tenants getting tons of money back and roll backs at stuy tow

Grr. Should've moved in there when I had the chance... Good for them! Bad for TS.

me too sick about it wondering what they are doing with the vacant apt

renting them to us...? ;)

im on the list but im 6 days in so angry i didnt call day 1

well, so much for the free market in rents.

The_President...Baah, Humbug...show some kindness to those who do not have as much as you.

cccharley..I put my name on the list the first day but do you really think those lists mean anything...

julia and cccharley, they had a ton of empty units. so who knows. and julia, yes, the lists do mean something.

julia it will be much easier for you i need a 2br

aboutready...that's great news that the lists do mean something.

I was at Stuy Town last weekend for the first time ever. Person I was visiting had no clue about the ruling. LOL. I assume they'll be notified to start paying less if appropriate?

Also, out of curiousity, how does the list work? I assume the apts are at different regulates prices, right? So if you're at thr top, you get a pick of the litter, then the next person picks, etc.? Also, can you "pass" so as to keep your priority on the list and wait for something better / cheaper to show up when someone leaves a RS apt?

As long as I'm asking, what does a RS 1BR go for there roughly?

inonada, i don't have a clue how the list will work. i think they have at least 6 buildings worth of apartments vacant. rental rolls have been actually lower than when TS bought the place, despite their destabilization efforts. when they were hawking market rate units they let people view a model unit and then let them see as many units as they wished that met their price/location/floor needs. my guess is that they'll start showing groups of people units and those at the end of the list will have, obviously, very little choice. i very much doubt they'll let people pass. you raise an interesting point, though. i know one family that had been told by MetLife that they were eligible to move from a 2 to a 3 bedroom RS apartment. she had just submitted her paperwork when MetLife told her they were ending the RS program for vacant apartments.

our rent bills for january are supposed to reflect the new rents. i believe the judge certified the class yesterday as well. it seems as though it will be an opt-out class, so ostensibly all market-rate tenants are being represented.

the rent for an RS unit depends on whether or not it is renovated, and when. my guess is that they'll try to rent all the renovated units first, and let whoever has control of the complex later decide whether they want to go to the expense of renovating the units. it would be wise to do so, to get the rent above the RS threshold so that they could potentially be destabilized more easily in the future.

a one bedroom that recently went market rate, if it were renting pre-renovation at a RS rate of $1200 per month, would likely have a current RS rent of around $2000ish. but one that went market in 2003, if it had been renting at say $1400 per month, would have a 2003 base RS rate of about $2100, with the subsequent yearly allowable increases (i'm not certain what the RS percentages would be, but the older apartment would obviously be more expensive under that scenario). the people in the best position for deals are the ones that recently signed leases for renovated 2 bedrooms where the RS rent was very low before renovation costs. i know one elderly women in PCV who has a three bedroom (there is one per building) for a little over a $1000. with renovation costs that apartment, if renovated, would exited at a little over $2000, and TS would have been charging about $6000 for it last summer.

i meant $6000 summer 2008.

AR, pardon my ignorance, but I's confused by what the numbers in your email mean.

Let's take the hypothetical $1200 => $2000ish recently-market-rated 1BR unit as an example, tell me if I got it right. Up until last year, say, it was renting for $1200. Then, the tenant moves, so they renovate to the tune of $40K, say, and kick the RS base up to $2033 because they get to increase the RS base by $833/month (1/48th of the $40K renovation). Because this RS base is beyond $2000, they deregulate the unit and rent it at market-rate, say $3000. However, they also took a J-51 tax benefit during the renovation, and according to the new ruling, because of this they have to make the unit RS again, but at $2033 since they get to keep the renovation increases but have to remain regulated. Existing tenant gets rent reduced to $2033 (modulo any RS increases that need to be applied), and the difference between the $3000 previously paid by existing/past tenants and $2033 is still being settled but likely going to be paid to existing/past tenants. Assuming existing tenant makes less than $175K a year, then the unit deregulates after J-51 tax benefit expires, which is in 2020. If they make more than $175K a year, then the unit still does not deregulate until 2020; what happens in terms of refunding past amounts or having to move from a deregulated unit, I don't even have enough of a clue to try to make up as I'm going here.

Is that all right? Can you fill in what happens to the $175K+ crowd?

inonada, i think if the tenant makes less than $175k the unit does NOT deregulate because of the expiration of the J-51 program. it would if destabilization laws were broadened, but under current law the apartment would then be subject to the two-pronged criteria (rent amount AND income) (I thought the J51 expiration was 2015ish but i'm not certain).

as of now the stabilization lies with the apartment, "ir"regardless of rent level or tenants' income. TS must return the rent to rent stabilized rent level + vacancy allowance + percentage of renovation + amount of yearly rent increase allowances pursuant to RS (i'm assuming that one, but I don't see why not). so rents for the same apartment could be all over the place, depending on when they were destabilized and how many times the unit had been vacant over the years.

the $175k+ crowd get the same treatment as the under $175k crowd.

the numbers are very confusing. the whole thing is confusing. we ran into someone in the elevator yesterday who rented a market rate unit just prior to the decision and had no clue what was happening. maybe it's because of the holidays, but it's awfully quiet over here given all this. maybe they're waiting for the return of the overpayments to express the joy.

I'm dancing on the streets, and hell, I don't even live there or care to get on the "list" or anything. Just enjoying the shitshow.

BTW, here's where I got 2020 from:

http://www.stpcvta.org/flyers/j51-faq-final.pdf

I see. So under current law, an apartment becomes destabilized if the tenant earns above $175K and the RS rent is above $2K. Alternatively, if the tenant leaves, the apartment destabilizes solely if the RS rent goes above $2K (using the vacancy + renovation boost). However, using J-51 means you cannot deregulate, so the apartment remains RS "ir"regardless of whether tenant's income is above $175K and the RS rent is above $2K.

In terms of a new tenant getting a RS apartment, do you know whether there are income restrictions? Does the RS rent being above/below $2K make a difference?

inonada, no, as far as i know there are no income restrictions under these circumstances. and obviously it would behoove the ll to try to fill as many apartments as possible with people earning more than the $175k limit. although of course that's no guarantee of performance at the time of destablization.

btw, your 2020 date comes from info more current than what i had read previously.

OK, I think I get it all now. Regardless of the apt size, 1BR/2BR/3BR, they would get renovated simply to a point of becoming a $2K apartment to move it out of regulation, but not anything more because it was not "needed" to get the pop to market rate.

Presumably the name of the game for them now is to maximize the renovations for new tenants? If they get an empty place, they put $80K of renovation into it to get a rent increase of $2K/month (1/40th, not 1/48th as I last metioned, I now think). If they want to increase the rent by $3K/month to get it to "market", they put $120K in renovations. The existing tenants will have low rents because they'd have to agree to renovations (who would for 1/40th the "cost" per month), but won't all the new tenants on the "list" simply be given more-renovated apartments whose RS rent has been juiced up to market rate for such more-renovated apartments?

If that's the case, then being on the "list" doesn't seem like it really gets you much.

inonada: "AR, pardon my ignorance, but I's confused by what the numbers in your email mean." actually it's mor elikely that her email didn't make sense in the fist place. she tends to be very confused and lose track of her own arguments. i wouldn't wprry about it. it's not you, it/'s her.

where is hfscomm when you need him? this thread is made for him!

Nah, I think it all makes sense. I just didn't understand the context since I knew next to nothing about RS.

And to save hfs the effort, let me ask the question. "So if LL renovates with new toilet seat for $40, AR rent increases $1? Hardy-har-har, my joke never gets old. Must now change ID to report mouse infestations, it's almost midnight..."

inonada, not necessarily. there was a lot of turnover in the market rate units (i'd venture that most vacant units are market rate), particularly in '08 and '09 because they increased the rents so much. they're already renovated. and they weren't renovated just to get them to a certain level of rent, although of course that was a consideration. they were renovated in a very uniform manner, two different styles, but all the apartments otherwise the same, for marketing purposes. the older renovations are a bit different and they might wish to swap out the appliances which would give them some room for increases, but otherwise I just don't see it given how low market is right now for such units. and in terms of the list, and its value, i personally don't feel the need for the security of RS, but for many people it does seem to turn a rental into a home, however fallacious that perception may or may not be.

plus, it really depends on who gets control of the place, don't you think? but i agree to the extent that it would be foolish to rent vacant apartments at less than the $2000 level, or more likely $2500 to allow for the slight possibility that albany may raise the limit. the place is broke and needs to rent the units, which is why i think people on the list will have a decent shot at a reasonable market-rate unit. and then TS will leave it to the successors to decide what to do with the unrenovated ones.

I am with you for, say, a 1BR. I don't think the market rate is much higher than $2K for those. However, for that hypothetical / mythical 3BR unit now with a RS rent of $1200, I think you renovate $120K to juice the rent up to $4200 or wherever market rate might be at the moment plus a little more room in case you think market rates are going to outpace RS increases. I don't think you renovate for only $40K and get stuck at a $2200 base for the next 40 year, 'cause at that price the new tenant ain't never leaving.

Many years ago, I saw some unit that happened to be RS, except that the RS rent was 40% higher than the asking rent. At that point, hard to see what RS does for someone.

i agree. but i'm not sure the money is here for $120k per apartment. and, as I said, there haven't been that many, relatively, new RS units being vacated. TS, and to a lesser extent, met life did their damndest to turn over units in 2004-08, those units were renovated, and since then the number of RS units being vacated has been fairly small. but going forward, obviously this is an elderly community. it will be interesting to see what they think they can get market for these units going forward, and what they actually do get. i think $4200 for a stuy town 2/1 is very dear in this market, particularly for one at 18 and C.

Ar...I'm in a bind and maybe you can give me some advice...I'm paying market rate in a J-51 bldg. Lease is up 2/1...LL is saying they might have to roll back rents but then again they might not...The lease they are sending me (they haven't sent one out) is market rate...people in my bldg. are saying I should sign it because they are sure the bldg. rents will roll back but if they don't i'm stuck for another year paying $2500 for a studio. What woud you do...sign or move out. thanks.

what would the roll back be to? how did they get the apartment out of RS? this is without knowing any details, but i think your rent would at a minimum be $2000 even if they had to roll back. you should do your best to find that out. if so, i'd think you'd be better off looking elsewhere. the larger apartments may be getting a better deal if there is a return to RS.

sounds good because i don't like the neighborhood the bldg. is in...and yes there are 3 bedroom apartments renting for $6k so they are going to come out way ahead. thank for the advice.

The tenant before me paid $660.00 a month and they renovated and brought it up to $2500 per month (my rent) people in the bldg are saying my rent will go back down to $1600 a month but no one knows and the LL is being very evasive.

Julia, if last tenant was at $660 and you are at $2500, then that likely means they renovated and used vacancy increases to get the RS base above $2000, and hence did an "illegal" destabilization by kicking you up to $2500. If the same thing as Stuy Town gets applied to you, your RS rent will be at least $2000, likely somewhat more because of increases to the RS base since deregulation. Given that you can get pretty high-end doorman studios for that type of price, the only reason you would want to stay is if having stable rent increases for the next several year or decade (when J-51 would expire, depending on building) is impotant to you. However, if you would be paying above-market rent for a building / hood you don't like, I hardly see why you'd want to do it.

The reason the landlord is being evasive is because he probably knows all this and wants you to re-up the above-market least that at worst case would be changed into an above-market RS rent worst-case.

BTW, the landlord probably owes you back-rent to the tune of $5K per year you were there, assuming you were paying $2500. How many years have you been there?

i'm here only one year and signed a lease at $2500..so what i'm hearing is the LL will never be forced to bring the rent down to $1600-1700 and in that case I can move to a neighborhood I want to be in.

Julia, I still think your LL got your rent up above $2K illegally to begin with. Do you see evidence that they put >$50K in renovations into your studio? I think that's what it would have taken to get from $660/mo to $2K/mo ... unless the previous tenant was RC rather than RS (building would have to predate WWII).

The bldg. is not pre-war and the previous tenant was definitey RS..they renovated the bath, kitchen, floors, closets, etc.but this is where i don't know what to do...the LL's management office when I asked them would the be rolling back the rent the said the didn't know and I should keep my options open. The did say they would not be sending me a RS lease but would not say what the new rent would be. There are now 12 empty apartments and the super has been told he cannot show any apartments.

julia, if you were the first post-RS tenant you should have received a notice outlining how the apartment was taken from RS to market rate. if i recall i received a document (in the mail, not with my lease, i believe) that was submitted to one of the housing agencies and set forth the prior RS rent, the vacancy allowance, the amount spent on renovations and the percentage of those amounts added to the base rent to elevate it out of RS.

anyone know which agency would have received this sort of record? or what a tenant's rights are to receive such documentation upon request?

Life is simple when choices are easy, no?

I do believe the landlord will end up owing you close to $6K in overpaid rent. You should probably notify the LL of this (in writing) and keep in touch with the existing tenants so that you are included in any settlement. Alternatively, because the amount you are probably owed is small, if the landlord doesn't pay, you can take him/her to small claims court. Probably best to wait for the dust to settle somewhat before heading down that route, though. Let others set the precedents.

AR, do you agree with how I've attempted to interpret all this?

I believe no notice needs to be sent out, but Julia could ask for and receive documentation if she desires. I read this yesterday (WTF am I reading this crap???) and will find the link.

Julia, do you know how many years the prior tenant had been there? That figures into the increase in RS rent that was legally allowable (the "vacancy increase").

Right, here are the general guidelines:

http://www.housingnyc.com/html/resources/dhcr/dhcr26.html

And here are the guidelines for improvements to specific units (as opposed to improvements for the whole building, like a new boiler):

http://www.housingnyc.com/html/resources/dhcr/dhcr12.html

In the latter link, it states that a new tenant may challenge the claimed improvements within 4 years of the improvements, and the LL must provide documentation.

If the apt was $660 before, then the LL was entitled to at least a 16% vacancy increase along with a $45 increase for the annual increase, putting the rent at $880 minimum assuming the old tenant had a relatively short tenure. At the other end, if the old tenant was there for 50 years, then an additional increase of 50 * 0.6% * $660, or $198, is allowed, putting the rent at $1078. Thus, somewhere between $37K (40 * ($2000 - $1078)) and $45K (40 * ($2000 - $880)) of renovations would have been needed to destabilize.

Given what Julia said was renovated, I'm guessing those numbers can be "spent" on a contract given cousin Jim.

inonada, technically i believe the landlord owes treble damages. i think within six months the parties are trying to resolve the Roberts action for PCV/ST. a settlement won't indicate what someone would get in an action, but the results would be illustrative, shall we say. i agree that Julia ought to let others take the lead. there are probably a number of people with a lot more at stake and a great deal of motivation to see the issue through. Julia, how many apartments are in the building? do you know how many have been destabilized?

julia, unless you are desperate to stay where you are, and it definitely sounds as though you aren't, i'd find a new apartment for 2/1, see what happens in our case here, and then decide what to do in terms of the amount your landlord may owe you. even if cousin jim did the renovations, your ll will likely be able to justify the increase to $2000, so your rent would be over that amount. i think you can do better.

AR...I did receive a notice from a city agency showing me that the previous tenant paid $660.00 but it only stated that previous rent and then my rent, not an explanation of why it was increased.

inonada, ar..you both are great...thanks for all the info...it backs up what I want to do...move out to a neighborhood I like much better, at a lower rent.

Julia...If I remember, you like the Village/Chelsea/Gramercy/Sty Town area? Well I did a quick check of the building I grew up in (W Village) and the last rentals were $2300 for top floor--elevator--1brs and my current building where studios (albeit pretty small, 450 sq ft) went for $1700 with full service. Now granted these are co-op building where you have to jump through hoops and may not be able to stay a long time but I still imagine you should be able to get either lower rent or a bigger place and be in one of your preferred 'hoods. And then if you get a nice big settlement from previous LL for overcharge, its into the bank (or off to the Bahamas)...good luck.

lizyank...The village/grammercy, etc. is my goal. $1700 for a studio is great, especially elevator and laundry..thanks