Rent Stabilization Succession Rights...Is It REALLY Fair??? (Hampton: for rent, month-to-month)

[pittsteelerfan]

Originally Posted by A_Better_Bronx_2morrow

You have a husband and wife with one 23 year old son living in a 3 bedroom, rent stabilized apartment for $500 a month. The market rent for a 3 bedroom apartment in their area is $1,900 a month.

The husband and wife decide to move because they brought a new condo. Since the son is old enough to be on his own, they decide to leave him the apartment so he can take full advantage of the reccession law which gives the son the ability to continue paying the CHEAP rent of $500 a month.

So now you have a single guy occupying a 3 bedroom apartment for $500 a month. And people wonder why there's an affordable housing shortage.

Does anyone agree or disagree with this?

In this day and age of high operating expenses such as fuel, property taxes, insurance, water & sewage, maintanance and repair and mortgage payments. Does anyone feel its JUST to allow such an unfair law to exist that puts a financial burden on landlords?

Before answering, consider yourself a property owner that collects rent to pay expenses. How would you feel about the situation above? Do you feel as if you are getting robbed and ripped off by allow such a thing to happen?

It's COMPLETELY fair. I highly doubt that there's ALOT of people living in building after building with this situation though. First of all, 3 bedrooms aren't all that common (atleast alot fewer).

NYC wouldn't exist today the way you know it, without rent control. Rent control allows the 'service industry' workers to exist in NYC. Alot of jobs in NYC don't pay much more, sometimes even less, than they do elsewhere (and those cities cost of living is much lower).

[gradstudent77]

Originally Posted by A_Better_Bronx_2morrow

PEOPLE need to know that the ONLY people that benefit from RENT STABILIZATION are OLDER tenants that have been living in their apartments 15+ years.

.

....and, those landlords who own property that is not subject to rent stabilization.

[Huckleberry3911948]

smart move keep that apartment.

[gradstudent77]

Originally Posted by I_Love_LI_but

In terms of housing stock in NYC, Manhattan in particular, rentals are OUT and co-ops/condos are IN and this has been the case for years now. Do you know of a reason why it would suddenly turn around? So if there were a big change I would think most of these former rent controlled or stabilized rentals would become co-ops or condos and would not significantly add to the RENTAL housing stock. Whatever is left as RENTALS would not be nearly enough to saturate the market to the point rents would go down and would match current market rents. Spare me the Eco 101 nonsense please, okay?

It's difficult to spare you an appeal to econ 101 when what you are saying flys in the face of it. Sure, some of the housing stock vacated by ex-rent-stabilized tenants would be converted to co-ops. This does not change the fact that a whole lot of housing supply would enter the market, in general.

[pittsteelerfan]

And I guess all those 'older tenants' should be tossed out on their ears, when the rent keeps getting jacked up and they ain't able to pay on their 'fixed incomes' ?

[lamontnow]

Originally Posted by pittsteelerfan

And I guess all those 'older tenants' should be tossed out on their ears, when the rent keeps getting jacked up and they ain't able to pay on their 'fixed incomes' ?

Housing analysts aren't advocating "tossing out" anybody. That would only happen if rent controls were abolished, and that is not what those who want to reform this system in New York are supporting. The misconceptions and sometimes outright falsehoods regarding the housing market and rent controls that I have seen on this board are astounding.

The system reform involves deregulation upon vacancy. Current rent-stabilized tenants are unaffected and continue to renew their lease at will and at rents limited to the current RS guidelines. Rent stabilization needs to be phased out through a gradual process of deregulation over a period of many years, not suddenly abolished. The system was reformed somewhat by the state legislature in 1997 and that reform has been effecting the system slowly, but positively, since then.

Unfortunately for the city, the Dems who now totally rule Albany, and are under enormous political pressure from a very activist lobby, are now in the process of effectively putting an end to any deregulation. We're going backwards!

[Chelsa1075]

It would be fair if all those workers you speak about with lower paying wages had access to these apatments? I have yet to find an apartment that is stabelized at a reasonable rate. I don't mean those that have been vacated and then are jacked up to market value, but can only go up 2% a year. I don't think that a 2 bedroom apartment should be 1800 no matter where you live.

[lamontnow]

Originally Posted by Chelsa1075

It would be fair if all those workers you speak about with lower paying wages had access to these apatments? I have yet to find an apartment that is stabelized at a reasonable rate. I don't mean those that have been vacated and then are jacked up to market value, but can only go up 2% a year. I don't think that a 2 bedroom apartment should be 1800 no matter where you live.

What was said is based on emotion, opinion, lack of facts, inaccuracies, and a lack of understanding of the costs of providing housing and the wide market that is New York City.

There are too many like this. There is simply nothing to discuss. I think this thread should come to an end.

[texan2yankee]

My landlord is a multi-millionaire. He is an UES doctor in private practice who lives in a rent stabilized or controlled (not sure) four bedroom apartment in a prime UWS building that he pays less than $1200 per month. He told us this last year. The one bedroom, full floor apartment I rent from him is in his paid off UES, $15 plus million dollar, brownstone. He rents each apartment for over $6000 per month to his five tenants. He also has a paid off waterfront house in the Hamptons. He told us. It's like he is proud he is using the system.

He doesn't qualify for rent control or stabilization except by deception. He makes too much money by far. The system is so abused and full of holes. I am so against this rent control and stabilization welfare system.

[A_Better_Bronx_2morrow]

Originally Posted by Chelsa1075

It would be fair if all those workers you speak about with lower paying wages had access to these apatments? I have yet to find an apartment that is stabelized at a reasonable rate. I don't mean those that have been vacated and then are jacked up to market value, but can only go up 2% a year. I don't think that a 2 bedroom apartment should be 1800 no matter where you live.

You can STILL have an over priced apartment that is rent stabilized if the LEGAL RENT is real close to 2K.

You can have the legal rent of a 1 bedroom at $1900 in the Bronx...that doesn't mean that even though the landlord can LEGALLY charge that amount that he's going to because it will stay vacant forever.

Thats why people's claim of PRICE GOUGING ARE FALSE DOES NOT EXIST. It is NOT in the best interest for a landlord to over price or price goug his apartment as he will LOSE BUSINESS. People have options and can rent elsewhere if they want which is bad for the landlord as he will lose business by having vacant apartments...get it?