Sale with tenants-Question.

Mimi: I don't think there's a magic #. Just bear in mind that to evict a market-rate tenant if he/she stops paying rent is difficult and time-consuming. Also, you will need a competent lawyer to get the tenant out if they stop paying rent - sounds easy, but also more difficult than one might think. And in the meantime, think about the fact that if the tenant becomes difficult, he/she is living in your house and can do some real damage to your property.

mimi, if you haven't already talked to him, 30_yrs (my colleague Dave at DG Neary Realty) is probably the perfect person to know exactly how to price this.

ali r.

Yeas, Ali, I am hoping hell see this thread...
nyc, thanks!

Hmmm crappy spelling, sorry...

IMO, life is too short to deal with tenants if it is at all avoidable. I've done in and it was a miserable experience. Personally, for a primary residence (not an investment property) I would never take ownership subject to a tenancy regardless of the cost savings. My sanity is too important to me.

mimi,
If T has a lease until 2014, then, seems s/he has the right to stay until 2014, unless there's a clause allowing L to end lease due to sale. It can be very difficult to buy out a T. If it was easy to buy out T, Owner would have done so. IMO, let the Owner buy out the tenant. Perhaps you could work out a deal for Owner to buy out T & deliver the unit free & clear of T, with a Surrender & Release signed by T.

I dont need to live in the house prior to 2014, I was thinking of renting it out until then anyway...Tks kylen and dwell!

Ok, if you can wait for T's lease to end. Just have your lawyer review the lease & make sure T isn't rent stabilized or rent control. So, question is what is the discount for buying an "occupied apt"? I don't know, hopefully 30yrs does.

Hey Skeevita, who said the tenant is low-income? Maybe it's a real estate broker.

Why would the low-income real estate broker try to get himself thrown out of his own rent-regulated apartment? You don't make no kinda sense.

calling 30yrs... no answer yet.

dwell, "make sure T isn't rent stabilized or rent control" what happens when the tenant is RS or RC? does it matter when the RS is above $2k/month?

btw, alan, i don't get your comments.

Hey admin,

if you buy a co-op that is occupied by a RS or RC T, you may never be able to evict the T & the T could pass the apt on to another person (assuming T isn't in violation of their RS lease or RC 'statutory tenancy', since RC Ts have no lease). If you buy a co-op occupied by a market T, then, you can refuse to renew the lease when it expires & thus, take possession of the apt. I'm just sayin to make sure a "market tenant" truly is one: ie: Stuy Town & J51: "market tenants" ain't market tenants no mo.

A T can be RS or RC with a rent of $2k or more, as long as they do not earn $175K or more for 2 years in a row.

IMO, it's always best to buy a place free of tenants or the owner.

admin, they were a response to hfstalkercomm's moronic posts, which were first TrollControlled, and now removed altogether (hopefully she was, and not just the posts).

The apt is not rent controlled or stabilized. I wonder what is the difference between accepting the previous tenants of getting new ones. One of them might be that you get to use your common sense when deciding who to rent it to. Other, that the tenant might feel more territorial if he has been there previous to the new owner...

hey dwell,

i thought that if the purchase of a townhouse was gonna be used entirely as a main residency, a RS T could be at risk of losing the place. am i wrong here? is this "main residency" reason possible only with mkt rate T?

"If you buy a co-op occupied by a market T, then, you can refuse to renew the lease when it expires & thus, take possession of the apt."

It depends what Department you are in: I wouldn't be so sure if you were in the Second Department. Since I'm sure most people are thinking Manhattan, it's true, but not for brooklyn

"The lease is market rate, expiring 2014."

I see a red flag right away: who writes 4,5,6 year leases for residential units? I would immediately smell something "funny". And anyone who has been in a place for that length of time is going to end up being pretty "territorial" about it.

Also, as dwell alludes to and doesn't come right out and say: the owner probably already knows the buyout number for the tenant, and you don't. So, they aren't going to give you more of a discount than that number. As a result, you end up in a lose-lose situation: if you offer more than the price minus buyout, they accept it and get more $; if you don't "overpay" for the buyout, they don't accept the lower offer and buy the tenant out themselves.

So 30yrs, I am at a disadvantage even when i can actually take the tenants in? I thought it might be an advantage, since very few people will like to wait that long to inhabit the place. I guess that this will depend anyway in the offers the place gets.

Good point, 30yrs, re: buy out $ & lease length. Mimi, I'd say don't take on the burden of a buy out.

30yrs: you sure about 2nd dept? Citation, pleez.

30yrs: correct me if I'm wrong, but, I believe there's no owner occupancy procedure if someone buys a co-op/condo occupied by a RS or RC T.

dc: you're alluding to "Owner Occupancy". Short answer is you're correct. I assumed Mimi was discussing a coop/condo unit, not a TH. So, yes, generally speaking, in a TH (or a multiple dwelling), owner can seek to not renew due to owner occupancy. But don't do this unless you have a Landlord-Tenant lawyer review the situation prior to purchase.

http://www.dhcr.state.ny.us/Rent/FactSheets/orafac4.htm
Fact Sheet #4 - Lease Renewal in Rent Stabilized Apartments

"Reasons for Not Renewing a Lease

An owner can refuse to renew a lease for several reasons, some of which are:

1. The owner or a member of the owner's immediate family needs the apartment for their personal use and primary residence. If the tenant is a senior citizen, or disabled, special rules apply [See Fact Sheets on Special Rights of Senior Citizens and Special Rights of Disabled Persons].
2. The apartment is not used as the tenant's primary residence.
3. The owner wants to take the apartment off the rental market, either to demolish the building for reconstruction or use it for other purposes permitted by law.

However, when the owner does not offer the tenant a renewal lease for one of these reasons, the owner must give the tenant written notice of non-renewal during the lease offering time frame described in "The Lease Renewal Process" section of the Fact Sheet. Failure to serve this notice on the tenant during this time frame will entitle the tenant to a renewal lease."

mimi, do you know hte seller's motivation to sell and how much in debt he is (if so)?

dc: the motivation is bank filed lis pendens. Debt: sixty % of the asking price (the price "without" the tenant.)
dwell, I am planning to rent it out anyway, so, why not keep this tenant was my question. It is a multiple dwelling, market rate.
Tks everyone!

mimi, why isn't this up to the tenant? why are you trying to change the tenant's status solely for your convenience and the tenant's inconvenience?

Paikoff v. Harris

Hey 30yrs,

Seems Paikoff deals with the Martin Act & coop/condo conversion situations. I'm assuming Mimi's dealing with a rental multiple dwelling, so, not sure Paikoff applies here.

322 WEST 57TH OWNER LLC,
Petitioner-Landlord,
v.
PENHURST PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
Respondent-Tenant.
No. 63319/06.
March 19, 2007

"As explained in Paikoff v. Harris, 185 Misc.2d at 377:
It is apparent that the protections afforded
nonpurchasing tenants were necessitated by
the change in the owner's economic
incentives as a result of the conversion. In
the case of a rental building, it is to the
owner's economic benefit to retain a
nonobjectionable tenant who is paying a
market rent. In that situation, the owner's
interest coincides with the tenant's interest
in not being dislocated and with the public
interest in stable and undisrupted tenancies.
However, after a conversion, the apartment
may be more valuable to the owner empty
than occupied by a tenant, even one paying
a market rent. In that case, it is in the
owner's economic interest to evict the
tenant, and the interest of the owner
diverges from those of the tenant and the
public.

****** ******* *******

VI.Conclusions
In light of the Attorney General's acceptance of
the non-eviction plan for the subject residential
building, respondents are protected from “no cause”
holdover eviction proceedings by the Martin Act
(GBL § 352-eeee [2][c][ii], § 352-eeee [4] ).
Accordingly, the petitioner's holdover proceedings
against respondents are dismissed.
This constitutes the decision and order

Mimi,

Re: the Lis Pendens, please be very careful. My suggestion: Have an attorney review the situation. Bank's in process of foreclosing. I'm not saying your purchase is non-do-able, but ya gotta be very savvy.

"Hey 30yrs,

Seems Paikoff deals with the Martin Act & coop/condo conversion situations. I'm assuming Mimi's dealing with a rental multiple dwelling, so, not sure Paikoff applies here."

Hey, I answered an issue about market rate tenants in Coops, you asked for a citation, I gave one. Don't blame me that you mistook what she was asking about and I posted a response to your incorrect assumption (said with a smile - not looking to argue, just pointing out that i wasn't answering mimi's OP there, but look at what I quoted to see what the answer was to).

"Mimi,

Re: the Lis Pendens, please be very careful. My suggestion: Have an attorney review the situation. Bank's in process of foreclosing. I'm not saying your purchase is non-do-able, but ya gotta be very savvy."

I would not be overly concerned with a lis pendens on a piece of RE I was looking to buy. You're not going to close w/o mortgage release/satisfaction of mortage from the lender with or w/o the lis pendens. The only thing you have to worry about is if the house gets foreclosed on while you are in contract that you lose your deal, but given the situation I doubt that's a real issue (i.e. since the house isn't under water, right?). This is nothing a good title company can't easily handle (ok, so I guess make sure you get a good title company/agent).

Blame you?? 30, sweetie, don't get ya knickers in a twist. It's all good, just chill.

Don't call me sweetie unless you're about to serve me coffee or solicit me for ......... (the two groups who in general I don't take it as condescending from because it's endemic to their businesses). ======> :) <=========

go away in a huff!

Don't call you sweetie? ok. Can I call you surely?

I told you not to call me Shirley.

Why does mimi want 30 years input? He went away in a huff.

columbiacounty
about 6 weeks ago
ignore this person
report abuse
whow...thought you went off in a huff. stay there. huff is good. if you're gonna threaten to go away, you gotta stay away.