Posted by Tracy on February 21, 2000 at 10:36:10:
Thank you for responding. She was rent controlled until April of 1989. For some reason, she has a settlement contract from a Supreme Court hearing. In that contract, she was changed from controlled to stabilized, she forfeited all interest from a security deposit put down in 1969 and apparently signed a stabilized lease (I did not realize this before now). My aunt is not sure why her lawyer had her do this and it is not clear to me what the proceedings were even regarding.
She is in her late 50's, so the senior clause does not apply yet.
Is this settlement possibly invalid and/or reversible? If she can be switched back to rent controlled, the 20 years residency clause would be applicable and the new owner would be unable to evict on owner occupancy.
The most recent lease she signed has a header reading, "STANDARD FORM OF APARTMENT LEASE THE REAL ESTATE BOARD OF NEW YORK, INC.". It does have the proper "attached rider" clause at the very top and does have a rider attached where she marked 2 years. There was no rent increase. BUT, the lease itself does not say Vacancy or Renewal on it. Since I have not seen a sample of either the vac. Or ren. Lease, I am thinking this is a standard lease in which he added the top statement and added a proper rider. My question is whether he is allowed to do this or not. If not, my next question is whether that means this lease is possibly invalid. Also, should she have signed a vacancy or renewal since it had been about 10 years since a lease had been signed. If so, this may win my aunt 2 more years.
Thanks for any suggestions. I have to admit that while this research is taking up a lot of my time, I find it extremely interesting.
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup