Do new leases have to be physically signed?

[nybklyn]

I think it would require to be physically signed because they want evidence to show that you know changes occur as they renew your new lease. If is not signed, it might be disadvantage to the landlord and not the tenant. NYC is a pro tenant state, so that's part of the reason why some landlord wants everything in writing with a signature on it.

[yeezu5]

keep in mind guys these are senior citizens without a word of english we're talking about. i dont think the LL was ever worried anything would ever surface but now it has. It seems like I have leverage but its sticky.

[rlrl]

before i moved to my RS apartment my old apartment was in a co-op bldg. there was the same statement in the lease as the OP cites about there being no rent control or rent stabilization and no city ruling etc

physical signature was required on all lease renewals just like my current RS apartment

[yeezu5]

yeah nvm my building is a co op too i jumped the gun a little bit there

[Chava61]

Originally Posted by guangzl1

I think it would require to be physically signed because they want evidence to show that you know changes occur as they renew your new lease. If is not signed, it might be disadvantage to the landlord and not the tenant. NYC is a pro tenant state, so that's part of the reason why some landlord wants everything in writing with a signature on it.

As a rent stabilized tenant, I have been sent a renewal to sign every time (1-2 years) I had to renew my lease. But the situation might be different for senior citizens as years ago when I stayed in my grandmother's rent control apt. I don't remember her having to sign any lease renewals.

[Kefir King]

but if it is in fact a co op apartment, what does that even mean?

Here's my two cents and it may be worth only that.

A friend rented a co-op in Rego Park. It was a "sponsor apartment," i.e., one that had never been sold since the former rental went co-op.
She was given a lease that had one renewal at the Rent-Stabilization rate and after that second year she was told basically buy or move." She had no stabilization rights to a new lease, that presumably those living in the complex BEFORE the co-opting had...to live there for the rest of their lives if they wished.

She bought at what turned out to be a TERRIFIC price and is living there pretty cheaply now.


yeezu,
You may be in exactly that type building. You can live there at rent stabilization increases but only at the behest of the landlord. You likely do not have the rights normally conferred by the rent stabilization law.

I hope that all sounds plausible. Like I implied, it's all second hand info.