TenantNet Forum

Where tenants can seek help and help others



LL did not provide copy of the lease

Rights for non-regulated tenants

Moderator: TenantNet

LL did not provide copy of the lease

Postby an0n » Sat May 11, 2013 8:21 pm

After I signed the lease for an unregulated apartment I asked for a copy. LL only provided a photocopy of the first page but said the lease would stay on file with them. I did not want to come across as a difficult tenant and I dropped the matter. (LL is a big bureaucratic institution which likes to have its way.)

Two months before the expiration date LL claimed that I breached the lease and said that I should vacate immediately. However LL accepted rent and seems to be waiting for the expiration date. No offer to renew was made.

If I stay beyond the term I understand LL may elect to refuse rent and immediately start a holdover proceeding. If so:
(a) Can I claim that LL actually terminated the lease two months early, and therefore that I should be treated as a month-to-month tenant? (This would give me a little extra time to relocate)
(b) I actually believe that I am not breaching the lease but without a copy I can't efficiently argue this point. Will it be too late to claim that LL should have offered a new lease anyway?

Also: if I go through the proceeding and I lose, does this have other negative consequences such as lower credit score, bad judicial record and stuff?

Thanks
a
an0n
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 11, 2013 7:43 pm

Postby TenantNet » Sat May 11, 2013 10:32 pm

Next time you will know to keep copies of all documents, including envelopes with postmarks.

If they accepted rent, that would vitiate a holdover proceeding, but you do not say if the LL actually brought a legal case or not. If they tell you to vacate while the lease is still in effect, it means nothing without legal papers.

But as an unregulated tenant, the LL is not required to renew.

If you stay after the term, you become a month-to-month tenant if the LL accepts rent. OTOH, he can bring a holdover seeking your eviction.

1) Did he actually send you a Notice of Termination? If not, you can't claim it. And it might be moot if you're beyond the end of the term. It all depends on the timeline.

Being a M2M tenant does not, in itself, give you more time. They are required to give you 30 days notice, and you can likely get some more time in housing court. But in the end, they will get you out.

How can you breach the lease if the lease has expired?
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: 9157
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: New York City

Postby an0n » Sun May 12, 2013 10:28 am

TenantNet wrote:If they tell you to vacate while the lease is still in effect, it means nothing without legal papers.

TenantNet wrote:1) Did he actually send you a Notice of Termination? If not, you can't claim it. And it might be moot if you're beyond the end of the term. It all depends on the timeline.


LL did not send any Notice of Termination. If I am not mistaken the law does not require any *formal* notice from LL to T to terminate a lease early (but of course a formal proceeding is then required if T does not vacate.) Therefore, by merely saying that I should vacate and then accepting rent I feel LL transformed the tenancy into a M2M.

Also, generally speaking I feel it's a pretty serious thing for a LL to say in writing that a T should vacate immediately. I don't see why we should not hold LL to it by saying "oh but since LL did not send formal papers it doesn't count, let's all work together to protect LL's interest in this matter which is to quietly wait for the expiration of the lease"

TenantNet wrote:How can you breach the lease if the lease has expired?


Lease has not expired yet. 2 months before expiration LL claimed I breached one of the clauses and said I should vacate.
an0n
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 11, 2013 7:43 pm

Postby TenantNet » Sun May 12, 2013 12:03 pm

While the lease is still in force, the LL must send a notice of termination - as well as a Notice to Cure (the latter if rent stab or if stated in your lease) - before commencing Holdover eviction proceedings.

This is required in Housing Court summary proceedings, and AFAIK, this must be in writing. (Actions brought in Supreme Court might not require a Termination Notice, but these are rare).

To cover your ass, look at your original lease and there is usually a clause that requires all notices to be in writing. The lease must authorize termination of the tenancy prior to the end of the term, so it must spell out how it is to be done.

Non-Payments require a Demand notice (usually written, but some oral demands might be OK, depends on a number of factors).

When the lease expires, it's not needed as there's nothing to terminate.

If LL accepts rent after lease expires, the tenant becomes M2M and LL is required to give 30 days notice in NYC to vacate.

If there was not Notice to Terminate (for cause listed in a Notice to Cure)

As the lease has not yet expired, he could send you a Notice of Termination and follow-up with a holdover proceeding. But that makes no sense for them to do it as by the time you get into court, the lease will be almost over.

In no case should you vacate and the LL can't enforce it without a court order.

If the LL is serious, you should figure out what you want to do. If unregulated, they will eventually get you out. Do you want more time to find a new place? Then negotiation might be the game plan. Figure out what you want to do.
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: 9157
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: New York City

Postby an0n » Sun May 12, 2013 1:51 pm

TenantNet wrote:While the lease is still in force, the LL must send a notice of termination - as well as a Notice to Cure (the latter if rent stab or if stated in your lease) - before commencing Holdover eviction proceedings.

This is required in Housing Court summary proceedings, and AFAIK, this must be in writing. (Actions brought in Supreme Court might not require a Termination Notice, but these are rare).


I could not find any requirement to serve a formal Termination Notice in New York Real Property Law Article 7 in order for LL to terminate the lease early. Since my lease in unregulated there is no need for a Notice to Cure either. Therefore I think a LL can perfectly terminate a lease early for breach of contract without any notice period ("vacate immediately"), and if he subsequently accepts rent it establishes a M2M tenancy.

TenantNet wrote:To cover your ass, look at your original lease and there is usually a clause that requires all notices to be in writing. The lease must authorize termination of the tenancy prior to the end of the term, so it must spell out how it is to be done.


That might well be but since LL did not provide copy of the lease upon my request I have no way to tell...

TenantNet wrote:If there was not Notice to Terminate (for cause listed in a Notice to Cure)

As the lease has not yet expired, he could send you a Notice of Termination and follow-up with a holdover proceeding. But that makes no sense for them to do it as by the time you get into court, the lease will be almost over.


Yes clearly LL is thinking along those lines: "why bother with a Termination Notice, let's just wait for the lease to expire and then start holdover proceeding, saves us one step". But my line of thinking is that LL terminated the lease early in writing for breach of contract, yet accepted rent and thus established a M2M tenancy.

Why should the law protect a lazy LL who doesn't give copy of the lease, wakes up 2 months before expiration claiming T breached the lease and should vacate immediately, yet keeps collecting rent and quietly waits for expiration? I should add that the lease would have been renewed had I been given the opportunity to prove that I am not breaching the lease.
an0n
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat May 11, 2013 7:43 pm

Postby TenantNet » Sun May 12, 2013 2:02 pm

You seem to be confused on a lot of issues. So far the LL has not done anything, so you might want to wait until he does. Then you won't be dealing with speculation. Remember, he can't just force you to move; it has to be through the courts. At that time you can object if you feel the notices were not served on you.
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: 9157
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2002 2:01 am
Location: New York City

Postby ronin » Sun May 12, 2013 7:24 pm

Tenant, I don't know if anon is confused... but after reading this thread I know I am!!

:shock:
ronin
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 2:01 am

Postby Emeraldstar » Mon May 13, 2013 9:16 pm

Hi All
Ronin LOL Bottom line... scare tactics rather than refusal of renewal. :wink:
Emeraldstar
 
Posts: 967
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 2:01 am


Return to NYC Non-Regulated Apartments

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron