Sessanta rent increase

That's what happens when you rent. What did you expect? Every year to get a free two months and use of the gym? Now that they got you, they got you, unless you want to move yearly.
Haha, rent stabullshit.

My rent is 3150, but the legal rent is something crazy, like $6500, did they raise it beyond that??

Just send it back saying you'll only pay the rent you had this year (Maybe + 421a increase) and see what happens

"see what happens"

Enjoy the back and forth for the next few months, basically increasing your desperate tone each letter you send until your landlord has you at the point where he wins because there's probably only one new development this year where you can get the two months free rent, although you know how the renewal drama will go in just another 14 months:
Mister Landlord, Mister Landlord, but I can only afford $3150 per month, what with all my medicines and I have to eat too. Please Mister Landlord, otherwise I'll have to give up the cat and sell my television.

Yup.

theres so much inventory its laughable how landlords are trying to play games. its gonna end up being just as bad as last year if not worse.

Please Mister Landlord, when I looked on Streeteasy it said rents are down, why are you increasing mine? It isn't fair. How will I afford the cat food if you increase my rent?

> That's what happens when you rent.

And 20% declines (leveraged) are what happens when you own.

I'll easily take the former...

"Please Mister Landlord, when I looked on Streeteasy it said rents are down, why are you increasing mine? It isn't fair. How will I afford the cat food if you increase my rent?"

Please Mr. Government, please prop up the price of my overpriced condo. I heard the economy is doing better, why am I still underwater?

How will I afford maintenance payments, the taxes that go up every year, and the cleaning solution for the human poop in my vestibule now that I can't refinance and take cash out.

SheaCMB, they took a % of legal rent, and added 421a to my current preferential. It's still a lot, considering economy, inventory, and "stabilization" expectations.

DaBulls, you're not helping. Go away.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/realestate/18Sqft.html?ref=realestate

"Q What incentives are you offering renters?

A We were giving a month free rent, but currently we are not offering any rental concessions. Our apartment buildings are 100 percent occupied."

"DaBulls, you're not helping. Go away."

I am helping Looking4more. I'm setting you right for the long term. It might be painful to realize that you aren't getting another 2 months free and a government stabilized rental. But the sooner you realize it, the sooner you can act on it and buy and lock in your value.

Rent stabi;ization is MEANINGLESS is your starting rent is well below the legally allowed rent. Your landlord can charge in your case up to $6500 a month. You are stuck.

yep. they were pretty sleazy (big surprise) about disclosing preferential versus legal rent during the lease signing process. but i figured they'd pull this. will be interesting to see how successful they are in jacking up prices.

what % increase in rent are they looking for?

Yeah, my leasing agent (Citi habitats) was also VERY sleazy about claiming my bldg (a different one) was both brand new and rent controlled. Having been burned before, I researched it, and confronted him, and he said I was wrong, then I sent him reams of websites that said he was wrong, then he said he woudl look into it, and low and behold yes the legally allowed rent in most of these places is WAY higher than the "preferentail rent." WHich makes me question the ethics of not just brokers or leasing agentss - but the very program itself. How IS IT that you can get tax breaks in return for building "rent controlled" units in Harlem, HellS Kitchen, Fidi, etc, but have the "legally allowed" rent be FAR higher than market rate rents were even in the peak times of 2006-2007, and over double what they are now? Its seems farcicle. I would love a Jonathan Miller type to opine on this someday.

I think Sessanta doenst mean something so pleasant in Italian. Wondering about your neighbors all this time?

Looking... You sent me to the website for my own landlord (Rosenyc.com) and it used to say "ask about our move in incentives" (a free month's rent) but that offer is gone now.
Lots of Brodsky stuff in the Sessanta neighborhood and their site (brodsky.org - click on each address for availability) does have One Month Free or One Month OP at the top.
Good luck.
Let us know what you find out about the rental market.

jason10006
1 day ago
ignore this person
report abuse Rent stabi;ization is MEANINGLESS is your starting rent is well below the legally allowed rent. Your landlord can charge in your case up to $6500 a month. You are stuck.

actually the LEGAL rent is by law supposed to appear on the lease. if not your landlord is in violation and you can break your lease. i have never seen a stabilized lease that didn't include this info.

i think it is interesting that except for the asshole bear marco, that the tone of this thread shows that landlords are done playing games with people.

Instead of us guessing whether rents really will increase and free months have gone away, can we talk about real things that may drive demand for housing?

Like, does anyone actually know what the hiring situation for law firms, investment banks and the like is this year? These are the people who will need to flood the city looking for apartments to rent that will drive prices and concessions.

"actually the LEGAL rent is by law supposed to appear on the lease. if not your landlord is in violation and you can break your lease. i have never seen a stabilized lease that didn't include this info. "

Yes, it did appear. But the Citi habitats leasing agent working for the landlord claimed that it was "rent controlled" and that my rent (much LOWER than the legal rent) would in fact NEVER go up more than the rent board allowed. he told this to all the tenants (its a new building.) Only I was not so stupid as to believe a broker/agent. So I researched it, and found that in fact future rent increases would be based off of the higher legal rent.

When I said I thought the preferential rent (more than half the legal rent) meant that I was not in any real sense under "rent control", he said no, I was wrong, and he was 100% sure he right. His "boss" at Citihabitats backed him. Only when I showed him the exact language from the legal code did he say he would "check with the landlord" and indeed, i was right.

Utter, complete sleaze. And typical of brokers. Say anything to get you in the door.

I'm aware of the preferential rent vs. the stabilized rent (and I think you mean Rent Stabilized vs. Rent Controlled). Jason, very good job actually reading the lease and the riders, being educated and challenging the landlord's agents. There's no one out there but you protecting yourself, with the possible exception, and I know this might make people flip out, a GOOD rental broker who has a GOOD REPUTATION that you are aware of in advance, not just some young nice guy or gal.

The most logical question on a one year lease anyway, is what happens in the second year. I know someone who signed a lease recently, was given the run-around on that question until it because somewhat obvious that the agent might have to find someone else, and then a two year lease was offered. Otherwise I've heard of people getting explicit provisions that the next years' rent only goes up by a certain maximum percentage (which you might as well assume IS the percentage).

Lastly, keep in mind, if you have concessions, you aren't getting those concessions next year. I don't like looking at "net effective rent" unless you are truly looking to be there for just one year. You get one or you get two free months, but the rent is the rent that you pay in those non-free months and will be the basis for the future.

Well in my case its POSSIBLE the broker was just stupid. But I got 3 free months on a 26 month lease, with the same rent for the 23 months, so I am not worried until Sept. 2011. But a general rule of thumb is dont just beleive your broker willy-nilly, especially if they are employed by the landlord.

move....

THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU RENT

- now, if you had bought that place, you would ALREADY be paying twice as much - so it wouldnt hurt.

n

'Enjoy the back and forth for the next few months, basically increasing your desperate tone each letter you send until your landlord has you at the point where he wins because there's probably only one new development this year where you can get the two months free rent, although you know how the renewal drama will go in just another 14 months:
Mister Landlord, Mister Landlord, but I can only afford $3150 per month, what with all my medicines and I have to eat too. Please Mister Landlord, otherwise I'll have to give up the cat and sell my television.'

DaBulls: you are an idiot. And a jerk. You should learn how to treat people with respect, even if you disagree with their point of view.

Looking4More: send them a polite but firm letter telling them you would not pay more than your current rent. If they reject it, move. I do not know your situation, but assuming you have no family and/or other factors that make moving difficult, you can find plenty of good apartments for $3,000-3,500.

Its a 1-bed right? One bath? There are lots of doorman units downtown in your range:

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/rentals/downtown-manhattan/rental_type:frbo,brokernofee,brokerfee|price:2500-3500|beds:1|baths%3E=1|amenities:doorman

ukrguy, the jerk is the person who gives a man a fish instead of teaching him to fish. Hunger is satisfied for the day, but the problem of reliance on others remains for the long term. Renting is a short term, unnatural solution. Better that Looking4More learn that now, instead of relying on nicey nice advice like sending a "polite but firm letter".

Also ukrguy, even if the person manages to convince the landlord with that "polite but firm letter" that he shouldn't pay more in current rent, the effective rent will still be significantly higher because those "free" months to induce the original lease won't be available. At $3150 per month for 12 months on a 14 month lease, the first year's effective rent was $2700, and that 2nd year rent will be $3150, or 16.7% higher. How many other expenses do you think that the poster has that are up 1/6th in just one year?

Endless reams of historical data show that owners and renters in the US would be (and have been) equal in terms of financial gain/loss in terms of owning versus renting, all else equal. We have data on this in the US going back to the 1890s. Over the long term, you are no better off renting than buying. This is why there are so many articles lately in the Economist, FT, Wall Street journal etc with headlines like "Owning A Home Should Not be an Investment". I will take Robert Schiller's expertise on this subject over some guy named "DaBulls."

I will climb into my computer and climb out of yours and slap you if you retort with some anecdotal evidence. Everyone has a story. I am talking about aggregate data.

However, if you INSIST - had I bought at the times when I had the money to do so, I would have been screwed every time, based on subsequent job loss or the general tanking of the job market. So for ME I have been unambiguously better off renting. However, for every one of me there has been someone better off owning. Thus what i say above.

I'm thinking of moving into this building. What kind of increases are they putting on people? (% or dollar amount over the ACTUAL monthly rent (not including the free month(s))?

aljf, they go for the maximum increase permissible by law: 3% on 1 year or 6% on 2 year lease (LEGAL rent!) PLUS 2.2% surcharge for section 421a.

From my personal experiences, not all landlords/management companies are greedy. In this case, the owner, Larry Ginsberg, has to recoup his Pozi scheme losses :)

but if the rent is $3000K but the maximum rent by law was $6000, do you mean that they raise the rent to ($6000*1.03*1.022) or to ($3000*1.03*1.022) or to ($3000 + ($6000*0.03*0.022)?

isn't the maximum increase of 3% only on rent stabilized apts? if the apartment is market, can't they raise it to whatever they want?

Same thing happened with Equitiable on the West Side. The apartments are renting below the rent stabalized amount which gives the building owner considerable flexibilitity to raise rents.

right, but how bad is it? are they raising above market prices?