Licensing for short-term rental?

[cbjohn1]

I'm unfamiliar with landlord-tenant issues in NYC but my brother just moved there and is looking for a place. He sent me a short-term lease to look over and the below stipulation caused alarm.

"In the case of legal actions the licensee will be responsible
for both parties’ legal fees and both parties agree to
mitigate their dispute under the code of laws of the State
of Florida."

I'd appreciate learning more about the differences between licensing and leasing in NYC and the above paragraph in particular. Thanks.

[TenantNet]

First, find out if the unit is rent stabilized, or not.

I can't tell you if restricting any dispute to law of FLA is something that will succeed (assuming it's the LL's desire).

But the language uses the word "mitigate" which carries a different meaning than litigate. Also, in NY, legal disputes, a "prevailing party" can claim legal costs be paid by the loser. Leases are often written where the LL can claim legal costs, implying that tenants can not ... but NY case law essentially allows tenants to claim legal costs if they are the prevailing party. But if the laws of FLA supercede NY laws, that might be a problem.

Also, it says your brother is a licensee, not a tenant. Is it a roommate situation? What is the short term here? Few weeks, months?

Overall this is very suspicious. Any LL that puts that into their lease is likely IMHO to play other games.

[cbjohn1]

It isn't rent stabilized. I think I should mention that the document refers to itself as a licensing agreement rather than a lease. I was hoping that this might be something that NYC'ers were familiar with as I hadn't ever heard about it. The license is with a company but several other people already live in the unit and the license is for the rental of a single room in that unit.

The terms of the lease are similar to month-to-month. He can be asked to move out with 30-days notice or can move out with 30 days notice. He is looking for something shorter term.

It was extremely suspicious to me and I think probably more trouble then it's worth. I just wanted to look into whether or not this was something common in NYC -- sounds like not. Thanks for the help.

[TenantNet]

It's not a lease; it's a license. He would not be a tenant, but a licensee, and the rules are not the same as for a tenant and a lease. Whether that's legal I can't answer. One difference is the requirement for notice of termination. For tenants - even month-to-month - it's 30 days. For a license, I think it would be ten days, although from what you say the agreement provides for greater time.

It also appears to be a roommate type situation (where roommates are termed occupants or licensees). Or it could be a hybrid of a net lessee who is a "tenant" of the building owner leasing an entire building or entire floor and in effect is a landlord to the licensees. That might be legal, and it might not. I've seen some situations like that where the legal arrangement might be legal, but it might violate certificate of occupancy requirements with the Dept. of Buildings, Fire Safety standards or egress requirements. I would be VERY concerned with those.

It's hard to say more without really knowing the actual situation, but yes, it sounds suspicious.