TenantNet Forum

Where tenants can seek help and help others



Discuss amongst yourselves...

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

Moderator: TenantNet

Discuss amongst yourselves...

Postby TenantNet » Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:43 pm

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: 8463
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: New York City

Re: Discuss amongst yourselves...

Postby 10ants » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:29 pm

The argument seems to be that they have no original RS lease notifying them that they have to use the apartment as their primary residence, therefore the golub notice was defective. Mostly seems like the previous owner was pretty casual and somewhat sloppy.

Building is a six-unit building, so presumably they are RS.

The real question is 'what happens next' -- RSC doesn't really cover what happens if you live in an apartment with no effective lease, and the LL isn't overcharging you. Presumably the LL will want them to sign a RSC lease, but there are risks that the courts won't accept that approach either since the new lease wouldn't be a 'Vacancy Lease', and by the logic of this decision, there is no lease that could currently satisfy the requirements in fact sheet five.

Seems like both sides are in for a ton of litigation
10ants
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:44 pm

Re: Discuss amongst yourselves...

Postby TenantNet » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:53 pm

One atty said, ",,,probably no LL was ever this stupid."

Without and initial lease, there is nothing to renew. Some thought the next thing would be the LL providing a vacancy lease, that brings up a slew of questions, i.e., at what rent? And can a new lease add any new terms or prohibitions, especially for a RS tenant already in occupancy?

I suspect the tenant has the advantage here, and - assuming the LL doesn't have too deep pockets - the tenant could force a settlement in their favor. But who knows.
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: 8463
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: New York City

Re: Discuss amongst yourselves...

Postby BubbaJoe123 » Wed Nov 15, 2017 10:34 am

Unclear from the ruling - were they tenants prior to the lease being discussed in the ruling, and were never given a lease, or did they move in in 2015, and their initial lease was on the renewal form rather than on the vacancy lease form? It sounds like the latter, but I'm not sure.

Other interesting question here is that the provisions in the RSC that prohibit using an RS apt as a second home are there for a public policy and tenant protection (or more accurately "tenants as a group" protection) reason as well (to allocate housing stock to primary residents).
BubbaJoe123
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:31 pm


Return to NYC Rent Regulated Apartments

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], FAST Enterprise [Crawler] and 2 guests