How does apartment get deregulated

[lesseeNYC]

LL is trying to evict from rent stabilized apartment currently renting at $580 per month. He seems to think it will be deregulated then and he can charge over $1200 a month. Is there anyway this is true? It's the last rent-stabilized apartment in a building with more than 6 units. Thanks for any help.

[TenantNet]

First, encourage the tenants in the other units to investigate whether their units were deregulated properly - chances are they weren't. A vacant unit does not become deregulated by virtue of it's vacancy. They can raise the rents to be sure -- and if they can get it above $2000, then they can deregulate it. But to get it above $2,000 - in this case -- the owner must spend over $52,000 in renovation costs. And tenants can challenge this.

[lesseeNYC]

Thanks so much for your help! Where does that $52,000 number come from. Is it in a statute or a formula?

Again, thanks.

[consigliere]

Upon vacancy, the landlord could increase your $580 rent by a minimum of 20%, to $696, for a two-year lease.
 
A landlord is entitled to increase the monthly rent by 1/40 of the costs of improvements. To raise the rent by $1,300 or more, to bring it to over $2,000, the landlord would have to spend more than $52,000 on improvements.
 

[lesseeNYC]

Thanks consigliere.

[azimuth]

I understand: if landlords can get rent to above $2000, they can deregulate it. To get it above $2,000 and thus deregulate it the landlord must spend something like $52,000 in renovation costs.

My building must be an archtype case: 15 stories, on each floor but ONE, many, most or all of the apartments got the renovations once vacated, and are rented out by some "short term" agency for rents of $4,800. (These are for apartments that last rented for $1,200 before the move//renovation.)

Is there a ny provision of the law that specifies that newly deregulated apartments must be leased directly to the any new, high-rent, tenant?

Separaetly, must they be rented For, say a year, minimnum?

In our building most of these apartments are rented indirectoly (through an "agenecy") to transients. The buiilding has gone from being a neighborly apartment building into a hotel for transients. (The "agency" that gets possession to re-rent fills them up for a few weeks or a few months at a time.)

SECONDLY... a rub: the lobbies (public spaces) of each floor of the the building have recently been renovated, too. Very beutifully! EXCEPT for the one floor that hasn't ANY "destablized" apartments.

As a recent event, I am expecting the landlord will bid for MCI increases to the rent for rent stabilized tenants who remain.

QUESTION: Are the tenants on the single floor whose lobbies have NOT been "equally" improved entitiled to the SAME improvements as the others? Can the landlord's application for a MCI increase be challenged over such a difference? Should the tenants whose floor still looks like a hell, be made to pay for the landlord's kind improvements of the floors he rents out for 5 times more?

Is what the alndlord has done legal?

Thank you,
Frump