Rent stabilization question
We are considering buying a rent stablized building. All the tenants , 8 units, are rent stablized. We would like to take over 50% of the buidling for ourselves. This will require us to NOT renew leases for 4 of the tenants. We know they will probably fight this but I also know it is…
We are considering buying a rent stablized building. All the tenants , 8 units, are rent stablized. We would like to take over 50% of the buidling for ourselves. This will require us to NOT renew leases for 4 of the tenants. We know they will probably fight this but I also know it is legal for us not to renew their leases if we take it over for personal use. The law is vague as to how much you can take over for “personal use.” Does anyone have any experience with this? Is taking over half the building for ourselves reasonable?
Second question: If an owner plans to renovate the entire building, one unit at a time, can you evict rent stablized tenants as you go along if the rents are under $2,000 a month.
Thank you for your input
I’ve looked into this and amost did it:
1) You can kick them out as their leases expire IF you can prove that you are going to move into their apartments.
2) #1 doesn’t apply if the tenant is 62+ or disabled (or gets that way during litigation)
3) You can’t kick out a tenant to make room for another tenant.
4) Your tenants will probably stop paying rent during construction.
Good luck, but there is a reason that these buildings trade this way.
The income ceiling for rent stabilization is a quarter of a mil a year. I’d very much like to be that poor.
It is legal to take over units for personal use. Personal use is poorly defined. Was a case last year when a developer wanted to take over 10+ units for “personal use,” His kids and their own personal nannies were going to get their own places. Litigation obviously ensued. Search NYT for details.
And there’s nothing remotely unethical about offering tenants money to vacate. They have the right to say no. You have the right to pay lawyers and potentially lose money.
Bottom line – I’d be really, really careful about this. Not necessarily a bad idea, just very high risk. Someone already said it, buy a place that suits your needs. Good luck!
because the building comes heavily discounted. there is a case going on right now between a rich white family evicting all the tenants in a 12 or 15 family manhattan tenement. as of last week, the appellate court kicked the case back down to the local jurisdiction and allowed the eviction proceeding to continue. for more info on what the legal battle will be like, look up this case. keep in mind that this is one couple taking possession of the entire building and it appears they are winning the war.
Almost 20% of new yorkers live at or below the poverty line – that means an income level of less than $20,000/year for a family of four.
Why is something that helps poor people from becoming homeless immoral? Don’t they have a right to live in new york city, or do you think new york just for the rich who can afford to pay high rents?
And there are, in fact, free legal services available for tenants living in rent stabilized apartments who meet other income-criteria.
To the OP, personal use really means personal use – you have to demonstrate a good faith to use the formerly rent stabilized unit as your primary residence.
Why not consider buying another building – one where there aren’t rent stabilized units?
Morality? Karma? You’ve got to be kidding? Go for it, rent stabilization is immoral and should be destroyed.
You can’t burst anything dude. But allow me to burst yours:
http://www.lawhelp.org/NY/StateDirectory.cfm/County/%20/City/%20/demoMode/%3D%201/Language/1/State/NY/TextOnly/N/ZipCode/%20/LoggedIn/0
I would be happy to move so you can take over your 50%.
I’ll need $150K, cash.
I’ll be home all weekend if you want to go over the details.
don’t mean to burst your bubble, Get Over It, but there are no free publicly assisted legal services for rent-stabilized tenants in these kinds of circumstances. if you know otherwise, name the source of same.
I wouldn’t buy a building under those conditions for two reasons;
– Financially, it’s going to be a hornets nest of pain & misery as you repeatedly get stung doing battle with your tenants in court. THEY can get publically assisted legal representation. YOU will need to get over $200.000
And they probably prefer staying than to being bought-out. Unless of course you offer to practically make a downpayment for them on their next new homes.
It’s a money-loser.
Morally, I’m sure you’d be able to find a better home within your price range that suits your needs and WITHOUT having to be so disruptive of other people’s lives.
It’s bad karma*.
(*’bad karma’ meaning Joe Karma from unit C third floor who -after moving-out- will return to kick your ass to jelly late one night when you least expect it.)