Landlord Sueing for illegal Rent; Counter Claims? (rentals, houses)

[newtoli]

In your situation, I'd take whatever you can find to get out of there and fast.

Large One Bedroom
studio - 2 & 1/2 rooms

[I_Love_LI_but]

Originally Posted by Azelyn

Is there any way we could push the court date back to have some more time to find a place? or do we just have to go to the court and just deal with it on our records? No one really answered my question fully..Just told me we had to go before then.

If we go, they deny the landlord the money and tell us we have to go, does that mean its on our records now? Or do we have time after court to leave before it happens. Thats all I am asking really.

Call the court listed on the notice and ask for information on how to get an adjournment. You will have to notify the landlord of this request in writing also. I am not sure about the particulars in Suffolk, but the court probably will require you to appear anyway and explain why you are not prepared to answer the notice and why you need more time. FAILURE TO APPEAR can result in an inquest (default judgment) against you, even though the judge has not heard your side of the story.

If the judge does not grant the landlord any money, the landlord cannot put a judgment on your credit report for other landlords to see. Even if he did grant her money, if you pay it right away, it won't go on your credit report.

As for other consumer reports, databases, etc., that landlords might check, since the apartment is illegal according to the authorities, this "eviction" is basically NOT YOUR FAULT ... you have to leave no matter what because the authorities say so, so no landlord would be able to hold it against you anyway. They will understand.

If you go to court and the judge grants the eviction, you will not have to abandon the apartment immediately after court. You will be given some time to get out, but it could be very short. Maybe someone else can chime in here with minimum/maximum amount of time to get out? Even if you are super stubborn and don't get out by that date, the landlord cannot make you leave by herself because you still have rights and she has to do things the proper way. She cannot change the locks on you! If she calls the police, THEY also cannot make you leave! She has to call the Sheriff and have them personally serve a notice on you to get out. They hang it on your door. I think the Sheriff's notices are 48-72 hours from date and time of service. Not really sure of exact timing. If you still don't get out after the date and time listed on the Sheriff's notice, then the Sheriff (again, NOT the landlady NOR the regular police) is authorized to open the door and remove all your belongings and put them on the street.

My advice really is to go as soon as possible because the landlady sounds very ignorant and might try something nasty anyway even though it is illegal. You also have pets that are in the house while you are not there and cannot protect them from being "accidentally let out" or worse.

Originally Posted by Azelyn

The police wouldnt give us our report about the heat because they dont give reports out in lindenhurst i guess, and we have a CO from the building department showing it is a single family house. They said it would be enough to prove its illegal. Is there anything else we should do?

I am surprised the police didn't explain to you that they don't handle this type of complaint and tell you to call Suffolk County. I found this on Suffolk County's website: For emergencies (no heat) nights or weekend call (631) 854-9100. If they turn off the heat again, make the call.

[Azelyn]

Originally Posted by newtoli

In your situation, I'd take whatever you can find to get out of there and fast.

Large One Bedroom
studio - 2 & 1/2 rooms

thanks for tryin to help, well def look into those

[I_Love_LI_but]

Originally Posted by HappySpring

Wouldn't a studio also be an Illegal apartment? If they are living on Long Island, how many studios are legal?

There are many studio apartments that are legal on Long Island. It's not the small size that makes one illegal.

The best tip-off that an apartment on Long Island is illegal is that electricity is included in the rent and you don't have your own LIPA meter and LIPA bill for your apartment. Some apartments in the 5 boroughs of NYC can include electricity in the rent legally, but I don't know of any, either in buildings or private houses, that can legally include electricity in the rent on Long Island, so that means the apartment itself is not legal and should be avoided and/or reported to the authorities.

BTW, TY for the REP POINT!

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by omigawd

Here's some caselaw for you to look at. One thing you're failing to understand is that AN ILLEGAL CONTRACT CANNOT BE ENFORCED. The apartment is ILLEGAL and therefore, ANY lease, etc is also deemed ILLEGAL since the slumlord had no right to rent it.
According to your logic, I could sign a contract to sell someone a stolen car or anything else and they would still have to pay even though it's an illegal transaction.

You can best believe, this slumlord will not get a penny:


[SIZE=4]http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2008/2008_50742.htm[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2][/SIZE]
[SIZE=4]http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2005/2005_01635.htm[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2][/SIZE]
[SIZE=4]http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2004/2004_50508.htm[/SIZE]

WOW ! after reveiwing you site referances i find that my statements are correct as to how the Judge most likely will rule . and if defendant (OP) has the money to do an appeal of the Judge's discisson will she preval . Does she have the money to do this? . I think not!

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by I_Love_LI_but

Call the court listed on the notice and ask for information on how to get an adjournment. You will have to notify the landlord of this request in writing also. I am not sure about the particulars in Suffolk, but the court probably will require you to appear anyway and explain why you are not prepared to answer the notice and why you need more time. FAILURE TO APPEAR can result in an inquest (default judgment) against you, even though the judge has not heard your side of the story.

If the judge does not grant the landlord any money, the landlord cannot put a judgment on your credit report for other landlords to see. Even if he did grant her money, if you pay it right away, it won't go on your credit report.

As for other consumer reports, databases, etc., that landlords might check, since the apartment is illegal according to the authorities, this "eviction" is basically NOT YOUR FAULT ... you have to leave no matter what because the authorities say so, so no landlord would be able to hold it against you anyway. They will understand.

If you go to court and the judge grants the eviction, you will not have to abandon the apartment immediately after court. You will be given some time to get out, but it could be very short. Maybe someone else can chime in here with minimum/maximum amount of time to get out? Even if you are super stubborn and don't get out by that date, the landlord cannot make you leave by herself because you still have rights and she has to do things the proper way. She cannot change the locks on you! If she calls the police, THEY also cannot make you leave! She has to call the Sheriff and have them personally serve a notice on you to get out. They hang it on your door. I think the Sheriff's notices are 48-72 hours from date and time of service. Not really sure of exact timing. If you still don't get out after the date and time listed on the Sheriff's notice, then the Sheriff (again, NOT the landlady NOR the regular police) is authorized to open the door and remove all your belongings and put them on the street.

My advice really is to go as soon as possible because the landlady sounds very ignorant and might try something nasty anyway even though it is illegal. You also have pets that are in the house while you are not there and cannot protect them from being "accidentally let out" or worse.



I am surprised the police didn't explain to you that they don't handle this type of complaint and tell you to call Suffolk County. I found this on Suffolk County's website: For emergencies (no heat) nights or weekend call (631) 854-9100. If they turn off the heat again, make the call.

How can i say it any clearer ! "MOVE NOW NOT LATER " save your self a lot of head ache's . Your finished ! check out the next place better. and get a contract ( lease) in writing! that's how thing's are legally done.

[Azelyn]

Originally Posted by Fighter 1

How can i say it any clearer ! "MOVE NOW NOT LATER " save your self a lot of head ache's . Your finished ! check out the next place better. and get a contract ( lease) in writing! that's how thing's are legally done.

like i said before... we cant 'just move'. its not that simple to find a decent suitable place that fits our budget and allows cats. I got laid off, its not like i can just relocate anywhere i please. if only it were that easy.

[omigawd]

Originally Posted by Fighter 1

WOW ! after reveiwing you site referances i find that my statements are correct as to how the Judge most likely will rule . and if defendant (OP) has the money to do an appeal of the Judge's discisson will she preval . Does she have the money to do this? . I think not!

I think you need to read the entire case before blowing your horn about how you're right.....

I can guarantee you, no judge will EVER award back rent to a landlord of an illegal apartment. The judge would look like a complete FOOL because his decision would be overturned on appeal. And, no you DON'T need an attorney to file an appeal.... and in her case, there will be nothing to appeal because she will not be ordered to pay anything.

As a "property manager", I am assuming you're a manager of LEGAL apartments..... You really don't know much about illegal apartments or the law that protects tenants in these situations. I, personally, was in this situation and the landlord attempted to sue me. Guess what? The judge threw him and his skank wife out of court and told them they are not entitled to a PENNY in rent for an illegal apartment.

What makes you think that 1. a judge (who is sworn to uphold the law) would enforce an illegal contract? and that 2. a judge would award money to someone who is not legally entitled to it?????

[omigawd]

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK


APPELLATE TERM : 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENTECIDED May 26, 2004 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE TERM : 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS PRESENT : PESCE, P.J., PATTERSON and GOLIA, JJ.
NO. 2003-870 K C

[SIZE=+1]CALOGERO CANDELA and MARY CANDELA, Respondents, [/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]against[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]MARTIN FRIED and MELISSA FRIED, Appellants. [/SIZE]

Appeal by tenants from a final judgment of the Civil Court, Kings County (R. Birnbaum, J.), entered April 7, 2003, awarding landlords possession and the sum of $10,200.



Final judgment unanimously modified by striking the monetary award and matter remanded to the court below for a determination de novo of the rent and/or use and occupancy to be awarded to landlords in accordance with the decision herein; as so modified, affirmed without costs. [*2]
Landlords were collaterally estopped, by virtue of a Housing Court determination dated December 3, 2002, made in a prior proceeding, from denying that the building
was an illegal multiple dwelling as of December 3, 2002 because of the presence of an illegal basement apartment. Inasmuch as the building was a multiple dwelling prior to December 3, 2002 and did not have a certificate of occupancy as such, landlords are precluded from recovering rent and/or use and occupancy from tenants for the period of noncompliance (Multiple Dwelling Law § 302 [1] ; Jalinos v Ramkalup, 255 AD2d 293 [1998]; Hutchinson v Greski, NYLJ, June 5, 2002 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists]). Thus, instead of awarding landlords arrears for the period commencing in May 2002, the court below should properly have made a finding as to when the building ceased to be a multiple dwelling and should have awarded landlords arrears only as of that date. Accordingly, we strike the monetary award and remand the matter for a determination de novo of the amount of rent and/or use and occupancy owed. We note, however, that if tenants have paid the arrears to landlords as a condition of a stay, the monies would be deemed to have been voluntarily paid (see Rosgro Realty Co. v Braynen, 70 Misc 2d 808 [1972]) and would not be recoverable by
tenants (Commercial Hotel v White, 194 Misc 2d 26 [2002] [rents voluntarily paid for period of noncompliance cannot be recovered]; Baer v Gotham Craftsman, 154 Misc 2d 490 [1992] [same]).
Decision Date: May 26, 2004

================================================== ==========================

Decided on April 3, 2008

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : GOLIA, J.P., PESCE and RIOS, JJ
2006-1574 Q C.

[SIZE=+1]Jerry Misir, Respondent, [/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]against[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]Mae Ann Gilbert, Appellant. [/SIZE]

Appeal from a final judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (James R. Grayshaw, J.), entered August 18, 2006. The final judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded landlord possession and the sum of $11,520.



Final judgment modified by reducing the monetary award to the sum of $6,247.74; as so modified, affirmed without costs.
In this nonpayment proceeding, landlord seeks to recover arrears in rent from May 2005 through August 2006 at the rate of $800 per month. Tenant defends on the grounds that the building is an illegal multiple dwelling and that landlord breached the warranty of habitability. At trial, the Housing Court took judicial notice of the file of a previous nonpayment proceeding, in which landlord had sued for rent for May through November 2005. The file showed that the previous nonpayment proceeding was dismissed based on a finding that the premises was an illegal multiple dwelling. In addition, tenant introduced two November 5, 2005 notices of violation, indicating that the basement had been illegally converted to a third apartment. For his part, landlord introduced New York City Department of Buildings' approvals of his certificates of correction, indicating a cure date for the violations of December 10, 2005. Following trial, the court awarded landlord the rent sought from May 2005 at the rate of $720 per month, after a 10% abatement for the conditions in tenant's apartment. Citing 9 Montague Terrace Assoc. v Feuerer (191 Misc 2d 18 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2001]), the court reasoned that landlord's cure of the violation allowed for his retroactive [*2]recovery of rent.
[b]The court erred in allowing the retroactive recovery of rent. In 9 Montague Terrace Assoc. v Feuerer (191 Misc 2d 18 [2001], supra), this court held that a landlord is permitted to retroactively recover rent where the building had been out of compliance with the registration requirements of Multiple Dwelling Law § 325 (2) and the landlord brought the building into compliance by registering the building. In contrast, where a building is converted to a multiple dwelling without complying with the certificate-of-occupancy requirements of Multiple Dwelling Law § 301, rent is not retroactively recoverable for the period of the noncompliance (Multiple Dwelling Law § 302 [1] [b]; Candela v Fried, 3 Misc 3d 136[A], 2004 NY Slip Op 50508[u] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2004]; see e.g. Hart-Zafra v Singh, 16 AD3d 143 [2005]; Jalinos v Ramkalup, 255 AD2d 293 [1998]). Since it is res judicata that the subject building was an illegal multiple dwelling through November 2005, the rents accruing through that time are not recoverable. However, since landlord offered proof tending to show that the condition was cured on December 10, 2005, and tenant offered no proof to show that the condition continued to exist thereafter, landlord was entitled to recover the rents accruing after December 10, 2005. As the record does not justify an abatement greater than the 10% granted to tenant, landlord is entitled to recover rent at the rate of $720 per month for 21 days in December 2005, or $487.74, and for the eight months of January through August 2006, or $5,760, for a total of $6,247.74, and we modify the final judgment accordingly. Golia, J.P., Pesce and Rios, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 03, 2008

================================================== =======================

The only reason the LL recovered was because he brought the building into compliance and it was no longer an illegal multiple dwelling. He recovered for ONLY the time period the building was legal.

[omigawd]

This is CASE LAW and since this case law came out, no judge in his right mind is going to go against simple law like this...... I don't know where you get your ideas from, but it's about time you realize you're wrong. It seems that the "landlords" and "property managers" think the law is 100% on their side when it's not. The law is equal and the law is the law. You can't run an illegal multiple dwelling. That's the law. A judge is not going to enforce the running of an illegal multiple dwelling. That's the law.