Rent Restrictions
Is it possible for the owner of a rent stabilized apartment to owner occupy the unit when the lease is up? I’ve heard stories where they can owner occupy a building to convert it to a single family if it will be for their own use. It’s the same principle here, it would be for…
Is it possible for the owner of a rent stabilized apartment to owner occupy the unit when the lease is up? I’ve heard stories where they can owner occupy a building to convert it to a single family if it will be for their own use. It’s the same principle here, it would be for the owners use. I will obviously consult a lawyer but I’ve read the posts here a few times and think they’re pretty helpful so I figured I’d ask. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
As the property is owned by an llc, owner occupation is not possible. Unless the corporation plans to demolish the apartment, and apply for eviction pursuant to a bona fide demolition plan, you’re stuck with the tenant until the tenant leaves or breaches the terms of the lease. You could be vigilant for lease breaches, but the housing court will always give the tenant the opportunity to rectify the breach, plus if you go down this road more than once or twice in a short space of time, you could open yourself to charges of tenant harassment. My suggestion would be to do all that is required of you as a landlord under the rent stabilization code, make sure the tenant does all that is required under the code, grab your ankles and grin and bear it.
Thanks for the advice guys… I didn’t purchase it with a tenant (if so I would have paid next to nothing for an occupied apt), it was left to me and two other people and owned in an llc and not by an individual so I guess that complicates things a little more. I think I’m just going to wait the tenant out for a few years. I really appreciate everyone taking the time to look at this post and all the answers really were helpful.
“The Economakis’ do actually live in their house.” For now. But look for a new condo conversion in a few years. Great scheme.
Brooklynnative and crimsonson: RIGHT ON!
RS/RC should be eliminated for a lot of renters. It is one of the biggest reasons it is expensive to live in NYC.
Not to mention, morally wrong in some cases.
I totally agree with bklynite. Why should a landlord be allowed to control or use the property he owns? I mean it’s ethically so unfair that he should get market rate for an apartment. What’s fair is that certain people in this city get their housing subsidized by private citizens. What I don’t understand is why these same rent stablized/controlled renters have to pay full price when they buy food at the market or stuff like that. I think they should be able to at least get their landlord to pay for a pizza and some beer once a week.
this is only true if you own the whole house. If you own an apartment because of a non-eviction plan for the building, the tenant is entitled to a renewal lease.
The answer is yes, but it can take several years, and if the tenant is over 60-ish you’ll lose.
In the interim, you may have grandstanding politicians and other annoying protesters coming out of the woodwork.
FWIW: The Economakis’ do actually live in their house.
^So “parking family members there for a few years” is a legitimate practice.
Maybe legitimate in complying with the letter of the code (not the spirit). Ethically & morally, not so much.