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 03-09-2010, 05:39 PM
 
64,509 posts, read 66,075,955 times
Reputation: 42955

Advertisements

yep it has to be on our terms, ... not the tenants

 
Old 03-09-2010, 06:10 PM
 
Location: Beautiful Pelham Parkway,The Bronx
8,389 posts, read 19,619,570 times
Reputation: 6211
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox View Post
I agree mathjak but the buyout needs to be on the landlord's term not the tenant's. The tenant can't just come in and start demanding things and pretty much hold the apartment up as ransom to milk money out of the landlord.
Aren't they always on the landlord's terms ? I haven't heard of any situations where a landlord has been forced to buy out a tenant.
A tenant can demand whatever he wants but the landlord doesn't even have to discuss..... unless he wants to.
 
Old 03-10-2010, 02:10 AM
 
64,509 posts, read 66,075,955 times
Reputation: 42955
i guess you can say that. ,,, we "offer " the money as part of our stated policy.... but if we didnt and the tenants came to us looking for money they would get nothing.....

if we were stuck with apartments with rent stabilized tenants and if all that was going to happen is one moves out and another moves in then the rent increase alone probley wouldnt be worth a payout for us.

we only do it because we can sell them.

Last edited by mathjak107; 03-10-2010 at 03:03 AM..
 
Old 03-10-2010, 03:56 AM
 
64,509 posts, read 66,075,955 times
Reputation: 42955
as investors we pay people commissions all the time. we pay people for helping us sell property, we pay people for turning us on to deals, we pay for rights to things... basically everyone has their hand out for bringing you profits. whether they have a vested interest or not they are at least responsible for helping you make greater returns.

like i said earlier, if a tenants status as rent stabilized got you a property at a reduced rate then they are instrumental in your transaction like it or not.they are in a way your partner in this deal. your the money man and risk taker, they turn you on to a deal to get you a below market deal by their status and if they agree to change their staus to moving out so you can reap the profits they want a commission too.......

if you can pay them and change the deal for greater returns by having them no longer part of the deal we origionally bargained for then its worth it to us to accelerate the time factor.


its a win win , the tenant makes some money for his role in getting us a below market price and we make greater profits as well when we sell and reap a nice spread between what we paid and fair market value..

rent stabilization,you gotta love it ha ha ha..... its not just a good thing for tenants....
 
Old 03-10-2010, 12:06 PM
 
1,263 posts, read 2,063,900 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox View Post
It gets worse people...these crooked liberal democrats want to make rent stabilization even STRICTER by introducing these new anti-landlord bills that are waiting to be voted on to further supress and strip away any remaining rights landlords have that benefit their business.
Last year the Democrats assumed full control of the state (governor, assembly, and senate) for the first time in over 40 years. Pro-regulation lobbies immediately got their politician proxies to introduce legislation which would make the current rent mess look like paradise. The abuses exhibited by the OP would become even more common. The liberal Dems are preparing to use their power to push through new and even stricter rent controls which would be disastrous for the NYC housing market.

Politicians won't change things for the better until voters in general understand that these rent laws hurt the majority of the population - including market rate tenants and all tax payers.,
 
Old 03-18-2010, 12:19 AM
 
19 posts, read 51,686 times
Reputation: 19
What many here do not realize is that the tenant is an 'owner'. The tenant owns a lease which comes with substantial tenancy rights (you could say 'property rights' for the sake of this discussion). SUBSTANTIAL RIGHTS. A non rent regulated tenants in NYC does not benefit from the many protections and rights rent regulated tenants have ('own').
You see, nobody just owns property, they own a collection of rights. Just because one owns a deed to a building does not grant unlimited rights. For ex., the city controls if you can build this or that addition or alteration, how the building must be maintained, even what, where, and when you can organize your trash. Landlord os a misnomer. There are no 'Lords' here. This is not feudal Europe. All you ever own is a 'collection of rights'.
A rent-regulated tenant in NYC owns a very substantial collection of rights via their lease and these are extremely valuable.
The deed holder (owner of a collection of rights) may wish to buy out the tenant's lease (collection of rights). The lease like any other collection of rights, has a value.

Furthermore, these rights protect rent-regulated tenants from unscrupulous behavior, some of which has been hinted at on this thread. DHCR and HPD in particular are weighty instruments to protect a tenant's rights. If the landlord does not maintain he apartment as a means to drive out the tenant, she can file for a rent reduction at DHCR which can further lower her rent by freezing any future rent increases until the conditions in her apartment are corrected. A single tenant or group of tenants can file to DHCR for a rent reduction due to reduction of building-wide services. If the landlord tries to overcharge the tenant she can receive triple damages via a DHCR legal rent determination. DHCR has many remedies for regulated tenants. Also, for a mere $40 (fee waived based on income) a tenant can file an HP (Housing Part) lawsuit in housing court, have HPD inspect the property, receive a court order against the owner for repairs (can also make a harassment claim at the same time), and have a free HPD attorney to prosecute the lawsuit (the tenant actually sues both the landlord and NYC/HPD, as HPD is responsible for enforcing the housing maintenance code in NYC...actually, often HPD will voluntarily file an HP lawsuit against an owner for repairs): the owner will be ordered by the court to repair the violations within a certain time frame [dependent on the severity/classification of the violation(s)], will face civil penalties if he violates the timeframe for repairs, and if the owner still refuses to repair will face contempt charges (fines and/or jail time). If the landlord doesn't repair violations by a certain date, HPD has an Emergency Repair Program (ERP) that will go to the property and repair then bill the owner and if the owner does not pay the city puts a lien on the property. If the owner stops the ERP from entering the building to repair, HPD can sue the landlord and get an access warrant to enter and make the repairs. The LAST thing a landlord wants is NYC with its hands in his pockets. If the owner still plays games with the tenant's health, safety, and welfare by letting the apartment or building run down she can call 311 and make a complaint (can do this anonymously) to the Department Of Buildings which will inspect and write violations and fines on the property and demands licensed and permitted repair personnel. All this (except the tenant initiated HP lawsuit) can be initiated for free with a toll-free phone call to NYC's Hotline (dial 311). This of course hardly even scratches the surface of the issue of tenant's rights.

Taking all this into account, if a landlord is paying maintenance for a $1k/month rent regulated long term tenant and can sell the unit for $750k, it may be profitable to buy out the lease for $375K.

Last edited by Lovegasoline; 03-18-2010 at 12:57 AM..
 
Old 03-18-2010, 03:08 AM
 
64,509 posts, read 66,075,955 times
Reputation: 42955
that would never happen at that price.... further more it depends on the landlords own equity in the apartment. if the landlord owes 600,000 thats a factor too... usually 5-10% is a going rate with 5% more the norm now.

dont confuse rights and laws with ownership ,tenents are not owners in any shape or form.. all they hold is a lease to use the property which doent give them any equity stake. the money they get is merely an incentive to terminate that lease.,. tenants are no more owners of the property then anyone who accepts a buyout offer at work owns the company that bought them out. the landlord can sell the apartment with them in it and while the landlord may get less then market value because a tenants in it the tenent still gets nothing.. if the tenant dies with no successor the estate gets nothing , the tenant can be evicted for a host of reasons and lastly the landlord can take the apartment back at any time for himself or family member and the tenants history. with the termination of that lease go all the laws and rights.

dont confuse ownership with the buyout of terminating a long term lease.....all the pay off means is just like the landlord can charge a tenant for breaking a lease early, the tenant can try to charge a landlord for breaking a lease early as well.

we all have rights at work too, but again that dosnt give us ownership, your mixing up different issues here. rights and laws have nothing to do with ownership. if you lease a car you may be bound by all the rights , laws and expenses of ownership but you dont own that car and when the terms of the lease are up there are no more rights and laws that you have pertainng to that lease ..

Last edited by mathjak107; 03-18-2010 at 03:47 AM..
 
Old 03-18-2010, 07:34 AM
 
19 posts, read 51,686 times
Reputation: 19
Mathjak107, you are correct the tenant does not have the exact same rights and owner has or visa versa. I wasn't implying they were the same.

"The tenant owns a lease which comes with substantial tenancy rights (you could say 'property rights' for the sake of this discussion)."

My point was owning the building gives certain rights (I wasn't suggesting equity stake or the benefits an liabilities that come with it). Tenancy and ownership rights all come with restrictions based on the municipality where the property is located. All rights come with restrictions. Rights of rent-regulated tenants in NYC are very different from rights of tenants in most other parts of the USA...they are very substantial rights.

"lastly the landlord can take the apartment back at any time for himself or family member and the tenants history."
In some cases yes, in some cases no. Again, this comes back to ownership rights, it depends on the certificate of occupancy and also if the owner is a corporation or an individual. For example, if the building has three or more families living independently of each other and is owned by a corporation the owner DOES NOT have the right to evict a rent regulated tenant for the personal use of a member of the owner's family. This is a good example where a rent regulated tenant has more substantial rights than an owner, i.e., a right to reside in the apartment.


Which once again, is the point I was making. Ownership, tenancy, rent regulated tenancy are each a collection of rights.

A buyout depends on the figures. For example, it's conceivable in a coop the maintenance fee alone may be twice or three times the rent a regulated tenant pays, the latter also having a family member with succession rights. In such a situation it may be more profitable to offer a high buyout than to maintain the status quo. In addition, as is evidenced from many posts (not yours btw, your posts are more measured) greed can be rampant in NYC landlords and create an incentive to violate a tenant's rights in order to turn a higher profit. There are many situations in which the landlord in his zest is overcharging a rent regulated tenant or has illegally removed the apartment from rent regulation status, in such cases the landlord may be liable for substantial monetary damages owed to the tenant. A buyout may structure included to include such damages.

Last edited by Lovegasoline; 03-18-2010 at 07:43 AM..
 
Old 03-18-2010, 07:36 AM
 
461 posts, read 1,765,423 times
Reputation: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovegasoline View Post
What many here do not realize is that the tenant is an 'owner'. The tenant owns a lease which comes with substantial tenancy rights (you could say 'property rights' for the sake of this discussion). SUBSTANTIAL RIGHTS. A non rent regulated tenants in NYC does not benefit from the many protections and rights rent regulated tenants have ('own').
You see, nobody just owns property, they own a collection of rights. Just because one owns a deed to a building does not grant unlimited rights. For ex., the city controls if you can build this or that addition or alteration, how the building must be maintained, even what, where, and when you can organize your trash. Landlord os a misnomer. There are no 'Lords' here. This is not feudal Europe. All you ever own is a 'collection of rights'.
A rent-regulated tenant in NYC owns a very substantial collection of rights via their lease and these are extremely valuable.
The deed holder (owner of a collection of rights) may wish to buy out the tenant's lease (collection of rights). The lease like any other collection of rights, has a value.

Furthermore, these rights protect rent-regulated tenants from unscrupulous behavior, some of which has been hinted at on this thread. DHCR and HPD in particular are weighty instruments to protect a tenant's rights. If the landlord does not maintain he apartment as a means to drive out the tenant, she can file for a rent reduction at DHCR which can further lower her rent by freezing any future rent increases until the conditions in her apartment are corrected. A single tenant or group of tenants can file to DHCR for a rent reduction due to reduction of building-wide services. If the landlord tries to overcharge the tenant she can receive triple damages via a DHCR legal rent determination. DHCR has many remedies for regulated tenants. Also, for a mere $40 (fee waived based on income) a tenant can file an HP (Housing Part) lawsuit in housing court, have HPD inspect the property, receive a court order against the owner for repairs (can also make a harassment claim at the same time), and have a free HPD attorney to prosecute the lawsuit (the tenant actually sues both the landlord and NYC/HPD, as HPD is responsible for enforcing the housing maintenance code in NYC...actually, often HPD will voluntarily file an HP lawsuit against an owner for repairs): the owner will be ordered by the court to repair the violations within a certain time frame [dependent on the severity/classification of the violation(s)], will face civil penalties if he violates the timeframe for repairs, and if the owner still refuses to repair will face contempt charges (fines and/or jail time). If the landlord doesn't repair violations by a certain date, HPD has an Emergency Repair Program (ERP) that will go to the property and repair then bill the owner and if the owner does not pay the city puts a lien on the property. If the owner stops the ERP from entering the building to repair, HPD can sue the landlord and get an access warrant to enter and make the repairs. The LAST thing a landlord wants is NYC with its hands in his pockets. If the owner still plays games with the tenant's health, safety, and welfare by letting the apartment or building run down she can call 311 and make a complaint (can do this anonymously) to the Department Of Buildings which will inspect and write violations and fines on the property and demands licensed and permitted repair personnel. All this (except the tenant initiated HP lawsuit) can be initiated for free with a toll-free phone call to NYC's Hotline (dial 311). This of course hardly even scratches the surface of the issue of tenant's rights.

Taking all this into account, if a landlord is paying maintenance for a $1k/month rent regulated long term tenant and can sell the unit for $750k, it may be profitable to buy out the lease for $375K.
This thread is about buying out a rent regulated tenant. In mid paragraph you switch the topic trying to sneak in information in an attempt to "educate" tenants about run down buildings, repairs, suing landlords for multiple reasons for over charges, harassment, HPD this, and DHCR that, etc. That has nothing to do with the subject matter on this thread. Why are you mentioning that? What is your TRUE agenda here by ranting about all these PRO-TENANT rights? If you have proven anything with your post, its the FACT that the RENT STABILIZATION law is a PRO-TENANT law that sticks it to landlords. It was designed to suppress landlords and strip away any rights the landlord has as a property owner to benefit the tenants. That's why RENT STABILIZATION is a joke and should be gradually phased out of existence. Only NY and a couple of other states have rent stabilization laws in the books, the rest of the 40 something states are all free market states and they're doing just fine without rent stabilization. They let the market determine what the rent price will be. The city has NO right to butt in and say "this is what you can only charge for rent". And thats what NYC (5 boroughs) does.

Besides, RENT STABILIZATION is the reason why we have slumlords who neglect their buildings and let it decay in the first place. Imposing all these strict ant-landlord laws that help tenants in their fight to continue to pay $500 for a 3 bedroom apartment is insane. Not to mention the fact that the landlord is OBLIGATED to offer a 1 or 2 year renewal lease to the tenant even if their performance as a tenant is bad by way of conducting themselves in an inappropriate and undesirable manner that degrades the apartment building and neighborhood. Particularly in the outer boroughs, good neighborhoods go bad and bad neighborhoods remain bad or get worse and STALE due to the lack of movement of tenants moving in and out of the neighborhood caused by the legal inability of landlords NOT having the RIGHT to not renew a undesirable tenant's lease. Now you know at least one good reason why we have these places called the "hood". Thank you RENT STABILIZATION.

Last edited by victorfox; 03-18-2010 at 07:58 AM..
 
Old 03-18-2010, 08:29 AM
 
64,509 posts, read 66,075,955 times
Reputation: 42955
A tenant owns no rights or priveledges. he only has whats extended to him by the lease or local laws.

the landlord can terminate those rights and priveledges alot of times even if rent stabilized via various techniques i wont discuss here as while legal i feel they arent really moral.

if multiple owners they are still allowed 1 apartment in total for family members. we are an LLC with multiple owners and it holds true for us

Last edited by mathjak107; 03-18-2010 at 08:43 AM..
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
Similar Threads
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