Posted by JJ on November 20, 2001 at 23:27:48:
In Reply to: does RPL 232 apply to BROOKLYN as well as NYC? posted by brooklyn on November 20, 2001 at 16:27:17:
: Does RPL 232 re: tenants need or lack thereof to give 30 days notice on a month to month apartment apply to Brooklyn apartments as well?
: Thank you-
does RPL 232 apply to BROOKLYN as well as NYC? YES, Brooklyn has been part of NYC for 100 years.
NO: tenants do not need to give 30 days notice in NYC, landlords do.
Sec. 232. Duration of certain agreements in New York.
An agreement for the occupation of real estate in the city of New
York, which shall not particularly specify the duration of the
occupation, shall be deemed to continue until the first day of
October next after the possession commences under the agreement.
Sec. 232-a. Notice to terminate monthly tenancy or tenancy
from month to month in the city of New York.
No monthly tenant, or tenant from month to month, shall hereafter
be removed from any lands or buildings in the city of New York on
the grounds of holding over his term unless at least thirty days
before the expiration of the term the landlord or his agent serve
upon the tenant, in the same manner in which a notice of petition
in summary proceedings is now allowed to be served by law, a
notice in writing to the effect that the landlord elects to
terminate the tenancy and that unless the tenant removes from
such premises on the day on which his term expires the landlord
will commence summary proceedings under the statute to remove
such tenant therefrom.
Sec. 232-b. Notification to terminate monthly tenancy or
tenancy from month to month outside the city of
A monthly tenancy or tenancy from month to month of any lands or
buildings located outside of the city of New York may be
terminated by the landlord or the tenant upon his notifying the
other at least one month before the expiration of the term of his
election to terminate; provided, however, that no notification
shall be necessary to terminate a tenancy for a definite term.
Sec. 232-c. Holding over by a tenant after expiration of a
term longer than one month; effect of acceptance
Where a tenant whose term is longer than one month holds over
after the expiration of such term, such holding over shall not
give to the landlord the option to hold the tenant for a new term
solely by virtue of the tenant's holding over. In the case of
such a holding over by the tenant, the landlord may proceed, in
any manner permitted by law, to remove the tenant, or, if the
landlord shall accept rent for any period subsequent to the
expiration of such term, then, unless an agreement either express
or implied is made providing otherwise, the tenancy created by
the acceptance of such rent shall be a tenancy from month to
month commencing on the first day after the expiration of such
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup