhattan Mortgage Company or Ditech), they have more bargaining power and can get more concessions from banks, and even with their fees you may do better than you would on your own or with a smaller broker. If you're dealing with a smaller broker or applying directly to a bank, you don't have the same bargaining power and may end up paying more, but if you're using a smaller bank that knows you, you may be able to do something other than a vanilla mortgage.

Posted by: bohuma at October 16, 2009 6:52 AM in response to How Are Mortgage Brokers Paid?

Personally, I don't think you should give any indication that your personal financial circumstances have changed. What really matters is the change in market value and the fact that if you move out on December 31, it is quite likely that the apartment will be vacant for at least a month. I would also play up the hassle of walking up all those stairs. 15 minutes walk from the subway is a long way, which should reduce the market value. The landlord should absolutely know that moving out is a serious option for you. In this market a sixth floor walk up is going to be hard to rent.

Posted by: bohuma at October 13, 2009 9:27 PM in response to Negotiating Rent Reduction

There are some rooftop terraces on co-op buildings around Prospect Heights that have what I presume are legal, charcoal grills. Don't underestimate the time, effort and cost of this project. If you get approval, make sure that the local fire house knows about it. Dot all the i's, cross all the t's. Try and find a neighboring co-op that has been through the process and ask them how much time, effort and cost was involved, that may give you a rough idea of what you're in for.

Posted by: bohuma at October 8, 2009 12:41 PM in response to BBQ on the Roof

I doubt it's illegal, the condo corporation will likely get a check at closing for the maintenance for that period. In a slow market, developers and other vendors offer all sorts of incentives to keep the sale "price" somewhere in their preferred neighborhood. The advantage for the purchaser is that the sale price is what qualifies for financing. the advantage for the seller is that the sale price is what gets reported on sights like Streeteasy.

Posted by: bohuma at October 8, 2009 7:11 AM in response to Is This Even Legal?

Compared to other condo developments in the neighborhood, this one is well priced, although it doesn't have parking available, it does have a nice back garden. While the maintenance charges seem high, if you've seen any of the listings for coops lately, they're pretty low. I've seen one bedroom coops around $300k but with $1200 a month in maintenance. This is an eight unit building, so all the expenses (part-time super, heat, hot water, condo taxes, repairs & maintenance, insurance, etc) have to be split eight ways. Given the climate in NYC, if you were paying for heat separately, rather than through the condo maintenance, you would probably be averaging a couple hundred a month anyway. It's not Trump Place, but it is a nice start for a young middle income Brooklyn family.

Posted by: bohuma at October 6, 2009 6:40 AM in response to 476 Sterling Condos Now For Sale

Is there really anything wrong with this house that can't be fixed with a can of gasoline and a book of matches? If the wiring is in the same shape as the rest of the house, you might even be saved the five bucks for gas.

Posted by: bohuma at September 29, 2009 2:38 PM in response to House of the Day: 329 Adelphi Street Reduced

It's a pity they don't use a preferential voting system, i.e. get people to rank their candidates in order of preference. If no candidate gets the requisite number of votes, take the votes of the least popular candidate and reallocate according to the second preferences of the voters, keep doing this until a candidate gets the requisite number of votes. It's more expensive to count, but it's a lot less expensive than running two elections (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferential_voting).

Posted by: bohuma at September 28, 2009 4:50 PM in response to Closing Bell: Vote, Again

I'm inclined to agree that you should have contacted the landlady when you arrived and found the apartment dirty. At the very least she could have taken photographs as evidence that the original cleaners didn't do their job and get a refund. It's kind of like deciding that a dripping tap needs fixing on a Sunday and calling an after hours plumber - you actually have to give the landlady the opportunity to rectify the problem before you go outlaying money and expecting a reimbursement. Given that it's only $70 I would let it slide.

Posted by: bohuma at September 28, 2009 4:36 PM in response to Does the landlord have to clean?

Sorry to be posting thrice in a row. My feeling is that you've probably shafted yourself for this year, however, for next year you should be very precise. Next year send the lease renewal as required by the RGB. On day T -59, if your rent stabilized tenant hasn't returned the signed lease, send her a notice to vacate. Do not negotiate. Get legal advice, but make sure you move to evict her. Once she's out, you get a vacancy increase, then, renovate the apartment. You are allowed to add 1/40th of the cost of renovations to the legal monthly rent Once the legal monthly legal rent is over $2000, you can destabilize the apartment, which means you don;t have to offer an automatic lease renewal. I strongly recommend this course of action, if you can get out from under rent stabilization you will be much better off. BTW, don't give your tenant a head's up on what you're doing.

Posted by: bohuma at September 26, 2009 6:57 PM in response to Tenant Refuses to Return Lease

From the Rent Guidelines Board:

I didn't return my renewal lease in 60 days - can I be evicted?

Under the rent stabilization rules, your landlord must mail you a lease renewal 90 to 150 days before your lease expires. If you waited longer than 60 days, the landlord can refuse to renew your lease and could move to evict you after the lease expires. For more information on lease renewal in rent stabilized apartments see the fact sheet. More information on eviction can be found in the resources section of our website here and here.

However, if the landlord did not offer a timely renewal to you, that is, did not offer the renewal between 90 and 150 days prior to the expiration of the lease, that could be a mitigating factor. So if this is the case, you should probably call the landlord and say that you want to remain in the apartment. If he objects, you might remind him that he failed to send a timely renewal, and that if he attempts to evict you at the end of your lease you will use this in your defense. If the landlord insists on renting to someone else, you should probably consult with an attorney regarding the "late renewal" defense and whether this would stop an eviction action by your landlord. See the fact sheet on lease renewal in rent stabilized apartments for more information.

Bohuma: Sounds like you could start eviction proceedings, if successful you could renovate the apartment and destabilize it.

Posted by: bohuma at September 26, 2009 9:04 AM in response to Tenant Refuses to Return Lease

If it were me, I would not have deposited her check, I would have sent a final demand via certified mail stating that if I didn't get receive signed renewal lease by x date, I would consult my attorneys with a view to commencing a holdover action in Housing Court. I doubt the Court would evict her for not signing the lease and returning it to you, but the threat should be enough for her to comply. BTW, your on pretty shaky ground because you let it slide in previous years. In my view if a tenant doesn't return the lease, they become a month to month, but I'm not a lawyer and I don't know what the Rent Stabilization Code says about this.

Posted by: bohuma at September 26, 2009 9:01 AM in response to Tenant Refuses to Return Lease

Heather, see http://insideschools.org/index12.php?fs=584 apparently it's outside PS 9's zone.

Posted by: bohuma at September 25, 2009 1:57 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 475 Sterling Place, #3I

The city law also governs activities on public land, so if someone sets up their grill in front of your house and starts having a party, you absolutely should call the local precinct - you can't picnic any where you feel like it.

Posted by: bohuma at September 25, 2009 1:05 PM in response to DOB Posts Letter of Intent to Revoke on St. Marks Ave

When push comes to shove it doesn't matter what I think, or what anyone else thinks, it's what the statute says and what the Appellate Court rules. I'm pretty sure that both say that the sidewalk is public property. The stoop and that little bit of garden in front of the row house, that's private and the owner can kick anybody off that. The city code refers to the sidewalk that "abuts" the property. I think that if the majority of these row house owners who think they own the sidewalk that abuts their property examine the legal title to their row house, they'll find the description does not include the sidewalk, and may specifically exclude it.

Posted by: bohuma at September 25, 2009 12:56 PM in response to DOB Posts Letter of Intent to Revoke on St. Marks Ave

Whilst I am well aware of the law that requires the property owner to maintain the sidewalk in front of their property, that they're liable for injuries caused by their failure to maintain, and that the city will fine them for failure to maintain, I still think that the sidewalk is public property. The city/state/whoever has passed a law that requires property owners to maintain that piece of public property, and has shifted liability to the property owner. The property owner cannot control the access of other people to the sidewalk, e.g. by fencing it off (at least not without a temporary sidewalk shed permit) or charging a fee to use the sidewalk. Nor can the property owner do whatever s/he likes with the sidewalk, e.g. store junk their (except on trash day).

So, while I think the city has delegated maintenance to adjacent property owners, the sidewalk is still public property.

Posted by: bohuma at September 25, 2009 12:11 PM in response to DOB Posts Letter of Intent to Revoke on St. Marks Ave

I do have a problem with curb cuts. The street and sidewalk are public property, and street parking is essential for many who live or work in Brooklyn. Cutting a curb effectively removes at least one street parking space. Unless the curb cut provides a public purpose, like providing six or more spaces for a multi-family building, I don't think that they should be allowed. If having private parking is important to you, you should buy a house or condo that has parking already, not try and take public land to provide yourself with private parking. The city has so far resisted requests for resident only parking because it believes that public land is for all of us.

Posted by: bohuma at September 25, 2009 10:50 AM in response to DOB Posts Letter of Intent to Revoke on St. Marks Ave

Make that USPS.

Posted by: bohuma at September 24, 2009 4:37 PM in response to Getting into Desirable Condo

If it's actually a condo, you can go onto the department of finance website and do a search on each unit number and get the registered owners addresses. You could then write a personal note to the owner/s of units that you're interested in and send it via UPS. I'm pretty sure that's how brokers do it.

Posted by: bohuma at September 24, 2009 4:36 PM in response to Getting into Desirable Condo

Altervoce, once the first units have closed, the developer is no longer obliged to keep prices consistent. You can offer whatever you like for a unit or parking space, the worst that can happen is the developer says no. The price cuts came after the first units closed.

I think Washington Ave is great, and I've felt as safe here as I have anywhere in Brooklyn, or Queens. I tend to keep my wits about me though, and take appropriate precautions, like not wandering through any urban neighborhood at three am with five martinis in my belly.

There are forty-five units in this development: 25 sold and closed, 3 in contract, 17 for sale - there may be offers out on one or more of these. There are 23 parking spaces, nine have been sold. The list price for parking was $25,000 in March 08, Streeteasy records the last sale of a parking space at $10,000, but that was in conjunction with one of the most expensive units in the building so they undoubtedly negotiated the unit and the parking space as a package.

Posted by: bohuma at September 24, 2009 3:50 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 475 Sterling Place, #3I

Seahawk, you heard wrong about the parking. Check the recent sales on streeteasy.

Posted by: bohuma at September 24, 2009 2:19 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 475 Sterling Place, #3I

Petebklyn, parking is available for purchase, with a low monthly maintenance. You'd need to talk to the listing agent to find out the current list prices of the parking - remembering that this is a buyer's market and most things are open to negotiation. We paid less than half for our space what we were quoted at the Argyle on 4th Ave. The spaces are outdoors.

gemini10, the neighborhood is improving all the time. Washington Ave has a number of quite good restaurants, mostly Caribbean at this end, but also a nice Greek BYOB (Teddy's). Tom's (Washington & Sterling) diner is famous in the neighborhood for its breakfast. I don't use dry cleaners a lot, but there are several on Washington. There are four bodegas on Washington within 5 minutes walk and a moderate sized Key Food on Washington between Lincoln and Eastern Pkwy. The 2/3 trains run from Eastern Pkwy, 6 minutes walk. 4/5 run from Franklin Ave (10 minutes walk), the Franklin Ave shuttle is about 7 minutes walk. The B45 is on the corner and goes to Atlantic Center where you can shop at Pathmark and Target (among others). The B71 bus runs from the 2/3 subway at Eastern Pkwy down Union St, you can shop on 5th avenue from the B71 - there's a bigger Key Food on 5th.

Posted by: bohuma at September 24, 2009 2:18 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 475 Sterling Place, #3I

I wouldn't sign a construction contract without my lawyer's OK, but others will have a different view. If you have a lawyer, what does s/he say? The contract normally provides details on the payment schedule.

Posted by: bohuma at September 24, 2009 1:26 PM in response to Contractor Deposit-Too early?

The kitchen cabinets are lacquered, so might need some sanding to change the color. The second bedroom easily fits a queen bed. There will be open houses from 1 - 3 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, check them out.

Posted by: bohuma at September 24, 2009 1:18 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 475 Sterling Place, #3I

I live in this building and love it. The apartments are roomy and highly sound resistant. The washer/dryer hookup is a big plus. There are also plenty of off-street parking spaces available to buyers.

Posted by: bohuma at September 24, 2009 1:13 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 475 Sterling Place, #3I

The owner of the building owns the building and maybe even the land on which it stands. They do not own the street where anyone is currently permitted to park their car, nor the sidewalk, both of which will become de facto private property if the curb cut is allowed to proceed. IMHO the laws on curb cuts are perfectly just. The 40' rule effectively means apartment buildings only - probably taking one street parking space and proving six or more off street parking spaces. The developer of the condo where I live (not in this neighborhood) got a curb cut approved for our building, the street lost one space but twenty-four were created off-street.

I dislike taking public land for private use unless there is an overwhelming public benefit (like getting a net twenty-three cars off the street).

Posted by: bohuma at September 23, 2009 1:30 PM in response to A Curb Cut on Landmarked St. Marks Avenue? Really?

From experience, I would recommend a semi-formal agreement. Have you thought about what will happen if either of you breach the agreement? I had a friend rent a room once, I became a crutch and used to suck it up when he couldn't pay the rent. Eventually I got a job offer in a distant city and had to sell up, but if I hadn't I may still have been the crutch.

Posted by: bohuma at September 21, 2009 10:21 AM in response to Renting Room to a Friend

Co-ops, unlike condos, are subject to residential tenancy laws because of the proprietary lease. The five co-op members who are not in violation need to swallow their scruples and contact a co-op lawyer and begin proceedings. As board members you are required to act in the best interests of the corporation, allowing a shareholder-tenant to ignore the provisions of the proprietary lease is not in the best interests of the corporation. Difficult as it will be, in the interest of the corporation, you need to act now. Call the New York Bar Association and ask for the names of lawyers in your area specializing in co-op matters.

Posted by: bohuma at September 21, 2009 7:27 AM in response to Ignoring Coop rules

In the current climate, I would strongly recommend selling your place before buying another. It is possible to manage this. Just remember that if you buy before you sell, you will end up with two very expensive mortgages, and renting out your smaller apartment may not be an option, particularly if it's a co-op. Ask your lawyer's advice about when it's safe to start looking to buy. My parents did this a number of times, always selling before committing to a new property. Friends of their's bought first and sold later, having to finance both properties for a period, it was very expensive. A moderately priced one bedroom in a reasonable neighborhood should still find plenty of interested buyers even in this market. I've noticed that in my part of Brooklyn, the one bedrooms are selling well, but the larger more expensive apartments are spending a long time on the market.

Posted by: bohuma at September 21, 2009 7:21 AM in response to moving equity into a new apt

My guess is that domestic servants are considered part of the household. As long as it is one household in one apartment I don't think there's a problem. Unrelated people are allowed to share accommodation - the city is full of roommate situations. As long as the maid's accommodation is lawful for sleeping etc. no issue for the buildings department. I would assume that the accommodation is part of her remuneration.

Posted by: bohuma at September 17, 2009 3:41 PM in response to Live-in help in two family house

If the restaurant is less that fastidious about it's cleanliness, you will be sharing your accommodations with rats, mice and roaches.

Posted by: bohuma at September 15, 2009 9:00 PM in response to Living Above Restaurant

You can check ACRIS at the department of finance website to find out who is recorded as the owner on the title of any separately titled property in New York City. The Department of Buildings Building Information System can provide the status of the certificate of occupancy.

Redbone - there is only one sponsor rented unit at 475 Sterling Place, all the other units are occupied by the registered owners (~25 units), their children (~2 units), and in once case a market rate tenant. I don't think that the sponsors are up to any shenanigans. The parking spaces at 475 are a steal.

Posted by: bohuma at September 15, 2009 2:39 PM in response to Is This Shady?

Ysabelle, have you consulted your own attorney? I'm not sure I'd recommend suing because if you lose you end up with their attorney's bill as well. But you could try getting them to binding arbitration, or even hire a forensic accountant. It smacks of, though it isn't legally, racketeering. And Napoleon Syndrome.

Posted by: bohuma at September 11, 2009 2:53 PM in response to Condo By-Laws

If it's new construction, the by-laws and initial house rules are in the offering plan. Personally, I feel the house rules are more likely to impact your quality of life than the by-laws. I think that offering plans also need to be made available to subsequent purchasers, but don't quote me on that. The by-laws describe how the condo is to be governed, but also contain information like whether the condo board can impose fines for breaches of house rules. You want to be careful that you're not buying a coop in condo clothing.

Posted by: bohuma at September 11, 2009 11:05 AM in response to Condo By-Laws

Assuming this is a market rate lease, you signed a contract, you should have read the terms and abided by them. If the lease says 60 days, that's what it means. Generally speaking you should send a letter to the landlord by USPS to arrive before the 60 day period. I think you have probably lost your deposit. Unless your deposit is like $10,000 it's not worth the legal fees to fight it. Only go to court if you think you'll get back more than it will cost you in lawyers and court fees.

Posted by: bohuma at September 9, 2009 4:38 PM in response to Confusing Lease Notice

I've rented twice in New York, once in Manhattan, once in Queens. Both times the broker helped me put together a landlord package that included multiple bank statements, employment letter, SS number, references, the works. I had to pay $80 on both occasions for the broker/landlord to run my credit. All management companies do this and it's good practice for individual landlords. If I was renting out an apartment I would consider all aspects of the package. Bankruptcy due to medical bills is not the same as bankruptcy due to profligacy, 30% of all cancer patients in the US end up bankrupt. Credit score is important, not the be all and end all though. I would be just as interested in the housing court reports.

Posted by: bohuma at September 9, 2009 3:17 PM in response to Credit Check for Tenants?

IrieMan, most supers don't want to upset their neighbors so don't ask questions. Landlords with significant numbers of rent stabilized tenants sometimes pay bonuses to supers who provide evidence of illegal subletting or non-residence and it will be a lot more than a tenant has to offer. My guess is that the landlord in this situation offers such bonuses to the super, could be as high as $10,000 for every apartment deregulated.

All well and good to have 20/20 hindsight, but OP (and any other rent stabilized tenants reading this) should have done his homework before leaving. My understanding is that you can sublet while out of NY on a temporary work assignment (e.g. teaching in China for a year), landlord needs to be advised and approve the subtenant, and the rent can't be more than 10% above the legal rent, and I believe the rent goes to the landlord - the head tenant can't profit from the sublease in any way, shape or form.

Most illegal sublets are because the head tenant wants to make a profit, that's not allowed under the Rent Stabilization Code. The RSC grants rights and imposes obligations on both tenants and landlords, if you don't follow the RSC faithfully you risk losing your rights and incurring penalties.

OP might want to contact a tenant lawyer to try and rescue his/her lease.

Posted by: bohuma at September 9, 2009 12:57 PM in response to Questions About Subletting

In making an offer in times like these, it's always best to play your cards close to your chest. The vendor wants the highest price possible, and sometimes they think they'll get whatever the purchaser can afford, which may bear no relationship to the market value. Start low, they can only say no.

Posted by: bohuma at September 9, 2009 11:03 AM in response to Making an offer

It also matters if you live on-site or not. If you don't, then pushing too hard just might result in a midnight move out and you having an empty apartment on no notice at all.

I saw a lot of these when I lived in Manhattan, the friend's van or U-Haul pulling up in the middle of the night and people furtively looking around as they carried out their stuff.

If you do live on the premises it's much less likely (although some people would still have the balls to do it right under your nose!).

Posted by: northridger at November 3, 2009 2:34 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease

no, I believe what folks are saying is that since there is no opt-out clause, they are responsible for the entire term of the lease. You're thinking of it in reverse.

If they have properties in Florida, they aint got no money!!

Posted by: moreteasir at November 3, 2009 2:37 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease

northsloperenter - just out of curiousity regarding your comment about paying extra rent, when you say you'd rather pay the extra $100/month, is that because you assume you will only be in the apt. for a year, and so $1,200 paid over the year will be less than the fee (+/-$2,000), or is it because you just don't want to pay all that money upfront and you'd like to leave your option open to leave after a year whereas you'd be committed to two years if you paid the fee?

Posted by: slopenick at November 3, 2009 2:44 PM in response to Landlord Paying Broker?

Make sure they move out at the end of their paid up time, keep their deposit and use it to float the month it will take to fix up and re-rent the apartment. You can even be nice and offer to give them back a pro-rata portion of the deposit if someone else moves in sooner than that. That is more than fair and probably sets the stage for an amicable separateion.

Fighting people to pay up on a lease they want out of seems like it will cost more than you will recoup.

Posted by: Brokedeveloper at November 3, 2009 2:50 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease

Gale, I had to break my lease a month shy of fulfillment this week because of the downstairs tenants who moved in after me, as well as street noise that was way worse than I had expected. I let my landlady know and posted on Craigslist to find someone to take over my lease and had no trouble finding interest. I'm now completely moved into my new space and my landlady has a new tenant that she likes :)

My point being, (a) your tenants should at least help you find a replacement and (b) Craigslist is your friend.

Posted by: ettay at November 3, 2009 2:56 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease

I can say from experience that the litigious route is the worst. The best you can hope from an experience like this is to get them out of there as quickly as possible with as much cooperation as possible. For heavens sake, do NOT rely on them or expect them to find you a tenant. Their fabulous judgement is what caused this mess. You should explain that this is a breaking of the lease, that it is a big problem for you, that this is a bad time of year, etc. and see if you can get them to be cooperative in keeping their apartment both very tidy and neat and available for showing. Immediately. And then while we can't control everything, to the extent you can, analyze how you can try to avoid a similiar situation in the future, i.e. do a lot of screening up front. I am sympathetic because s**t happens but see what you can learn from this. And stay out of court. I had to go there as a last resort with an inherited tenant from hell and let me tell you about a way to age yourself.

Posted by: donatella at November 3, 2009 3:07 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease

I would let them be squatters

Posted by: Xander Crews at November 3, 2009 3:36 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease

slopenick -- there are 3 reasons:

1. It would take 2 years of lower rent to make up for the fee, and I'm only signing a 1 year lease, so there is no guarantee that I'll be there 2 years (the place might turn out not to suit me or I might find a better deal or the landlord and I might have conflicts, etc.). There is also no guarantee that the landlord won't raise the rent 10-15% after the first year anyway. So, paying the fee and then hoping to make it up in lower rent is a higher risk approach.

2. I'd rather have the money I spend on my apartment go to the landlord than the broker. Hopefully, getting a higher rent will encourage the landlord to maintain the building better and respond to repair requests in a more timely fashion. Obviously, it won't matter with some landlords, but with small landlords who don't have a lot of free cash flow for dealing with unexpected repairs, it could help.

3. The broker does nothing for me that warrants getting paid that much money. The broker works for the landlord. The landlord should build the cost of the broker into the rent and pay the broker. That way when the broker's fees get too high, the landlord can negotiate or just say 'no' and go with a different broker. A tenant doesn't have that option since they can't choose which brokers will be the ones managing the apartments they want to see, so there is no mechanism to control brokers' fees when the tenant pays.

Posted by: northsloperenter at November 3, 2009 3:37 PM in response to Landlord Paying Broker?

Hi, Even if they have money.. you really don't want a tenant who doesn't want to be there. it's just a headache. Let them do all the leg work and you just screen in the end like I and a few others have said. Better to have someone that wants to be there in there IMO.

Posted by: scarter at November 3, 2009 3:46 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease

Where is the apt? I know a couple that is looking to rent in Brooklyn for Dec. 1. They are coming from England so I'm helping with the hunt. Maybe we could talk offline.

Posted by: blowfish at November 3, 2009 3:47 PM in response to Tenants Breaking Lease