Posted on 11/09/2014 10:44:15 AM PST by lowbridge
Sounds logical to me. At $10 a month, the owner is pretty much guaranteed he'll get paid. You know how long it takes and how hard it is to evict someone who defaults on their rental payments?
The article has nothing at all to do with the any statutory rent regulations in New York State or New York City.
The article is about an investor who bought an apartment building and failed to read the lease agreements that were attached to each unit and would be conveyed to a new owner of the apartment building.
You’ve changed subjects. Should I consider that a concession on your part that close to 50% of New York City’s apartments are subject to rent control as opposed to the 2% figure you cited earlier.
As stated, not true.
About 30% of NYC housing units are "rent controlled". About 45% of NYC rental housing units are rent controlled.
Can someone explain how rent control came about and what would the true rent be if it wasn’t in effect? Is rent control an actual city law or is it something that landlords all agreed to do? Would there really be as many places to live if there was no rent control and people couldn’t afford to live in Manhattan or the other boroughs?
Looks like she’s firing potshots in the dark. I wouldn’t pay anything to so much as visit that part of the world. There’s more than enough un-American trouble coming out of it to other states.
You'd have to change the lochs, monster.
Look buying a property to be a landlord is the same as buying any other business to make money
You assume all obligations and contracts that business made....
You can not say “Oh i bought this business and its contracts but I don't have to honor the contracts that do not benefit me....
look stupid if you didn't look at the obligations you were buying along with a business that's your stupidity.
I do not understand how some conservatives do not get that a contracts between two party's ...whether it's business to business or business to customer is still a contract between two parties
So a customer got the better of the business because the business was the stupid one.. tough luck for the business.
this new landlord acquired the property and he's obliged to follow the contracts the property had... case closed
exactly! Thank you!
this has nothing to do with rent control this is about an idiot that bought a business without looking at it obligations and then whines about it ...
The new landlord deserves to lose his ass because he an idiot
..if he wins its crony capitalism at its worst.
A contract between two parties is a contract between two parties
It doesn’t matter if you call yourself the business or the customer ..it doesn’t matter if your the rich guy or the poor gur
it’s whatever the contract was and whoever got the better deal in the end ...is what it is
I use more accurate and legal terms as they delineate specific meanings if various legal terms. Rent Control and Rent Stabilization two specific terns that have very different meanings in the city and state of New York.
Currently, only around 2% of apartment units are under Rent Control in NYC.
BTW- I own several pieces of investment property and every time I have bought a property, I review every lease of every unit to make sure I do not have a unfavorable lease that conveys to a new owner.
The fact of this case, is that the new owner failed to exercise his due diligence and now he must comply with that $10.00 a month lease.
First, there is “rent control” which was established, if I recall correctly, after the housing shortages of WWII and was an attempt to keep middle class Americans within the city. Those rents were highly regulated and kept artificially low. Next, came “rent stabilization” which allowed landlords to increase rents every time the lease was renewed. I only lived under rent stabilization.
NYC is not for everybody. For those of us who love walking, theater and the arts in general (as well as good food) its worth all the hassle and stupidities. Although Bloomberg and DeBlasio have really been pushing it...
I answered your question (to the best of my ability - not too good!) in post #31. I should have replied to you directly but I got a little mixed up in my posting.
Your opinion that the definition of words (such as 'rent control) should be based on how they are defined in the New York City Municipal Code is, to say the least, a very interesting one. But to observers who don't use the NYC Muni Code as a surrogate dictionary, the term 'rent control' is universally taken to include any rental unit where a landlord is prevented from raising or lowering rents whenever they want to.
Not a problem. Thanks!
Less than 2% of the housing units in NYC are under rent control.
How about rent stabilized?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.