Adding to Stabilized Lease? Vacancy Increase?

[go_jets37]

I am new here but this forum seems like a great resource so thank you for running this website.

I live in a rent stabilized 2 bedroom apartment, my lease started on March 2015. I am the only one on the lease right now.

I would like to add a roommate to the lease. As I understand this would trigger a vacancy lease which would mean the 18-20% increase to my base rent.

If I added the roommate to the lease right now, would the increase apply to next month's rent? Or would it only apply when we renew the lease in 2016?

Thanks

[TenantNet]

Why would you want a 18% increase to your rent? Why not have the person just move in as a roommate (not on the lease) with no rent increase? You have the legal right to have a roommate; the LL can't stop you from having one.

[go_jets37]

I don't want the increase but my potential new roommate said she would like to be on the lease for security purposes.

I will tell her it increases the rent if she wants to do that (and will ask her to cover the increase). But I would like to know if that would apply next month or when my renewal comes next year.

Thank you TenantNet

[Cranky Tenant]

Under Rent Stabilization you can only charge your roomate a propotional share of the rent. If you have one roomate she would pay 50% so the idea of charging her the vacancy difference wouldn't be legal.

Your landlord may prefer to issue a new lease now, but since you're already several months into your lease I'd imagine adding the roomate and any vacancy increase shouldn't kick in until you renew the lease... if you and the new roomate are still sharing the apartment at that time.

Unless you plan to marry this person or she's a relative I personally wouldn't add her. Between the vacancy increase and any headaches if the situation doesn't work out could be more trouble than it's worth. You should consider offering her a roomate agreement as an alternative to being on the lease that spells out your terms.

[TenantNet]

Cranky is correct in that requiring the roommate to cover the increae would be illegal on your part. It could result in your being hit with an overcharge complaint and treble damages.

For the roommate being on the lease, there might be some benefits, but it changes a number of things, including your ability to get rid of the person if things don't work out.

A current lease can be ended prematurely if both parties agree (get it in writing), but not by only one party. So any vacancy increase would notg be effective until a new lease kicks in.

It wouild be crazy to agree to a new lease. What happens if she doesn't like it and leaves? You would be stuck with the entire increased rent. Offer a regular roommate agreement. If she doesn't go along, then look for a different roommate.

[BubbaJoe123]

It's illegal to charge a roommate more than a proportional share of the rent, but if the person is on the lease, and becomes a full co-tenant, they cease to be a roommate for the purposes of the anti-profiteering rules - there's no restriction on how two co-tenants decide to split up the rent.

That said, I agree with the other commentators here - no really good reason to add this person to the lease.

[go_jets37]

Thank you TenantNet, Cranky, and BubbaJoe for the advice!!

[TenantNet]

BTW, the Jets are evil ... not just football, but they helped to displace many tenants and small businesses.

[10ants]

Under the new rules, the LL can only get one vacancy increase per year. So now *would* be the time to do it, assuming that the LL got one at the beginning of the tenancy.

Most likely, the LL would say no, for that reason.

[TenantNet]

10ants, you're misunderstanding the situation. Yes, the LL can only get one increase per year ... that was the case back in 1984. But these days increases are added for other things, including longevity increases. If the tenant took occupancy this year, most of that is inapplicable.

But that's not the question. The tenant should not create a new tenancy, which the thread really centers on. Bring on he roommate - as a roommate, not a co-tenant.

Everything else is confusing the OP, as often happens here.

[10ants]

My point was that in *this* situation, adding a new name on the lease doesn't cost anything and gives the prospective roommate the security that if the OP leaves he or she can continue to stay there.

[TenantNet]

And it leaves the original tenant in a compromised position. Still not a good idea.