U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 05-03-2012, 06:54 AM
 
64,532 posts, read 66,100,109 times
Reputation: 42983

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hilltopjay View Post
I know I'm right but you have it backwards. The Rent Stabilization laws are PRO-TENANT and ANTI-LANDLORD. Everyone knows that. Tenants have more rights to their apartments than the actual OWNER. Isn't that insane? So please stop with your misinformation. Obviously you know nothing about RS otherwise you wouldn't have said that comment.
im still waiting to see the list that protects landlords rights....

 
Old 05-03-2012, 07:40 AM
 
Location: Burlington, VT
509 posts, read 2,062,505 times
Reputation: 276
FWIW: I've painted every NYC apartment I've lived in from a small self-managed building to those managed professionally. When I move out I have it professionally painted back to white. Usually costs a few hundred bucks. I've never had any issues. I say paint it unless it's strictly forbidden in your lease. You pay a lot of money to live in your small NYC apartment so you may is well make it as livable as possible. Just be ready to incur the expense of returning it back to its original condition.

Oh, and whoever said that NYC is pro-landlord: You obviously know very little about the NYC rental market. It's probably the most pro-tenant city in the US.
 
Old 05-03-2012, 07:57 AM
 
4,383 posts, read 8,676,849 times
Reputation: 2331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colddiamond102 View Post
Forgive my ignorance....but this thread caught my attention.....

What is a rent controlled apartment? Does that mean they cant raise the rent or something??
Ignoring the replies from the bitter landlords, yes that is what it is. The landlord can only raise the rent a certain percentage set by a board. Also the tenant is entitled to have hsi lease renewed indefinetely and can only be evicted for some major violations
 
Old 05-03-2012, 08:11 AM
 
64,532 posts, read 66,100,109 times
Reputation: 42983
bitter? not at all.... i just dont like forced family members .
 
Old 05-03-2012, 09:27 AM
 
Location: Boynton Beach / Great Neck NY
234 posts, read 610,972 times
Reputation: 189
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilltopjay View Post
What a bunch of bulls-t. Please stay in Florida. We don't need people like you with your entitlement mentality living in NY. You know absolutely nothing about Rent Stabilization.
Too late, I'm already here.

Also too bad for you and the other Landlords that the Supreme Court wouldn't even hear the case to reverse the NYC rent stabilization laws. Arguably the most conservative Supreme court EVER, doesn't want to go there. Should tell you something.

Funny that you claim I know nothing about rent stabilization, when I've actually read the laws. Someone disagrees with your point of view and you call them stupid, really pitiful behavior.
 
Old 05-03-2012, 09:32 AM
 
64,532 posts, read 66,100,109 times
Reputation: 42983
If you understood the laws and the ins and outs you wouldnt have made the comments you did about RENT STABILIZATION being anti slum laws.
you would have known habitability laws apply to all apartments.


Just sayin.........
 
Old 05-03-2012, 09:38 AM
 
136 posts, read 154,196 times
Reputation: 103
There has been some serious misinformation dessiminated on this thread by supporters of the government-controlled rental market in NYC.

The Rent Stabilization System is and has been a disaster for tenants in general. Yes, of course the tenants living off the system, those paying a fraction of the market rent, zelously defend it. But they are a minority of tenants. The majority of tenants are paying market rents which are higher than the market rent would be without govenment control. In other words, the majority of tenants are paying for the artificially low rents held by the minority.

Why does the system jack up market rents? The explanation is rather simple: The Rent Stabilization System depresses the apartment vacancy rate. There are hundreds of thousands of apartments with artificially low rents. Because of the low rent, these apartments are, more or less, permanently occupied. The occupants sit on them for decades, or for life, or even after death (they can be passed on almost like an estate). So they very rarely become vacant. And they represent a significant percentage of the rental apartment market.

The lack of vacancies tilts the demand-supply ratio which results in higher market rents. This is the dirty little fact the pro-regulation lobby wants to hide from the public. And it's why housing economists across the political spectrum oppose rent control systems.

The tax payers also pay dearly for the Rent Stabilization System but I won't get into that here.
 
Old 05-03-2012, 09:39 AM
 
Location: Boynton Beach / Great Neck NY
234 posts, read 610,972 times
Reputation: 189
Mathjak,

I always love the photos you post and the informative contributions you make here, but I respectfully have to say that your analogy below is flawed.

You weren't forced to buy and rent out an apartment building, were you? You could sell the building if you so chose? Nobody held a gun to your head and said that you had to buy the building with rent stabilized units?

Divorce your wife...
Quit your job...
Sell your rent stabilized apartment building...

Being a landlord isn't indentured servitude, you do have choices. Not the choice to evict tenants to raise the rent to market rate. But you knew that going into the deal, right? Or did you buy the building and then realize the units were rent stabilized.

Finally, for anyone out there that really thinks that deregulation is the key to lowering rents city wide, look at Nassau County. There is rent stabilization in some Villages and no rent stabilization in other Villages. Plenty of land exists for developers to building apartment complexes, YET the rent isn't cheap there either. Hum, maybe it's a supply side issue that goes beyond rent stabilization.






Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
no we are not talking anti slum laws at all when it comes to rent stabilization.

where did you dream that up?

housing laws that have to do with habitability apply to every apartment regardless of their status.


rent stabilization is doing nothing for most of the renting public..

it doesnt even benefit anyone who hasnt been in an apartment for decades now. anyone who has gotten an apartment over the last decade is pretty much at market rate.

my biggest gripe is no tenant should be forced on a landlord forever anymore than you should be forced to keep whatever job you first took even if your unhappy there and are earning below market wages.

we arent even forced to keep our spouses forever.

you want those in the real estate business to be forced to keep their job forever but not you? real estate is a job just like the way you earn your living.

as a landlord i have my own investment plan for dealing with stabilization but the fact is its a big pile of bull sh*t the public has been led to believe that some how they are benefiting themselves from

so you have the public championing for something they have little to no understanding of like yourself and the reality is the public have no benefit or perhaps never will benefit from what they think they are championing for.

in fact with most rentals having been converted to co-op decades ago unless city owned the chances of even getting a stabilized apartment grow less and less as existing apartments become destabilized as tenants leave or die.


its like i think milk and farm products need to be stabilized and regulated so they dont rise.

it sounds good, it sounds like something i want , but the reality is i dont know the first thing about farming, the dairy business or anything elses that goes on in those industries and what i want may be a bad idea once i learn the ins and outs of the industry..
 
Old 05-03-2012, 10:03 AM
 
64,532 posts, read 66,100,109 times
Reputation: 42983
the answer is no to all your questions. we were forced into agreeing to be stabilized by the city.

we were origonal owners of the building and promised that the stabilization program was only to prevent gauging and would be transparent to ethical landlords.

if we didnt agree the tax valuations on the building would be changed and we would be penalized heavily.

they lied to us.

artificially holding down rents for decades were political ploys to win votes and burned landlords .,,
our light at the end of the tunnel was to take the buildings co-op so once the origonal tenant moved out or sold out good bye stabilization...


you do remember the co-op craze of the 1980's dont you? thats why it happened.

depending on the rent roll of a building and the profitability selling a stabilized building or apartments if co-op can be very difficult to sell with out heavy loses.

many had good cash flow when they were bought but because rents lagged expenses for quite a long time in the past the cash flow can be pretty crappy at this point .

buyers want either good cash flow or heavy discounts ,sometimes offering less than whats even owed by the current owner so selling isnt always an option..

most investors want good solid cash flow , they dont want to wait almost 35 years until the tenant dies or moves to reap a profit like we did....

we changed our game plan when expenses kept going up and up and cash flow got tighter and tighter. we offered to buy out the leases so we could sell at full market value and stop the bleeding.

we were lucky because we had the cash to do the buyouts at 50-100k each but if we didnt we would have been stuck .

Last edited by mathjak107; 05-03-2012 at 10:54 AM..
 
Old 05-03-2012, 10:07 AM
 
Location: Manhattan
20,129 posts, read 26,407,309 times
Reputation: 9026
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
im still waiting to see the list that protects landlords rights....

1. A landlord can force a tenant out. A tenant CANNOT force a landlord out.
2. A landlord can change the rent...a tenant cannot.


The list is complete.

Q.E.D.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top