One Month Fee in West Village Unreasonable?
Started by bluedahlia
about 16 years ago
Posts: 11
Member since: Jul 2009
Discussion about
I'm no fan of brokers, or paying one penny more than necessary. In this part of town, the no fee's are slowly becoming more prominent, but broker only listings are still everywhere. Yes I made the mistake of using C.L and visiting an apt on Bank St that I now love, and actually think is a good deal rental wise. It's a small building with only 5-6 units. So is the simple fact that some bldgs, especially the pre-war townhouse beauties in the west village use brokers. And that's that? The bldg is not owned by one of the big management companies we all know about. I've been looking in this part of town for a while now and I've probably answered my own question. So maybe I'm just venting :)
I don't know too much about this, but it seems to me that the broker performed a service by bringing you to an apartment you otherwise would not have known was on the market, so you owe the broker for that service if you decide to take the apartment.
Just think of the broker fee as part of the cost of rent and make your offer accordingly.
not for the ll it isn't?
Here's hoping the technology on this site will render the bloodsuckers obsolete.
Try to resist. Broker fees for apartments is grating.
"Here's hoping the technology on this site will render the bloodsuckers obsolete."
And how do you spend your days? Washing the feet of the indigent?
If there's an objection here, the only thing I could see was the owner being too cheap to pay for work and foisting the cost onto a tenant instead of paying it himself.
A broker shows someone an apartment that they love and plainly state "is a good deal rent wise" and expecting to be compensated for doing what they do for a living makes them a bloodsucker?
Sometimes smaller apartment buildings have relationships with specific brokers. The broker knows the building and the tenants the landlord is seeking, and in such cases there's no way to get around the broker fee. Try to negotiate the rent down a bit to compensate.
Your problem with paying a fee is unreasonable. If a place costs half as much as the best no-fee option, I personally have no problem paying a whole year's rent in fees. So long as the landlord's reduced rent reflects the fact that you pay the fee, so what? The landlord isn't going to market the apartment, show it to every random person, etc., so as long as a fee needs to be paid, what difference if you pay it vs. the landlord pays it but charges you higher rent?
If you are looking for a rental "home" (i.e. longer than 2 years or so) than a brokers fee for an apartment you love is an investment in your quality of life, especially if you are getting a reasonable rent stabilized apartment. (you didn't mention if its rs). I paid a high brokers fee ($1000) for an apartment that came with an amazing low rent and a 3 year lease in 1983. Twenty five years later I worked with the same broker as she was showing the apartment when I was finally moving out.
It's pure economics, don't overlay morality. If the landlord needs to fill the space they'll pick up the cost; if you really like the space you'll pay the cost, effectively paying 8% more in rent. If you can find another place that's just as nice at the same price with no broker's fee, you'll walk. That's a market in action. Only advice is that it never hurts to ask: say "I like this place, but the broker's fee is making it more expensive stacked up against comparable apartments." See how they react...
no one should be paying a broker fee in a collapsing rental market
let me rephrase that only owners should be paying fee's
As a tenant, I refuse to pay broker fees as a matter of principal. Previously they were difficult (but nowhere near impossible) to avoid. These days, I find it hard to imagine any scenario that would end in me paying the fee. The property would have to be significantly cheaper than the many many alternatives even with the fee factored in.
"As a tenant, I refuse to pay broker fees as a matter of principal."
That sort of attitude is precisely why places listed with a fee often end up being significantly cheaper even with the fee (if not negotiated away).
Like I said, if it were significantly cheaper with the fee, I would rent the property. I'm pragmatic like that. Previously this was absolutely not the case. Broker apartments were priced no differently than others.
Reading it over, I can see how that would be a bit confusing, with me blathering on about my principles and then talking about being pragmatic and all. I meant to say "I refuseD to pay broker fees as a matter of principle", back when they were difficult to avoid, inflated prices tremendously, and were obviously not beneficial to the tenant in effectively all situations. Even these days, I doubt there are many properties that are actually cheaper with a broker's fee, even at "only" 8.5%.
No offense meant to the rental brokers on this board, but a broker took advantage of me when I first moved to the city many many years ago and I'm not alone in saying that I don't possess a particularly high opinion of your profession.