Coop with a rent stabilized tenant in place
Started by noob
about 15 years ago
Posts: 30
Member since: Sep 2009
Discussion about
Can someone please enlighten me on the caveats of buying a coop as an investment with a rent stabilized tenant in place other than that the tenant can't be removed unless he/she dies or moves out (assuming that its cash positive given the current rent and monthly payments)?
Can someone please enlighten me on the caveats of eating a turkey and mayo sandwich for lunch that has been sitting outside for a few days during the summer other than that the turkey might have gone bad and the mayo might have gone bad and I might get sick (assuming that the bread is pumpernickle)?
Howdy....my family was in the real estate business in Manhattan until 2001. We had many issues with rent controlled/stabilized tenants and the difficulty in removing them. We had a case where a tenant was in violation of the law by using a rent controlled apt. as a pied a terre and also having an income that far exceeded the limits allowed. Although we won the case in court, it was impossible to remove the tenant. We also had instances where an elderly tenant would have a grandchild move in and take over the lease upon their death. As they were related, the rent laws allowed this. I advise you against buying an occupied co-op as an investment. Las Vegas has better odds.
NY tenant law allows relatives of stabilized and controlled tenants to take over their leases
in certain circumstances. Also spouses.
thanks
Noob:
I have bought about 70-75 such apartments over the years, and follow the market for them
closely. I haven't seen a decent, much less really good, deal in many years.
hey rb345, can you describe exactly what a "good" deal is? thanks
I think there are ways to boot the rent controlled tenant if you're willing to move in and make it your primary residence for a period of time.
Derek:
Rent Stabilization Code section 2524 and the terms of every New York State offering plan specifically prohibit evicting
rent-stabilized and rent-controlled tenants for alleged owner occupancy. Unless your tenant engages in the conduct speci-
fied in section 2524, his or her lease must be renewed. Even if you fail to give your tenant a renewal lease, the lease
renews automatically; only difference is that you forfeit your rent increases by not giving the tenant a renewal lease.
To rb345: what kind of numbers/other factors do you look for when evaluating these deals? And is it possible to speak with the tenant(s) before making a purchase, to get an idea of their plans?
"How's your health?"
"If ready to kick, any grandchildren looking to move in with you for the final couple of years?"
Rent-regulated coops/condos present unique investment challenges and risks. Because I am still open to purchasing
more, I dont want to reveal my purchasing criteria. That much said, three real life experiences will help under-
score what I am talking about:
:
1. years ago I turned down an offer to be given 4 well-located doorman 1-bds for free
2. three sets of investors who bought five units each in the same coop ended up losing all their apts withon months
Then there's the Guyanese attorney practising in NYC who called me years ago for help. He bought a 2-bd in 1 west
80's brownstone for $100,000 with a 97 year old rent-controlled tenant, and an annual negative cash flow of about $10,000.
After his tenant turned 105, the tenant voluntarily checked into a nursing home. Being the loving grandfather that
he was, he had thoughtfully provided for his ATTORNEY grandson. If you've ever watched Discovery Channel nature films
of feeding hyenas, you know how that story ended.
The grandson, being a humanitarian, offered the owner, who by then was had sunk about $200,000 into the apartment,
$20,000 to buy it from the owner. The owner reached out to me for advise. I told him to take the $20,000.
Hey REB - you seem very knowledgeable about this issue -- but I thought that tenants under 62 could be removed by people who plan to occupy the unit. Or is the reality different?
Thanks
9 NYCRR � 2524.4
� 2524.4 Grounds for refusal to renew lease, or in hotels, discontinuing a hotel tenancy, without order of the DHCR
The owner shall not be required to offer a renewal lease to a tenant, or in hotels, to continue a hotel tenancy, and may commence an action or proceeding to recover possession in a court of competent jurisdiction, upon the expiration of the existing lease term, if any, after serving the tenant with a notice as required pursuant to section 2524.2 of this Part, only on one or more of the following grounds:
(a) Occupancy by owner or member of owner's immediate family.
(1) An owner who seeks to recover possession of a housing accommodation for such owner's personal use and occupancy as his or her primary residence in the City of New York and/or for the use and occupancy of a member of his or her immediate family as his or her primary residence in the City of New York, except that tenants in a noneviction conversion plan pursuant to section 352-eeee of the General Business Law may not be evicted on this ground on or after the date the conversion plan is declared effective.
You posted the answer: "except that tenants in a noneviction conversion plan pursuant to section 352-eeee of the General Business Law may not be evicted on this ground on or after the date the conversion plan is declared effective."
I don't think so -- I don't think that provision applies to a single family buying a single unit/set of contiguous units. There was a big case about this in the EV a couple years ago if I recall. But I'd love to get a real answer.
There are a bunch of townhouses on the UWS with what look like just one or two rent-stabilized or -controlled tenants and several vacant units and I wonder how difficult it would be to convert them for a single family's use - not an investor. I'm guessing the answer is difficult at best, but if the tenants are under 62 is it still impossible?