TenantNet Forum

Where tenants can seek help and help others



Open and Notorious Pet Ownership

NYC Rent Regulation: Rent Control/Rent Stabilized, DHCR Practice/Procedures

Moderator: TenantNet

Re: Open and Notorious Pet Ownership

Postby BubbaJoe123 » Wed Dec 17, 2014 8:32 am

10ants, that doesn't get around the pet law at all, unless the lease also has a provision prohibiting pets (in which case the two sections of the lease would be completely contradictory).

The open and notorious route is there to ensure that the landlord can't suddenly start enforcing a prohibition in the lease that had been ignored for months or years, forcing a tenant to decide between keeping his long-standing pet, and his apartment.
BubbaJoe123
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:31 pm

Re: Open and Notorious Pet Ownership

Postby TenantNet » Wed Dec 17, 2014 11:02 am

I'm not so sure. A case could possibly be made that the provision he cites is merely a notice and identification, not unlike similar requirements for tenants to notify LLs when they have a roommate. In some cases the LL wants a complete history (which IMHO) is unenforceable), but more often just a name of the roommate. While tenants have every right to have roommates (a limited number) without LL permission needed, there are provisions where the tenant is supposed to tell LLs the identity of the roommate, either on their own, or on request of the LL.

That's a separate question than if the roommate (or in this case pets) has a right to be there.

One could say it's a violation of the lease, but in practice if a tenant has not told the LL of a roommate, it comes out in litigation and then the question is moot.

This LL seems to be using the provision as a wedge to identify "illegal" pets and if the tenant has not given notice, then claim they have violated the lease. I'm not aware of any litigation on just this point, but I can certainly see a judge going with the tenant.
The Tenant Network(tm) for Residential Tenants
Information from TenantNet is from experienced non-attorney tenant
activists and is not considered legal advice.

Subscribe to our Twitter Feed @TenantNet
TenantNet
 
Posts: 9238
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: New York City

Re: Open and Notorious Pet Ownership

Postby 10ants » Wed Dec 17, 2014 11:37 am

There's a no pets clause in the lease above the 'identification of pets'.

The idea is to get around the open and notorious display, and affirmatively require the T to notify the LL of the presence of a pet, presumably so the LL can sue the T, and also to prevent the T from having multiple pets successively.

I have no idea who would win in court.

I doubt that most older leases have this -- seems like a reaction to a bunch of cases from 10+ years ago.
10ants
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:44 pm

Previous

Return to NYC Rent Regulated Apartments

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 3 guests