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.
That's exactly the point. Notice how the mindset and motivation of the LL changes when you compare market rate apartments vs. rent stabilized apartments.
With Market Rate apartments:
1. Tenant pays fair market value for their apartment.
2. Since the LL is receiving market rate rents and renting his apartments is his livelihood, the LL is motivated in keeping his tenants happy or they walk.
3. LL harassment in market rate apartments in NYC is unheard of.
4. In market rate apartments, the tenant technically has more power than the LL as the tenant is viewed as a valued customer. It is in the best interest of the LL to retain his valued customers forcing him to upkeep the building and apartments.
With Rent Stabilized apartments:
1. Tenant pays below market rate
2. Tenant is entitled to a lease renewal
3. In RS, the landlord's motivation is flipped from market rate apartments
4. LL does not view the RS tenant as a valued customer and is not motivated to upkeep their apartment in good shape.
5. Tenant suffers from a lower quality of life in their apartment and LL also suffers monetarily and from a management standpoint if the RS tenant is a trouble maker/criminal where the LL is unable to remove them due to guaranteed lease renewals.
6. The building degrades both physically and from a quality of life standpoint via bad tenants
7. Due to guaranteed lease renewals, the RS is not motivated to be on their best behavior unlike market rate apartments where the LL has the ability to not renew a tenants lease which keeps would be bad tenants in check.
8. The RS law sometimes forces some LLs to harass RS tenants and in cases wish death on RS tenant because the LL feels powerless in disciplin and/or removing the tenant. This is unheard of in market rate rentals as LLs have exit strategies and penalties in place to deal with unruly or uncooperative tenants.
In reality the only distinction is between good landlords and bad landlords and good tenants and bad tenants.
I have a friend who lives in a market rate luxury building. One time he needed to use the service elevator to move some furniture and was basically told he should bribe the doorman for the privilege. He didn't want to play ball and heard talk that they were really going to increase his rent upon lease renewal. So was he wrong? Should he have given the guy a twenty and perhaps also give them extra large tips during the holidays just to stay in their good graces? I'm not sure where you get the idea that there can be no harassment in a market rate apartment. If you live in a hot neighborhood and the landlord doesn't like you for any reason (maybe you're too ugly) you can be sure to get a large rent increase the next time around.
Everybody knows RS is all about Manhattan. The move from 2500 to 2700 is not accidental. $200 over 2500 is exactly 8%. This law is extended for 4 years, and the rent guidelines board has only been authorizing a 2% (on average) annual rent increase for a 1-year renewal (2012: 2%, 2013: 4%, 2014: 1%). So that means that a Manhattan RS apartment today with four 2% increases will likely still be under $2700 (even with compounding) when the next law renewal date comes up, where the lawmakers will push the goalposts again by another 8%, thereby railroading landlords and keeping apartments off the market for the non-entitled
A person paying 2k in rent for a rent stabilized apartment is still putting down a good amount of money on rent and there are a number of people who still cannot afford the apartment.
Rent regulations are here for another 4 years and everyone will have to deal with that.
In reality the only distinction is between good landlords and bad landlords and good tenants and bad tenants.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that there can be no harassment in a market rate apartment. If you live in a hot neighborhood and the landlord doesn't like you for any reason (maybe you're too ugly) you can be sure to get a large rent increase the next time around.
This is the point. Too many landlords need careful supervision.
Everybody knows RS is all about Manhattan. The move from 2500 to 2700 is not accidental. $200 over 2500 is exactly 8%. This law is extended for 4 years, and the rent guidelines board has only been authorizing a 2% (on average) annual rent increase for a 1-year renewal (2012: 2%, 2013: 4%, 2014: 1%). So that means that a Manhattan RS apartment today with four 2% increases will likely still be under $2700 (even with compounding) when the next law renewal date comes up, where the lawmakers will push the goalposts again by another 8%, thereby railroading landlords and keeping apartments off the market for the non-entitled
Perhaps a person who is a social worker or a special education teacher, from a modest background (because authentic talent does not ask for a finance report), with student loans, IS in fact entitled.
I count a dozen such people among my good friends and only one comes from money. All make amazing contributions.
People might give that some thought while babbling on about the small number of people who take advantage. Many more people legitimately benefit - or I should say, benefit YOU through their contributions.
Honestly if rent regulation had gone away ultimately you would have had more condo and co-op conversions. There is high demand to buy in Manhattan (and neighboring Brooklyn and Queens) and even with rent regulations in place that is where the market is going.
Developers and landlords are not worried about rent regulation either way.
4. In market rate apartments, the tenant technically has more power than the LL as the tenant is viewed as a valued customer. It is in the best interest of the LL to retain his valued customers forcing him to upkeep the building and apartments.
How many apartments have you lived in? This is simply not the case.
Perhaps a person who is a social worker or a special education teacher, from a modest background (because authentic talent does not ask for a finance report), with student loans, IS in fact entitled.
I count a dozen such people among my good friends and only one comes from money. All make amazing contributions.
People might give that some thought while babbling on about the small number of people who take advantage. Many more people legitimately benefit - or I should say, benefit YOU through their contributions.
Well that's terrific and those people should be applauded for their social contributions, but one good deed does not absolve taking away the rights of property owners to use their assets without price controls. If the government and society feels the need to subsidize these people, they should foot the bill instead of forcing private owners to provide the subsidies out of their pockets. This sort of Robin Hood mentality is anti-Capitalist and against everything this country stands for.
How did price controls work out for the Soviet Union?
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.
