Google Search

TenantNet Forum Archives 1996-2002
Posting and Replies are disabled in all Archives
TenantNet Forum | TenantNet Forum Archives Index


Re: Attempted Eviction of Rent Stabilized Leaseholder Fails

Posted by Anna on September 02, 1999 at 11:37:16:

In Reply to: Exemption Allows Priests to Keep Apartments posted by Mark Smith on September 01, 1999 at 23:12:12:

: The New York Law Journal for September 2, 1999 reports on a housing court case where a group of priests were allowed to keep their apartments, despite their landlord's efforts to evict them.

: The case itself is of no particular interest to the readers of this forum, except that the attorneys for the tenants were Kellner Chehebar & Deveney. Douglas Kellner, the lead name partner of that firm, is a frequent contributor to this forum, using the initials DK.

: http://www.nylj.com/stories/99/09/090299a3.htm

This case is VERY much of interest to readers of this forum!!!!

It is one more victory for rent-stabilized tenants who moved into very marginal neighborhoods 20-30 years ago and made them safe for Yuppies/Puppies to move into today. If not for brave people like these, landlords could not get $2000 rents today!

The basic fact in all these attempts to evict rent-stab rent-controoled tenants is: either the landlord has owned the building since before they moved in and therefore paid less for the building than one apt sells for today OR the LL bought the building WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE of the rent roll AND if LL's monthly expenses exceeds this rent roll, it is no one's fault but his. The rent increases voted by RBG have been much larger than the actual increases in costs to run a building, by a landslide! PS: if not true for one individual building, the LL can apply for (and probably get) a hardship increase from DHCR, if his annual profit is less than 8.5% (8.25% ?).

Some facts about this case you seem to have missed: these Jesuits pay an average of $900 per month at 98th & Bway, the LL wanted an average of $2150 ($650 is average for rent stabilized in that neighborhood, new tenants pay $900-2150). The men lived there continually for 25-30 years: this was not a revolving tenancy. The judge did not create an 'exemption': read the article you linked to! PS: there was a sad recent case where a minister and his family, long-time residents of the Upper Upper West Side, were evicted because the tenant named in the lease was his church, a corporation. This is the reason the LL started eviction proceedings agains the Jesuits: a non-profit corporation no longer has rent-stab protection. The lease for the Jesuits included their Community as a tenant (NOT a corp), not just the larger NY Jesuit Order: a corporation

Here's a link to an earlier article: read it and the NYLJ one carefully this time: http://www.nydailynews.com/1998-10-25/News_and_Views/City_Beat/a-8937.asp

Follow Ups:



Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 
Comments: Optional Link URL: Link Title: Optional Image URL:


   

TenantNet Home | TenantNet Forum | New York Tenant Information | Contact Us
DHCR Information | DHCR Decisions | Housing Court Decisions | New York Rent Laws |

Subscribe to our Mailing List!
Your Email      Full Name