Rent control tenant in apt

1) There may be legitimate successors to that lease (domestic partner, family member who live for X years in the apt with deceased before death).
2) I believe the apt becomes RS. Of course, it's moot if the owner moves in.

See http://www.housingnyc.com/html/resources/faq/rentcontrol.html

- whether it becomes RS depends on # of apts in building & what the market rent is.

if the apt is a coop or condo it becomes a free market rental unless heirs
can successfully assert succesioin rights

thanks all

if the apt is a coop or condo it becomes a free market rental unless heirs
can successfully assert succesioin rights

what if the tenant has a child-lets say tenant is 90 and child is 60 but not currently on the lease- can tenant add her child to the lease and therefore give her succession rights?

Thanks again!

I believe the child must also occupy the apartment--for a certain number of years--in order for the child to be able to take over the lease.

http://www.housingnyc.com/html/resources/dhcr/dhcr30.html

5th/Gen:

1. succesion rights are determined by statute, administratuve regulation, and the decision
of NY's highest court in Braschi

2. your tenant can create successors by following certain procedures
3. DHCR at 25 Beaver Street in Manhattan up from the S.I. Ferry can answer many of your questions
4. it's on-line site might also do so

Thanks all! Much appreciated!

Apparently it gets tried... How did Faye get the apt transferred to her?
------------------
Now Faye Dunaway is a defendant in case No. 76667/11 in Manhattan housing court, just another rent-stabilized tenant facing eviction.

In a lawsuit filed Tuesday, her landlord claims that Ms. Dunaway, who pays $1,048.72 a month for a one-bedroom walk-up apartment in a century-old tenement building on East 78th Street, does not actually live there, but rather lives in California. The suit also names her son, Liam Dunaway O’Neill, whose father is the photographer Terry O’Neill, as a subtenant in the apartment.

Rent stabilization rules require tenants to live in the apartment they are renting as a primary residence, not as a second home. Ms. Dunaway, 70, does not appear to be living glamorously.

If Ms. Dunaway leaves, the landlord is likely to get far more rent. According to rental data tracked by the brokerage Citi Habitats, one-bedroom walk-up apartments on the Upper East Side currently rent for an average of $2,318 a month

Ms. Dunaway, 70, who at the peak of her career had a lavish apartment at the Eldorado, said she got the one-bedroom apartment in a walk-up building from her mentor, the playwright William Alfred, who died in 1999.

Just another example of rich a-holes abusing the system. I hope they evict the old bag and her son too.

"According to rental data tracked by the brokerage Citi Habitats, one-bedroom walk-up apartments on the Upper East Side currently rent for an average of $2,318 a month"

This apartment is on York avenue, and those numbers account for 5th, Madison, park.... One of these days, people will recognize there are (at least) two distinct markets. Until then, people exploit this stat left and right. I have seen countless investment prospectives claiming the upside in the deal is the difference from the "average UES" rent. Buyer beware....

...and I wonder how much this RS abuse happens when it's not a movie star, and there is no press

The LL should be able to sue her for the difference in market rent (the real numbers from that building)!

"Just another example of rich a-holes abusing the system."

Um, sadly Ms. Dunaway is not "rich".

She has a modest home in California -- with a mortgage -- and drives a 2007 Toyota Corolla. COROLLA! Not even a Camry.

I'm a big fan of Faye Dunaway (Chinatown is a must see movie) and while she's not living the life of Riley she' clearly is not in need of a NYC rent controlled apartment. The system is broken and this is yet another example. Faye Dunaway joins Cyndi Lauper & Nora Ephron.

did cyndi lauper win in court...i think she tried to fight the LL.

I think she won.

The Cyndi Lauper caper is a great story. It's laid out at http://decisions.courts.state.ny.us/fcas/FCAS_docs/2002FEB/30011977619962SCIV.PDF

In 2006, the owners of the Apthorp had to pay Cyndi and husband $400,000, in addition to rolling the rent back to $989 from $3750. They're still there in 10F as far as I know.

In sum, both parties tried to game the system. Lauper and husband then turned on their landlord confederates, and won big-time

http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/dgkeysearchdetail.cfm?trg=1&strucID=242901&imageID=417148&total=16&num=0&word=apthorp&s=1&notword=&d=&c=&f=&k=0&lWord=&lField=&sScope=&sLevel=&sLabel=&imgs=20&pos=16&e=w

The F-line was originally a 10-room, double exposure, WEA & courtyard facing apt. Not inconceivable that 10F is still a 10-room, plausible that 3kish was the going rent for a 10-room in the early 90s?

10F became a 2400 ft² two-bedroom when the Apthorp was split up in the 1930s. 9th and 11th floors are at http://nyre.cul.columbia.edu/projects/view/18020#images, and the 10th was the same. It's the same in the condo plans.

Maybe Cyndi thought she was getting a RS apartment, so the $3750 was credible in 1993. Or she could've paid key money to get the lease. There was a lot of back-and-forth in the case that the decision may not cover.