Buying a Rent-Stabilized Bldg
My parents and I were looking at a 6 family building with 4 rent stabilized tenants, 1 vacant, and the owners apartment. My parents would take the owners place and I would take 2 of the other apts to combine for my own growing family. Pleeeeease don’t go all rent-stabilized crazy on me, but would…
My parents and I were looking at a 6 family building with 4 rent stabilized tenants, 1 vacant, and the owners apartment. My parents would take the owners place and I would take 2 of the other apts to combine for my own growing family. Pleeeeease don’t go all rent-stabilized crazy on me, but would I be able to take one of the rent stabilized places over to do this? If so, can I pick any of the stabilized units? I suppose I would pick the one paying the least since the higher income from the others is what is making my mortgage manageable. Does it matter which one I decide to ask to move out? Any thoughts on the matter are appreciated. I’m really not looking to be some evil landlord- just want a place for my family and parents to live with a bit of income.
Yanks, first, consult a lawyer. Someone on BS recommended Marc Aronson on Smith St. in another thread. Poster said he knows his stuff, but I cannot verify. Christopher posted correctly above about 120 days notice before the lease is up, send it notarized and certified, ALWAYS. If the lease expired already, or none is in place, you will have no choice but to offer them a new lease, one or two year, then wait till 120 days before that lease expires to start any proceedings. If they are elderly, it will be really tough. Elderly AND rent control, pretty much untouchable. Forget for now about getting out the person with the cheapest rent, you will recoup that rent over time long term, but see which apt. will be easiest for you to make your long term abode. To help your matter, you may also have to get an architect to file plans with the city to make a primary residence duplex. This will help your cause, but you WILL have to follow through. You most likely have to make concessions, letting the tenants live rent free for certain number of months, or cash out of pocket, or both, depends on court proceedings. Most importantly, you CANNOT rent out an apt. evicted for family/personal use, last I remembered, for minimum three years, but that might have changed. If caught doing so, the previous tenants can sue the pants off you to regain their apartment as well as monetary damages, somewhere along the lines of three times each months rent from eviction to recovery, but don’t quote me on that, I just know it’s harsh. Overall, it can be done, but be patient and please make your decisions wisely, especially dealing with the lives of people you will be uprooting. You may want to personally explain the situation to those tenants, and see if there is something reasonable you can do for them, i.e. money, in order for them to move within a reasonable time frame, and keep all this out of the courts, which for the tenants will be in their best interests as well. You may be lucky enough to find someone who is willing to work with you, but proceed wisely and respectfully. Best of luck. Patience is a virtue.
sam claims his friend has not paid rent in 10 years b/c landlord can’t be bothered to sheetrock the ceiling? yeah, right.
I only write about what I know from real life ecperience, not from how things “should” be but from how I actually see and experince them. I used to live in a co-op with rental tenants who had not paid a penny of rent in years claiming various “infractions”. A clever renter, and some of them have become professionals at gaming the system, can make claim after claim and basically live rent-free. The landlord can’t touch them. One of my childhood friends in fact, I don’t hold this agaisnt her because I love her, has not paid rent on her UWS apartment in ten years because her ceiling plaster keeps bubbling. they repair it and it comes back. They need to just replace the ceiling with sheetrock but they have not done it yet. She is not old and is rent-regulated. An older person who is rent-controlled is like a walking God in housing court. A sacred personage. Fugghedabodit. Naturally if you luck out and get reasonable tentants who don’t wish to game the system or whatever you could have a different view, but in NYC, those folks are getting rarer and rarer to find.
Sam, I agree with you about your comment that many rc and rr tenants live rent free but to imply that they are squatters implies that they are violating property laws and laws governing ownership, which I do not think is fair to the tenants since they act well within their rights. Your second point is spot on though – potential buyers in these situations need to do their homework given the complexity of these laws. My only point is that the laws are on the books when people choose to buy property in these situations (often at a reduced price relative to a comparable unregulated property. To then complain about the situation and presence of legal residents is a bit disingenuous in my view.
Sam: you have often stated this idea that rc and rs tenants live rent free. And now you are saying that the differences between the two are neglible. Neither of those positions is consistent with my experience. Could you explain how you support them? Thanks.
I think ironballs is pretty accurte vis-a-vis the squatter analogy. Many rent-control and rent-regulated tenants live rent-free. They really are like legal squatters. It is a peculiarity of NYC and it courts.
Also I realize that there are many technical differences between a rent-control and rent-regulated tenants, but in reality, the differences are negligible. The bottom line is that they both have legally protected rights far surpassing those of the onwer. I know it is a bitter pill and many on this blog with limited experience do not accept the reality of the rental laws’ teeth but they are real nonetheless and the buyer should beware.
I wonder if those who squawk about property rights of owners also support AY and Ratner’s eminent domain ousters?
IronBalls, I can appreciate your steadfast commitment to ideology, but your suggested link between rent stabilization and the Communist Manifesto is absurd, and the idea that rent stabilized tenants are squatters is laughable (after all, they are living under a legal lease contract and paying the rent stipulated in that lease). If a property owner purchased a building before rent stabilization rules went into place, I have some sympathy for the fact that the rules of the game were changed on them, but given how long rent stabilization laws have been on the books, I doubt that applies to very many people on this board. I can sympathize with your opinion that the law tilts the benefits to renters vs landlords in these cases, but the law is also tilted towards property owners in many cases as well – for example, any homeowner who wants a truly equal playing field with renters can stop deducting mortgage interest on their tax returns since renters are not allowed to deduct the percentage of their rent that is going towards paying the landlord’s interest payment.
sorry, that’s cynical.
Second cup of coffee is now in my hands.