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.
Most LL's don't paint, redo or otherwise act upon common areas unless it is part of a building wide upgrade/renovation from what have seen. They keep the areas clean and comply with laws regarding keeping them free of clutter or whatever, but that is about all.
Again much depends upon the type of tenant mix. If a LL was trying to get more upscale people, and had managed to get a good number of RS tenants out, then usually they put money into all common areas. After all the lobby and hallways are first things people see when coming to look at an apartment.
Have said this before; can always tell a building that is mostly or all RS; they are grimy or just straight up busted looking. These are the old school buildings, obviously not the new ones that just went up.
That is one thing about both the building we live in and where we own the apartments ... they are kept immaculate ...they must paint a different area or floor every 2 or 3 months .... they have their own painters on staff so between apartments and common areas they are busy all the time ....
That is one thing about both the building we live in and where we own the apartments ... they are kept immaculate ...they must paint a different area or floor every 2 or 3 months .... they have their own painters on staff so between apartments and common areas they are busy all the time ....
The building that I live in paints way more often than that. Think, spray cans and Sharpies!
"Fridge or other appliance goes out? LL now has no incentive to replace with anything else but a busted second hand/scratch and dent unit. Long as it operates that is all law requires. "
What they did before was put in a scratch and dent unit and increase the rent like it was a La Cornue.
Landlords brought this on themselves by their relentless fraud and abuse. If they could have just kept it within reason, the law would never have been changed.
I see we're still not dealing with the fact that the title of this thread is a straight-up open lie? There is no such provision in the new law. Why is anyone talking to a person seriously who just blatantly and shamelessly makes up their central claim?
"Fridge or other appliance goes out? LL now has no incentive to replace with anything else but a busted second hand/scratch and dent unit. Long as it operates that is all law requires. "
What they did before was put in a scratch and dent unit and increase the rent like it was a La Cornue.
Landlords brought this on themselves by their relentless fraud and abuse. If they could have just kept it within reason, the law would never have been changed.
I see we're still not dealing with the fact that the title of this thread is a straight-up open lie? There is no such provision in the new law. Why is anyone talking to a person seriously who just blatantly and shamelessly makes up their central claim?
Please keep up, myself and a few others pointed out to OP title was bogus.
People you want to really feel sorry for are the LL's who gave out preferential leases. All those below market rents are now going to be the new legal. People have just been bent over for trying to do the right thing, and there isn't anything they can do but take it.
Is that immediately locked in? Seems to me landlords have a legal claim for the opportunity for one chance to raise to get their full rent
That doesn't seem to be the case. The preferential rent will become the base rent.
However, they didn't give preferential rents out of the goodness of their hearts. If they could have gotten more they would have. But the market wouldn't have supported the full regulated rent, so they had to make a deal.
But of course this makes it a no win situation for the property owners. If they market's up, and they could get a higher than regulated rent, they can't by law. If the market was down, and they had to charge a lower than regulated rent to keep the unit rented, they now can't go back to what would have been the full regulated rent, and the decreased rent becomes the regulated rent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakeJones
Is that immediately locked in? Seems to me landlords have a legal claim for the opportunity for one chance to raise to get their full rent
This already happened in the past when LL default and bailed and developers buy them up and buyout tenants to move. That's how people like Trump get away with owning so many properties in the area.
One thing I wonder is what if a building is accidentally burnt down or blown away with dynamite? What happens to the rent regulations then?
That's what they used to do back in the South Bronx during the 70s and 80s. "Accidentally" burning a building. They did that on purpose so they can collect the insurance and no need to worry about the rest of it!
However, they didn't give preferential rents out of the goodness of their hearts. If they could have gotten more they would have. But the market wouldn't have supported the full regulated rent, so they had to make a deal.
In most situations. There are lots of situations though where a landlord is doing someone a favor and plenty of landlords cutting people a break that could charge somewhere in between the preferential rate and the legal rate and now they can't do anything even if the nice guy who helps with the building and takes out the garbage twice a week decides to leave and a slob moves in to take his place
One thing I wonder is what if a building is accidentally burnt down or blown away with dynamite? What happens to the rent regulations then?
If a property is totally gone as in demolished for any reason, then generally RS tenancy ends. This can be due to city declaring property unstable and ordering it torn down, explosion, etc.... Those properties blown to smithereens down on Second avenue had RS tenants, and they were sold for a new condo development.
This comes out of laws which basically state rights of tenancy cease to exist when property in question no longer remains. Indeed as have stated one (and now the only) way to remove RS or RC tenants is to seek permission from city to demolish the building.
OTOH if a building is only temporarily uninhabitable (fire, structural issues being corrected, etc...) rent regulated tenants can create a stake holder that gives them right to return when things are complete. Tenants in question must continue making rent payments, though IIRC the amount is reduced because obviously services are no longer being provided.
What can and often does happen is repairs or whatever work takes so long that tenants find other apartments/have moved on with their lives and don't bother. There is also the financial burden of paying for two apartments even if one is only a nominal sum.
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.
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.
