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.
Even if there's some sort of raising because of snooping, the landlord is 100% within their right to raise that rent. There is no question here nor debate, the legal rent is what you should expect to pay in any given year - the preferential number should always be looked upon as a free ride enjoy it while it lasts
Even if there's some sort of raising because of snooping, the landlord is 100% within their right to raise that rent. There is no question here nor debate, the legal rent is what you should expect to pay in any given year - the preferential number should always be looked upon as a free ride enjoy it while it lasts
That's exactly my point. What people don't understand is, the Landlord is entitled to that higher legal regulated rent.
Just like RS tenants are entitled to get a lease renewal against the LL's wishes, well landlords are entitled to get the higher legal rent against the tenant's wishes. It goes both ways.
In fact, RS tenants have the deck stacked in their favor which diminishes the LL's power to control and manage their property how they see fit. So to the people on here who complain about preferential rents, get over it. Ya'll have more than enough leverage over landlords as is.
Of course. Or I have grown bored repeating the same things in the same tired discussions while the actual world moves on. People who lack actual experience can research things for themselves.
Even if there's some sort of raising because of snooping, the landlord is 100% within their right to raise that rent. There is no question here nor debate, the legal rent is what you should expect to pay in any given year - the preferential number should always be looked upon as a free ride enjoy it while it lasts
[sigh ...] So-called legal rents should be challenged at the least suspicion.
Because quite often they are exactly that - "legal" rents just waiting for that paperwork research and verification.
[sigh ...] So-called legal rents should be challenged at the least suspicion.
Because quite often they are exactly that - "legal" rents just waiting for that paperwork research and verification.
No the legal rent has nothing to do with paperwork or any sort of research. The landlord has a maximum rent under stabilization and it goes up exactly by the rent guidelines board decision every year. The landlord can charge up to that amount at any given lease renewal this is a black and white issue there is no grey area
No the legal rent has nothing to do with paperwork or any sort of research. The landlord has a maximum rent under stabilization and it goes up exactly by the rent guidelines board decision every year. The landlord can charge up to that amount at any given lease renewal this is a black and white issue there is no grey area
Think what the poster meant was often the legal rent on a RS lease is open to challenge because it isn't any such thing. This is because either willfully or out of ignorance some landlords pull fast a fast one and someone singing a new lease may never know.
It wasn't until recently that NYS began requiring LLs to register RS apartments. Previously IIRC it was more on a voluntary system. If you cannot research previous rent history how can you determine if the current rent being offered is correct?
Landlords have taken vacancy increases that they shouldn't. Rounded off increases to vacancy and renewal leases, padded renewal leases with charges they shouldn't and on it goes. Thus the "legal" rent being charged at renewal can be inflated.
[sigh ...] So-called legal rents should be challenged at the least suspicion.
Because quite often they are exactly that - "legal" rents just waiting for that paperwork research and verification.
Ok, say a tenant does challenges the legal rent amount. And say after investigating, it turns out the legal rent is legit. Now what for the tenant? Do you really think the LL is going to charge the tenant the preferential rent again after the ordeal the tenant put the LL through? Nope...the tenant is going to have to look for another place to live. All because of the tenant's snooping.
Of coarse the plan of attack for the LL is to be as nice and discreet as possible for the duration of the initial lease. Be very nice to the tenant, smile, do any and all repairs and document all conversations with the tenant to cover your basis. Come renewal time, you stick it to the tenant for snooping around. That'll teach them a lesson.
In such a situation, there is no way the tenant can prove they were so-called harassed by the LL. As there is no proof whatsoever and the harassment cases will ultimately get thrown out in court.
Now, the tenant has 2 choices, pay the high legal rent or spend additional money for moving and finding a new place.
All this additional money the tenant now suddenly has to pay becomes an inconvenience. All this inconvenience for the tenant could of been avoided had the tenant not snoop around. Now the tenant is paying the price. Let that be a lesson to tenants on this board.
Ok, say a tenant does challenges the legal rent amount. And say after investigating, it turns out the legal rent is legit. Now what for the tenant? Do you really think the LL is going to charge the tenant the preferential rent again after the ordeal the tenant put the LL through?
This is funny. It almost sounds like you think the LL would charge a preferential rent due to being NICE
If the LL thinks he can get the legal rent amount for the apartment, he will charge the legal rent amount. Preferential rents are in place because the market value of the apartment is lower than the legal rent, and the LL wouldn't be able to find a tenant if he were charging the legal rent.
Example: one bedroom apartment in the Bronx has a legal rent of $2000 due to many tenancy turnovers. Market rent in the area for a one bedroom is $1300. LL advertises apartment for $2000. No one responds.
He is forced to offer it at $1300 to get a tenant.
I'm sure there's some exception somewhere of a LL or two who actually is nice or doesn't care about all the extra income he could be making from his investments and agrees to rent the apartment at a preferential rent that is much lower than market value. But that would be the exception and not the rule.
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.
