A Roommate Under Rent Regulation

[consigliere]

Colleen McGuire, the attorney who writes the summaries for TenantNet's Housing Court Decisions, answers a question in the Real Estate section of the October 27th online edition of The New York Times:
 
 
A Roommate Under Rent Regulation
 
Q. I am the sole lessee of a rent-stabilized two-bedroom, two-bath apartment. I rent a bathroom and a bedroom to a roommate, splitting the rent and utilities evenly. The kitchen and living room are common areas. My question concerns the furnishings. The bedroom is unfurnished, but the living room and kitchen are fully furnished. The roommate uses my kitchen appliances (including microwave oven, dishes, pots, pans and utensils), my audio-video equipment and my living room furniture. What compensation, if any, am I entitled to for the roommate's use of my personal items under rent-stabilization guidelines? . . . Kim Barget, Brooklyn.
 
A. Colleen F. McGuire, a Manhattan lawyer who frequently represents tenants, said that there are no guidelines in the rent stabilization code for charging a roommate for furnishings. "The code only provides that the legal rent must be shared proportionally among all occupants," Ms. McGuire said. Moreover, she said, since the regulation is so new, having been promulgated in December 2000, there is virtually no case law on the topic.
 
Ms. McGuire said, however, that a tenant with a roommate might be similar to to a tenant with a subtenant. Under the rent stabilization law, she said, a subtenant may be charged 10 percent above the legal rent for a furnished apartment.
 
"So the letter writer can arguably charge her roommate 10 percent above the roommate's proportionate share of the rent, since the roommate has access to a predominantly furnished apartment." Ms. McGuire added, however, that since the issue has not been the subject of judicial review, the letter writer would be proceeding at her own risk if she charges the roommate an additional amount. The risk, she said, is that the extra charge could be deemed an overcharge, and that could be grounds for eviction.
 

[Diharrel]

Does anyone know? If the roommates came to an agreement that one would pay $100 dollars more - before the regulation was put in place in 2000 - does it stand? Also, where is this regulation in he handbook?

[consigliere]

There has been very little reported in the way of case law about overcharging a roommate under the December 2000 changes to the Prohibitions part of the Rent Stabilization Code (RSC).  
 
Rent Stabilization Code (RSC) §2525.7:
 
Occupancy by persons other than tenant of record or tenant's immediate family
 
(a) Housing accommodations subject to the RSL and this Code may be occupied in accordance with the provisions and subject to the limitations of section 235-f of the Real Property Law.
 
(b) The rental amount that a tenant may charge a person in occupancy pursuant to section 235-f of the Real Property Law shall not exceed such occupant's proportionate share of the legal regulated rent charged to and paid by the tenant for the subject housing accommodation.
 
For the purposes of this subdivision, an occupant's proportionate share shall be determined by dividing the legal regulated rent by the total number of tenants named on the lease and the total number of occupants residing in the subject housing accommodation. However, the total number of tenants named on the lease shall not include a tenant's spouse, and the total number of occupants shall not include a tenant's family member or an occupant's dependent child. Regardless of the number of occupants, tenants named on the lease shall remain responsible for payment to the owner of the entire legal regulated rent. The charging of a rental amount to an occupant that exceeds that occupant's proportionate share shall be deemed to constitute a violation of this Code.
 

[Diharrel]

I've evicted this roommate - and don't know what I should charge as his rent for the last month. Should i just charge 50%? Or what he has been paying this whole time??? I can use the sublet clause -- because 10% more on his share would be more than what he pays now.. but, I don't want to do anything wrong.

[consigliere]

It would probably be safest just to charge half the rent, although this could cause your ex-roommate to question why you are charging less for the last month. You could say that your ex-roommate wasn't there every day of the last month and that's the reason for the lower amount.
 
DHCR's regulations about charging a roommate are rather simplistic. They don't address gas, electricty, phone, cable, internet access, and other monthly expenses. They don't address the amount of space occupied exclusively by the roommate and the total amount of space shared. Nor do they address the issue of furniture, appliances, etc. supplied by the tenant -- exclusively for the use of the roommate and shared by all of the people living in the apartment.
 

[MikeW]

Have their ever been any actual evictions baaed on this rule yet? And if so, can I assume they kicked out the roommate also?

[Diharrel]

"DHCR's regulations about charging a roommate are rather simplistic. They don't address gas, electricty, phone, cable, internet access, and other monthly expenses. They don't address the amount of space occupied exclusively by the roommate and the total amount of space shared. Nor do they address the issue of furniture, appliances, etc. supplied by the tenant -- exclusively for the use of the roommate and shared by all of the people living in the apartment."

oh my GOD - a ray of hope!!! So, because the roommate in this situation has the bedroom and I have the dining room/hallway. I could argue that he SHOULD pay the 53 dollars more he does above 50%. I have a chance?

I need a lawyer. I need a pro bono lawyer.