Backstabber Roomate Sued for Violating Stabilization Law

[terrygold]

I live in a $1,000 stabilized apartment. My roommate, the leaseholder, charges me $1,500. The landlord recently filed a lawsuit against my roommate for violating the rent stabilization law but he doesn't know the real truth about what's going on. The landlord discovered my roommate has a house elsewhere and is accusing him of living there most of the time, which is against RS law. It's true. But only I can confirm this. The landlord is also accusing my roommate of subletting illegally. He thinks I'm a subletter and doesn't know I'm the roommate and that the leaseholder is profiteering (which is cause for eviction). We have a court date and I want to negotiate with the landlord and help him get my roommate out in exchange for my own apartment or buy out. But how do i offer to help without tipping my hand about the profiteering or confirming that my roommate is violating the RS law in terms of living elsewhere? How should I approach the landlord and secure a deal for myself? What should the deal be? My roommate is very wealthy and hasn't paid rent in decades. In fact, he's a landlord himself. He lied to me about our agreement. I'm only learning this because of the lawsuit. Further leverage, I could contact the previous roommates and let them know they're entitled to refunds.

[terrygold]

also, can anyone recommend a lawyer or a place to get legal services?

[TenantNet]

The might be several things going on.

First, as per the lawsuit, the LL claims the lease holder - AKA the tenant - is a non-primary tenant. RS tenants must use the unit as their primary residence. Among other things, the tenant must actually live there 183 days a year minimum as a rule of thumb. One can own a second residence like a vacation cottage, but must be at the RS unit 183 days.

Subletting is often confused with having a roommate. If you actually share the unit, have your own sleeping area and the tenant - when he is there - shares the place with you, then that's a roommate situation. Subletting is when the tenant leaves for a temporary period and the sublet has complete control of the unit. There are rules on subletting procedure. See the Forum Reference section for those. But in some cases there are a lot of grey areas. And of course claiming you are a roommate, not a sublet, is a defense to illegal subletting.

If the tenant is charging you a non-proportionate part of the rent (usually half before utilities), then that can be a violation of the RSC. But it can depend on how egregious it is. If the legal rent is $600 and the tenant is charging you $1600 (meaning he gets free rent plus a profit of $1000), then I would go after him. But if the legal rent is $600 and he's charging you $400 (more than half), then I'd think twice and look for a better solution.

And if the LL is unaware of this, and didn't bring it up in the lawsuit, he might not be able to bring it up now.

In other words, it depends. You can always go to him and tell him you discovered his game and that you want to be compensated for any overcharge and an equal rent going foreward.

LLs want the unit deregulated, which is why they go after the tenant. You could end up with a deregulated unit, or something that results in yet another unit lost to the free market. Don't do that. If the LL thinks he has a good case, why would he use you?

Or you could end up on the street if the tenant wins and then wants you out.

You seam to want a deal, your own profiteering. Isn't that as bad as what the tenant is being accused of? It's that kind of attitude that is killing tenant protections. Shame on you (and the tenant to the extent that he's also profiteering).

As for lawyers, there are many that advertise on this site.

[terrygold]

the total rent is 1,000. My roommate charges me 1,500. The landlord doesn't know that. He thinks I'm a subtenant but I am a roommate. The tenant comes and goes as he pleases but he doesn't live here 183 days. it's probably slightly less. I'm not sure if I should tell the landlord my roommate is profiteering AND doesn't live in the apartment enough to satisfy the 183 day rule. And since I'm named in the lawsuit, shouldn't I try to negotiate to get a buyout or some compensation? Now that I'm in a housing action, my name will be on a blacklist. Maybe I can ask the landlord for some money in exchange for getting rid of my greedy roommate. I'm poor and trying to avoid becoming homeless. My roommate is affluent. He has a second home and a rental property; and hasn't worked full time in 20 years. He's a landlord himself. He stands to gain a huge buyout. An attorney acquaintance said the lawsuit the landlord filed is a precursor to offering a buyout? As it stands, the LL will lose a housing action because he's accusing my roommate of having an illegal subtenant, not profiteering. and there's no way he can prove that my roommate doesn't live in the apartment enough to satisfy the legal requirement without my testimony.

[TenantNet]

You didn't say before that you were named in the lawsuit. Usually LL's name all occupants even if unknown by adding "John Doe" to the case cation. That's because they are seeking possession against anyone in the apartment.

When you say the total rent is $1000, first is that the Legal Rent as registered by DHCR? Second, is it $1000 exactly? If so, then there's something else going on as RS rents are never on even amounts. I would believe $1007.52, but not $1000.00.

As a named party, you can put forth your own defense. For example if you were asserting succession rights, you could do that (but that's not the issue here). But you can say you're a roommate, not a sublet and that you share the unit.

The tenant's profiteering on what you pay is something else and doesn't seem to be part of the LL's case. As I explained above, I don't see the LL giving you a RS unit, either that one or another one. Buyouts aren't usually all that much in reality. (plus it's taxable and if you have a lawyer, they often take 1/3). You only hear about the really large buyouts when it's the last holdout tenant in a building that needs to be demolished to make way for a new skyscraper.

If the tenant wants to save his tenancy, I can see that he should reimburse you for all overcharges, that would be $1000/month on the numbers you cited (your share of the legal rent should be $500). If you go to DHCR you could claim an overcharge. And while DHCR is supposed to give treble damages, they usually don't.

Your friend who said the lawsuit is a precursor to a buyout doesn't know what he is saying. Sure, it can happen, but that's an exception. And you don't know if the LL's case is good or not, or if he needs your testimony.

Turning LL's evidence as you suggest can turn around and bite you. You should get compensation, but I would not seek to profit yourself. We understand that the tenant is this case - based on what you said - is a scumbag profiteer. We have no love for him. But don't be so eager. You need to be careful as you could end up without a place.

One thing I would recommend is consulting with an attorney to see what course of action you - as a named party - can take. And decide if you want to be compensated, or a place to live.

[terrygold]

thanks for your reply. yes, you''re right. it's not exactly 1,000. i'm fudging the figures for anonymity sake, but I pay several hundred dollars more than the real rent (which is, as u said, an odd amount). I'm not eager to profit. My roommate wants me to leave as soon as the case is over. I'm going to be without a place one way or another. He's rich. I'm poor. I overheard him on the phone saying that he'd rather continue making money while the case is pending because he doesn't know that I know what profiteering is. The moment I tell him will be the moment he asks me to leave. The case has destroyed our friendship. I can barely stand to be in the same room with him and wouldn't live with him for all the money in the world.

I'm just trying to be strategic because this came up suddenly and I don't have savings.

I was told that the landlord could evict my roommate for profiteering, but not me.

And what if they do offer a settlement to the tenant, should i ask for part of it beyond the overcharge refund since i'm a named party in the suit? I'm trying to protect myself because I read that I'll now be on the tenant blacklist for being named in a housing action even though I haven't done anything wrong. I'm terrified. I have no savings and will have to find a place while I'm on a blacklist!

I was told that it's likely the landlord will approach me during the first court hearing and offer something. Should I tell him about the profiteering? And theoretically, what could one ask for?

[TenantNet]

So if he wants you to leave, then the die is cast. Consider filing an overcharge complaint with DHCR for overcharge and ask for treble damages.

Also understand that the tenant can't just lock you out. He would need to take you to court (he's in the position of a LL as regards your rights as a roommate).

Filing with DHCR might make the whole situation a bit gooey, perhaps to your benefit. And if he seeks your ouster in court, that can also goo up the works.

And if you do that, make sure it's part of your answer in housing court (yes, you have the right to submit your own answer).

"I was told that the landlord could evict my roommate for profiteering, but not me." Who said that and in what context? I don't think it's true. If they get possession that goes for everyone in the unit.

Right now there is no overcharge issue. Do no speculate and do not get all confused. Right now it's a holdover case by the LL claiming the tenant is either a) non-primary and/or b) illegal sublet. That's it. You are named because you are an occupant.

You can certainly file with DHCR (that could take many years but at times it could be strategic). Or you could put in a defense and counterclaim that you are owed $XXX. If you do that understand that a concurrent filing with DHCR might give the judge in housing court a reason to dismiss that part of any claim you make. So again, it needs to be thought through.

As for the blacklist, yes, you are probably now on it. That's unfortunate but it happens.

If you are approached right away, I would not necessarily jump at it. Not likely to be the best offer.

As I said, as this is getting complicated, I would suggest consulting with a good tenant attorney who could offer a possible strategy.

[terrygold]

Thank you for your time and responding so thoughtfully. I appreciate your advice.

[BubbaJoe123]

You really should get a lawyer here, because you've got a very messy situation, but a lot of potential upside. In theory, you could be entitled to $3k for every month you've lived there, which can really add up. Your landlord (i.e. the named tenant) has been screwing both you and the landlord for some time. There certainly seems to be room for both you and the landlord to win here.

[terrygold]

treble damages are not offered to roommates. only to subtenants. other than getting a refund for the overcharge, which could take years, how should i approach the landlord?

keep in mind, as a roommate. i have no rights. someone said something about illusory tenancy but I don't know what that is. I'm still not sure how I should approach the landlord or whether I should tell him that the tenant is both profiteering and living elsewhere.

Some people think the suit is a precursor to a buyout. i know that might not be true but if it is, is there any reason to negotiate with the landlord to try to get a portion of the buy out or even ask for my own apartment? is there a reason the landlord would work with me to get the original tenant out?

I'm searching for a lawyer. thanks for your help. This forum is awesome. I'm so curious what people think.