Question about Succession Rights?

[Lilly]

If there is any possible way for the LL to find out that you signed another lease, he will find it. Don't sign another lease-sublet.

[Brooklyn Babe]

Sounds crazy, but you could sign another lease using a variation of your name ex. middle name. Friend I know was able to suceed even though LL found out about other apt. She proved that her "doing business as" name J.D. Doe was used on the other lease and she rented the apt. because she had a dog walking business in the area and sometimes had to spend the night there to pet sit &/or attend to late /early appt.s. She had a roommate to back her up. But she was also able to prove that the majority of her time was spent at her dads.
Make sure that all of your gov't documents only have your mom's address ex. tax return, bank statements etc..List her phone number and your cell phone for any contact...

[HAJ77]

I live in Rent Control, and it's people like you that give all of us a bad name. If you're not living there, with the exception of college or military service, then you shouldn't get any succession rights. That said, if you are going to do this, start saving for attorney costs, beacuse the LL will take you to court if he think there's any chance of proving you worng.

[NYHawk]

I'm with HJ, we should not be helping people scam the system, and committing fraud. Shame on Lilly and BB for conspiring with frenchy. Offering this kind of inappropiate "help" is ammunition for the landlords and their lawyers who are trying to dismantle rent regulation. It is also gives this board a bad name.

[Phil Cohen]

Well, I'm all for doing whatever is legal. I imagine that if this lady is leasing another apartment--or five other apartments for that matter--it doesn't matter for succession purposes so long as her dad's apt. is her primary residence.
Lotsa people have country houses and stabilized apts. in the city.
Let's not get weepy eyed about LL's taken advantage by tenants. In my own personal experience my "legit" landlord committed felonies--out and out fabrication of evidence--in an unsuccessful effort to win a DHCR case. I am not worried by some gal who wants to get her father's apt. Good for her. Who knows how long we are going to have rent stabilization anyway?
In any event, this is an advice board, not a debate board.

[Cranky Tenant]

Either way, the major point here is that you must have lived in the apartment for at least two years (or one year if you're disabled) The fact that you're the daughter of the primary tenant doesn't automatically give you succession rights.

One of the first things the LL is likely to do once this matter comes up, is ask the neighbors who you are, and how long you've lived there. If you haven't been seen around the building on a regular basis that might give the LL reason to investigate further.

If it goes to court, you'll need to be able to document your relationship with the leaseholder and prove you've been living there with her, so this isn't a good time to sign a lease elsewhere.

[TenantNet]

We agree with the last poster that tenants should have only one regulated unit, not more than one. (they are allowed to own/rent other units as long as they are not the tenants prime residence - such as a vacation cottage). But a bit of clarification. Rent regulation is not about affordable housing - at least not as it was originally intended. It was intended to stabilize communities and the tax base. Unfortunately rent regulation has been somewhat coopted by an ideology for housing for the poor. Of course that begs the question: if it's about housing for the poor, then why did/does regulation protect those that are not poor (remember the Mia Farrow debate?) The answer is/was that it never was about protecting the poor; it was a market-wide system.

[Cranky Tenant]

No it's not fair but that's the way it is. Part of the problem with a child of the leaseholder claiming succession rights is, you might not have as much documentation as someone like a spouse or domestic partner might have in a similar situation.. Since you don't pay rent it may be harder to prove that you have, in fact, been there for 19 years.

I'd suggest putting together some papers including any bills you pay, your birth certificate, voters registration card, etc, so that you can demonstrate you have in fact been living there. In the meantime, avoid anything that indicates you're not.

If your LL's a shady character he's likely to fight it wilh every resourse available.

[Cranky Tenant]

Originally posted by FairSpectator:
The whole poit of rent stabilization is for people who can't afford housing. However, this person is definitely taking advantage of the system if she has another apartment. Essentially, she is taking an apartment away from someone who needs it.

A good number of the people who live in rent stabilized apartments moved in at market rate, and just continued to renew their leases. It wasn't a subsidy or a handout. The rent just didn't skyrocket at the rate LL would have preferred.

If this apartment is vacated, most likely the LL will "renovate it" so he can destabilize it in the process. Then there'll be one less apartment for anyone who can't afford to pay thousands of dollars a month.

[TenantNet]

A few thoughts - to Cranky: You're right. Some RS tenants move in at what is considered to be market rent at that time. What RS does is temper the increases. Regulation never was a subsidy (until the Democrats allowed it); it just tempered the forces causing rents to skyrocket. That's why regulation is not a good solution in all areas.
To Frenchy - be careful. Your plans sound self-defeating. Your succession rights depend in your living with your parents two years prior to their leaving. To set up liveing elsewhere (even if you try to finesse the primary residence issue) could sink your chances. Remember, it's not you who determines what is your primary residence. If your LL challenges it, it will be DHCR and the courts. So you're taking a big risk.

[newtonyc]

If someone can afford a country cottage then they should not be eligible for a rent stabilized/controlled apartment. It is not right to force a landlord to subsidize someone's vacation home. If someone can afford a house in the country, then they could afford to buy in the city or at least afford a higher rent. It is things like this that are going to be used against tenants to end rent regulations.

[Cranky Tenant]

Sorry newtonyc but I disagree. Tenants aren't "eligible" for Rent Stabilization or Rent Control because its not income based. It's the apartment that's regulated.. not the tenant.

What you can "afford" really shouldn't be any of the LL's business just as long as you continue to pay your rent on time. After all, if the tenant of a rent stabilized apartment gets laid off, or experiences some kind of loss of income, the average LL isn't going to give the tenant a discount.