---

Posted by Vieo on May 29, 2001 at 00:56:15:

In Reply to: 1) Landlord-created 'illusory sublets'; (2) Evictions based on 'building renovations' by new owner posted by Michael Kraft on May 28, 2001 at 23:48:50:

Why did the three tenants ever go for something like this ? Probably they thought they could get 'something for nothing' so they went along with the con. Now they get whacked instead ... that's what going along with a con will get ya.

What happens now ? Who knows. They can either hunker down while all parties fight this out or they can seek out new abode. Let's hope they've learned their lesson and get a normal lease in their name only next time.

: I'm a rent-stabilized tenant in an apartment in a 10-unit Manhattan
: brownstone. Three occupants in the building hold fictitious sublets. The owner created the 'sublets' as a condition of renting their apartments to them. He has now notified all 3 of them (i) that the building has been sold, (ii) that the new owner plans to renovate it, and (iii) that they have to vacate their respective apartments at the end of their current 'subleases.' (To date the owner has not sent any notices to the regular tenants -- i.e., the ones that hold actual leases.)

: My questions:

: 1. What are the rights of these 'subtenants'? What course of action should they take to remain in their apartments? Do they have a statutory right to full tenancies based on the landlord's fabrication of illusory sublets?

: 2. If the building really has been sold, can the new owners evict tenants (i.e., as well as subtenants) based on plans for renovations?

: Thanks very much.

Follow Ups:

• Because that's the only way they could get the apartments MikeW 05/29/01 (2)
  • Re: Because that's the only way they could get the apartments Vieo 05/29/01 (1)
    • Re: Because that's the only way they could get the apartments Lilly 05/29/01 (0)

---

Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 

Comments:
: Why did the three tenants ever go for something like this ? Probably they thought they could get 'something for nothing' so they went along with the con.  Now they get whacked instead ... that's what going along with a con will get ya.

: What happens now ? Who knows.  They can either hunker down while all parties fight this out or they can seek out new abode.  Let's hope they've learned their lesson and get a normal lease in their name only next time. 

: : I'm a rent-stabilized tenant in an apartment in a 10-unit Manhattan
: : brownstone.  Three occupants in the building hold fictitious sublets.  The owner created the 'sublets' as a condition of renting their apartments to them.  He has now notified all 3 of them (i) that the building has been sold, (ii) that the new owner plans to renovate it, and (iii) that they have to vacate their respective apartments at the end of their current 'subleases.' (To date the owner has not sent any notices to the regular tenants -- i.e., the ones that hold actual leases.)

: : My questions:

: : 1.  What are the rights of these 'subtenants'?  What course of action should they take to remain in their apartments?  Do they have a statutory right to full tenancies based on the landlord's fabrication of illusory sublets?

: : 2.  If the building really has been sold, can the new owners evict tenants (i.e., as well as subtenants) based on plans for renovations?

: : Thanks very much.


Optional Link URL:  
Link Title:         
Optional Image URL: 

---