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.
somebody needs a better lawyer...its not like the marshals are sitting on their hands....they do a lot of evictions....one marshal i used to work with, we used to issue about 250-300 warrants a month for just him alone.
Its not about having a good lawyer Seventh, its about certain professional tenants that know the RS system and use it to their advantage to harass landlords.
The evictions you see at the marshal's office are most likely not professional tenants who don't know how to use these pro-tenant laws in their favor.
In this cases, I believe he inherited that RS tenant when he got the building. Therefore he inherited the lease from the prior landlord who probably didn't pay attention to details and left out a lot of important clauses in the lease that would of detered such behavior.
I for one like to think that I have a very AIR TIGHT lease that covers just about any tenant-landlord scenario that I can think off. IT'S 12 PAGES LONG!!! I for example ALWAYS take pictures of the apartment, print them out in color, have the tenant sign it to confirm the condition of the apartment and attach it to the lease. I'm even thinking about starting to do a walk-thru video with the new tenant in it as additional proof to cover myself. In addition I also do a walk-thru inspection with a checklist in hand with the tenant checking off the condition of the apartment which they confirm and sign off on. That way, if the tenant ever tries to pull a fast one on me, I have all angles covered to prove my case in front of the judge.
But in my humble opinion, I think the number one reason why landlords get stuck with bad tenants is because the landlord has a horrible tenant screening process. It is a very lax and soft screening process that makes them vulnerable in accepting undesirable tenants.
Many landlords are too lazy to screen the tenants themselves so they out source the job to real estate agents (big mistake) to get them tenants. Real estate agents are shady and will lie to a landlord so and so has good credit or makes enough money or is a great person with a great personality just to make his commission.
Well, victor has given the sad, but true, responses to both those points.
But your question about the lease reminds me of something else that should be said. The renewable lease for life is a well known basic of rent stab, but only to owners and tenants within the system. The fact that you asked that question is indicative that the general public is not aware of far the tentacles of rent stab reach. To them it is only the ridiculously low rents and some are aware of the buyout fiasco. But it's much, much more encompassing than that. For example, did you know that rent-regulated tenants can not only stay for life, they can actually pass their apartment to their survivors? Yes, as if it were part of their estate. Again the seizure of property rights.
Most importantly, the general public is not aware of how the system hurts them as tax payers or non-regulated tenants or apartment seekers in general. These laws did not come down from the sky. They are created and supported by politicians for political reasons - any pol in NYC who utters a word of criticism of the rent stab system will commit political suicide. That will continue until the general public wakes up to its negative impact on them.
Well, victor has given the sad, but true, responses to both those points.
But your question about the lease reminds me of something else that should be said. The renewable lease for life is a well known basic of rent stab, but only to owners and tenants within the system. The fact that you asked that question is indicative that the general public is not aware of far the tentacles of rent stab reach. To them it is only the ridiculously low rents and some are aware of the buyout fiasco. But it's much, much more encompassing than that. For example, did you know that rent-regulated tenants can not only stay for life, they can actually pass their apartment to their survivors? Yes, as if it were part of their estate. Again the seizure of property rights.
Most importantly, the general public is not aware of how the system hurts them as tax payers or non-regulated tenants or apartment seekers in general. These laws did not come down from the sky. They are created and supported by politicians for political reasons - any pol in NYC who utters a word of criticism of the rent stab system will commit political suicide. That will continue until the general public wakes up to its negative impact on them.
i will admit, i am not familiar with every aspect of rent stabilization, as i personally have never lived in a rent stabilized apartment. my first apartment that i rented was not under rent stabilization. i am aware that family members are allowed to pass on the apartment to a son or daughter however...well rent stabilization laws were created in 1969 i believe? by now, the system might be archaic. it can definitely be revamped to suit landlords and tenants alike, but i still believe the need for the system exists.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
Why are folks so angry about this? The biggest abusers of the rent stabilization system, NYC rent laws in general, and sustainable, affordable development are these greedy developers. And, many developers benefit by working the system. These new developments get the land for $1(My land since it is city-owned and I'm a taxpaying resident.) and then get a tax abatement on said land (Again, my money).This is a business deal pure and simple. The landlord will make many hundreds of thousands of dollars if this woman leaves. She does not have to leave. Why should she not share in the wealth?
"Being a tenant advocate or writing a book helpful to tenants (even if 38 years ago) does not create a conflict of interest.
Taking money or having a financial interest from a party ... if that happened ... might create a conflict of interest.
And if that were the case, I would wager at least half, if not more of the sitting judges in Civil or Supreme Court took money from landlords or landlord lawyers."
How many tenants do you know of who contribute money to housing court judges' election/reelection campaigns? How many landlords and real estate interests do you know of who do?
Get real.
For all this empty griping and moaning Mod cut ... here's some free advice: abide by the law, respect the legal rights of your tenants, put a governor on your own unrestrained greed, and you will not have such MASSIVE problems. If you find you cannot or will not abide by the laws, then get into another business. That just boggles the mind: just get into another business if real estate sucks so much for you. My impression is you would b|tch and moan whatever business you would end up in. The problem is with the operator, not the equipment.
Instead of deluding yourselves, you'd be better serviced by educating yourselves. Learn the law and understand your responsibilities under it. Decide if you can meet your responsibilities. If/when you find that you cannot, blame yourself instead of blaming the tenants, the laws, the city, the state, HPD, DHCR, judges, politicians, or what have you. Assume a modicum of personal responsibility. You are obviously building your own problems into your business. There's plenty of responsible, responsive, intelligent, law abiding, successful, happy owners of rent regulated apartments in NYC. Perhaps it's because such owners apply their energies to running and improving their businesses rather than trying to buck the law and cheat the system.
Regarding apartment maintenance issues stated up thread: one should peruse civil charges if one is certain that the tenant is willfully damaging your property assuming that you have proof to back up the allegation: otherwise it sounds like libel to me - you should be careful in that regard. The breech of the warranty of habitability is a valid defense against a claim for arrears.
As we see upthread however, many landlords perceive denial of service and maintenance to rent regulated tenants as an acceptable means of harassment and profit (i.e., collect rent but do not fix anything or provide essential services). So many landlords have burrowed so deep into this practice of denying tenants their rights that they fail to see the downside and it doesn't work with tenants who are informed of their rights. Adequate resources devoted to regular, as well as preventative, maintenance on the premises should diminish warranty of habitability claims. If you are responsible in this arena, you should be able to bring your non-payment proceeding without suffering from warranty of habitability counter claims.
Last edited by bmwguydc; 04-03-2010 at 10:29 PM..
Reason: Not necessary
Regarding buyouts, there's many different philosophies and business models. If an owner is pursuing a goal of ownership of the apartment that is one business model.
On the other hand, if one's business model is ownership of a rental property, particularly in a gentrifying (or soon to be gentrified) neighborhood, one can easily justify the buyout of a rent regulated tenant. One legally applies renovation expenses (or illegally risks cooking ones books) to de-regulate the apartment and get for example, 4x the rent as a result of this deregulation. In just a little over a year one could easily pay for the renovation expenses via the increased rental income. For the next 20 years one could profit from 4x the regulated rent amount, plus future increases. It could be hugely profitable, especially if the targeted regulated tenant was perceived as a long term tenant. In such an instance there is ample profit incentive to offer a high figure buyout, 6 figures or more. In fact, looking at it anther way, NOT offering a high figure buyout in this business model could be perceived as a significant loss of potential profit.
It's a cost benefit business analysis pure and simple. The players know which moves turn them a profit and which failed opportunities cost them a potential profit. All the rest is sentimental rubbish and those on this thread promoting 'personal', 'ideological', or 'political' impulses for or against offering buyouts are revealing themselves as either bystanders or rookies. Those that make it in NYC real estate do not do so by routinely missing opportunities.
Ok it's pretty much obvious Lovesgasoline that you are a rent stabilization tenant advocate. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you had your own little tenant advocate website to bash "greedy" landlords that are the scum of the earth. (Wink, wink)
Regarding apartment maintenance issues stated up thread: one should peruse civil charges if one is certain that the tenant is willfully damaging your property assuming that you have proof to back up the allegation: otherwise it sounds like libel to me - you should be careful in that regard. The breech of the warranty of habitability is a valid defense against a claim for arrears.
As we see upthread however, many landlords perceive denial of service and maintenance to rent regulated tenants as an acceptable means of harassment and profit (i.e., collect rent but do not fix anything or provide essential services). So many landlords have burrowed so deep into this practice of denying tenants their rights that they fail to see the downside and it doesn't work with tenants who are informed of their rights. Adequate resources devoted to regular, as well as preventative, maintenance on the premises should diminish warranty of habitability claims. If you are responsible in this arena, you should be able to bring your non-payment proceeding without suffering from warranty of habitability counter claims.
Your reference to "upthread" is apparently to my posts. I gave a detailed description of the actions of a clearly abusive tenant. You ignore most of what I said and twist the rest. How DARE YOU accuse me of "denial of service and maintenance"??? I clearly stated that this tenant does NOT inform me of any repairs that are needed (for the nefarious purpose of creating a counter claim).
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox
Ok it's pretty much obvious Lovesgasoline that you are a rent stabilization tenant advocate. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if you had your own little tenant advocate website to bash "greedy" landlords that are the scum of the earth. (Wink, wink)
Yes. There is a pro-regulation website that is run by a lobbyist and activist who takes things to the extreme. Even to the point of urging tenants to take illegal actions. The verbiage of this poster is very similar to the administrator of that website.
I advocate the rule of law and personal responsibility Victorfox.
Both owners and tenants have a contract and responsibilities. Both have legal recourse if there is a breech of that contract. I think you will find that if both parties exercise their rights and responsibilities under the law most conflicts will be either prevented or satisfactorily resolved.
Victorfox, you appear to be anti-tenant and pro-owner: you can benefit by this same simple advice. Many ‘problem tenants’ are in fact owner created problems. An owner that is sick to the stomach about the existence of rent regulation and instead of abiding by the law and growing his/her business, prefers to scream from the rooftops while subverting the system at any opportunity is of course going to have huge problems running his/her business.
Many owners are trapped in circumstances of their own making. An owner should take responsibility for their business and legal obligations. You do not like your tenants you say? You oppose rent regulation? Therefore, you begrudge each and every dollar spent on the tenant’s unit or the building? It’s a problem of personal emotions and/or ideology interfering with business. Prioritizing ranting about being a perceived victimization by tenants, politicians, courts , lawyers , taxes, business expenses (did I leave anything out?) is going to doom you as a business person. You give the perception in your posts of one ‘soaked in rum’ with the hatred of the real estate system and you wear your disgust of tenants like a badge of honor. With an approach like that, it’s little wonder if things go south over in VictorFox Enterprises, LLC.
Taking responsibility for business and legal obligations may mean actually spending time and money maintaining the property. It may mean doing regular maintenance and having the resources to do this properly. It may mean regular preventative maintenance and the resources to do this properly. It may mean routine inspections to make certain the apartment(s) are fully maintained. It may mean hiring a qualified and responsible supervisory staff and/or building manager. It may mean hiring a responsive qualified superintendent and certified skilled tradesman to do your repair work. It may mean putting money into a property that has been neglected.
Again, if one is willing to keep a property professionally maintained most of these ‘problems’ disappear. If then a tenant violates the terms of his/her lease and/or the housing laws an owner will have the legal recourse to resolve the matter. Furthermore, on the issue of interpersonal relations, if the tenant perceives he/she is welcome in the building and that you make sincere efforts to professionally maintain his/her apartment, you may also find that this tenant cuts you a great deal of slack when something unexpected happens, instead of reflexively feeling his/her only recourse is involving the city bureaucracies and/or withholding rent. What you do not seem to grasp is there's a spectrum of business success among building owners in NYC. Just having a deed guarantees you nothing: in fact, it may guarantee you nothing but headaches. An owner builds his/her own personal psychology into the business. You need to always look back to yourself if you discern any shortcomings in your business, in order to be able to improve it.
The fact is, on both sides of the issues, some would much rather complain than assume responsibility.
Last edited by Lovegasoline; 04-04-2010 at 09:14 AM..
"Lovegasoline",
You failed to reply to my question in post #138.
And I have another one: Are you connected to that rather nefarious pro-regulation website? Given your history, I'm absolutely sure you're aware of it.
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.
