Heights Rent-Controller Out on a Technicality
“Rob a bank, and if the federal government doesn’t catch you in five years, you’re off the hook,” said Josh Barbanel in a Times story this weekend, but for Robert Nocco, no statute of limitations could save him: the new owner was able to rummage back to 1976 to challenge Nocco’s right to a rent-controlled…
“Rob a bank, and if the federal government doesn’t catch you in five years, you’re off the hook,” said Josh Barbanel in a Times story this weekend, but for Robert Nocco, no statute of limitations could save him: the new owner was able to rummage back to 1976 to challenge Nocco’s right to a rent-controlled apartment in Brooklyn Heights, at 222 Henry Street. Mr. Nocco’s parents moved into the apartment about fifty years ago, the article explains, and until June, Mr. Nocco, who was paying $212 in rent every month, had thwarted several legal attempts to remove him from the apartment. The current owner (who paid $386,566 for the five-story building in 2005, according to Property Shark) took his case to state housing regulators and noted that in 1976, Mr. Nocco rented another apartment in Brooklyn, while his parents moved to Florida. Since regulations would require Mr. Nocco to have lived with his parents for two years prior to taking over a rent-controlled apartment, this was enough for a housing officer to rule in the landlord’s favor. The two parties reached a settlement (in the very low six figures), and Mr. Nocco moved out in June.
Rent-Control Rights Stripped Away [NY Times]
I don’t consider having a separate apartment a technicality. Them’s the rules. (This is the issue that comes up whenever Maxwell/Apartment Therapy posts interiors of his own place)
quote:
Yes – this is an anomaly but it is still wrong for our city to force private LL to subsidize tenants
so, what’s your opinion about Section 8? the program that has detroyed communities across the country.
*rob*
Tiptoe, unless that tenant occuppied 4 out of the 5 flrs, 386k + buy + legal bills is still a very good price for a bldg in Bk Heights. in 2005, a small 2 bdrm cost as much or more so doubt many buyers would back away from this deal simply because of the RC tenant
increases under rent-control come every year. Not set by same board as rent-stabilization but they do occur annually.
There were several years in the 70’s where they also got fuel adjustment increase on top of regular increase.
Two things I’m amazed about:
1) the gamble the LL took when buying this house, thinking or hoping that he might be able to get rid of the rent-controlled tenant. Most of us would walk away even with the low price.
2) the tenacity of the LL or his private investigator digging up records from the 1970s. plus, there must have been $$$ poured into this investigation. i guess this was figured into the all-over price of the house
Some “technicality”!! the whole system is a technicality….the guy got the RC under false premise – hardly a technicality – the headline is another B’stoner anti-LL slant. The only “technicality” (which implies unfairness) – is that this guy won’t have to pay back all the improperly subsidized rent he took advantage of for THIRTY YEARS.
Pete – it is possible to get rent increases under RC but it is not easy and additionally this guy’s legacy in the apartment apparently goes back to the 1950’s – which helps account for the low base.
Yes – this is an anomaly but it is still wrong for our city to force private LL to subsidize tenants (who have to show nothing in terms of need) to live in an apartment for at least 10x less than the market – think of all the worthy people that could be helped if only 1/2 this subsidy was taken away.
media and anti- RC love these stories. They are anomolies to typical/average rent control. Certainly there are people that scam the system…and there will always be.
Also, when I read these stories and I see these rents I also think there is more to story. I know /know of plenty of people with rent control/ and yes rent control and not rent-stabilization living in modest apts…and their rents are not this cheap at all.
He did get it for a bargain, but its still part of the price. He may have anticipated paying it and accounted for that, but he didn’t get the place for $386. RC issues are normally priced in.
“i have no problem with rent control per se.”
I don’t have a problem with the concept, but the way it has been implemented in NYC is so bad and full of abuse and unintended consequences that if I heard tomorrow it was being systematically phased out and that no new tenants would get a controlled or stabilized apartment, I’d think it was a good thing.