# NYC's Absurd Rent Control Laws: You Can't Even Evict A Tenant!



## tablemtn (May 2, 2006)

> but after a while the people who are willing and able to pay higher rents will no longer exist.


...unless there are not enough RESIDENTIAL UNITS to meet demand! That is the case in Manhattan. Landlords have their pick of paying tenants. They get to discriminate based on everything from income to bankruptcy history to the person's job. With rent control, the market is distorted, and perversely enough, it discourages developers from building an adequate supply of residential units. You ask the question, "what about all those poor people who won't be able to afford the rent?"

Hey, life can be tough. They'll have to move out. But I'd ask you this - what about all the people in non-rent-controlled spaces who have ALSO had to move out? What about all the people who would like to move in, but cannot, since all the non-rent-controlled spaces are so expensive? 

It would be better to let rents float freely for all residential units. The median price would almost certainly drop over time, thus making more affordable for more people to live there.


----------



## Xusein (Sep 27, 2005)

HirakataShi said:


> And yes people will travel long distances to work in the cities if that's where their jobs are located. There are people who wake up at 5am and travel 2 hours everyday from Chiba, Shizuoka, Kanagawa, Saitama, Ibaraki and Tochigi prefectures just to get to work in Tokyo.


That's madness.

From what I hear, that's starting to happen heavily in New York. People are moving as far as Pennsylvania, more than 100km west, to buy affordable housing, and drive 2-3 hours to their jobs in Manhattan. I'm no expert though.

High rents make people move out farther to cheaper areas, which brings sprawl.


----------



## TalB (Jun 8, 2005)

Let's not forget that Mike Bloomberg does favor a lot luxury developement being that he is rich himself.


----------



## Paddington (Mar 30, 2006)

TheKansan said:


> Do you honestly believe that if rent control didn't exist, suddenly millions of yuppies would move in and kick all of the middle class and lower class out of NYC?
> 
> If you do think that, you are insane. Market forces should determine rent.


The problem with NY right now is that there are too many yuppies. It's difficult to imagine a scenario with more yuppies moving in.

NY, Miami, and LA are cities that have large numbers of rich people and poor people servicing them, and a shrinking if not non-existant middle class in many parts of the city.


----------



## Paddington (Mar 30, 2006)

Without rent control, there would be more of an equalization of rents.

The landlord cares less about how much each tenant pays, and more about what his total take from his building is. Say he has two units right now, both with old tenants paying $500 each a month. But his costs (mortgage) are $2,000 a month. If one tenant moves out, the landlord will put the unit on the market for $1500 a month. So one tenant will continue to pay $500 but a new tenant coming in will have to pay $1500. 

Rent control is less about rich and poor, and more about screwing people over based on how recently they've arrived to the city.


----------



## TalB (Jun 8, 2005)

I don't think that it was right to end the Mitchell-Lama program, b/c it caused a number of city residents to be priced out.


----------



## krull (Oct 8, 2005)

*HOBO'S SWEET DEAL *
*$104 APT. HE WON'T USE*


By DAREH GREGORIAN and MARK BULLIET 
December 22, 2006

Vagrant Michael Tsitsires might not be home for Christmas - but at least he'll have one. 

*An appeals court yesterday denied a landlord's bid to boot the homeless-by-choice man from his $104-a-month apartment on West 57th Street because it's not his "primary residence." *

Tsitsires, who's in his 50s, is mentally ill and spends most of his time outdoors in a 10-block "safe zone" around the area of his dilapidated apartment building at 400 W. 57th St., usually sleeping in Central Park, the Appellate Term ruling says. 

The landlord, TOA Construction, said that means his "primary residence" is the streets - and he should clear out of his studio in the former Windemere building. 

Civil Court Judge Gerald Lebovits agreed, and gave them the OK to give Tsitsires the bum's rush. "This court is not condemning [Tsitsires] to a life of homelessness," he ruled last year. "Whether by choice or circumstance, [he] is already homeless." 

The Appellate Term reversed that decision, saying they refused to find a tenant "maintains his primary residence on a park bench." 

The panel noted that *Tsitsires, who gets Supplemental Security Income disability payments, had lived in the building for 35 years and keeps his "his clothing and personal belongings in the apartment and received mail there." *

The 2-1 decision also found his "homeless" lifestyle is the product of deep, longstanding emotional difficulties, fueled by a panic disorder and substance abuse problems. He is so far gone, his testimony had to be taken at a hotel within his "safe zone." 

The dissenting judge, William McCooe, said Tsitsires caused his own problems and should get the boot from the nearly vacant, boarded-up eight-story building. 

"He maintained a homeless lifestyle likely caused, one psychiatrist explained, by substance abuse. Another psychiatrist stated that he is claustrophobic and hates his apartment" - and both said he won't take his medication, the judge wrote. 

Tsitsires' lawyer, Trisha Lawson, said she was "thrilled" by the majority decision, and called her client "a nice, gentle man." 

Tsitsires could not be reached. Neighbor Lascelle Wright said their building - a former SRO - isn't the nicest, but "at least I have heat and hot water."


Copyright 2006 NYP Holdings, Inc.


----------



## krull (Oct 8, 2005)

hno: Meanwhile blight on a prime location in Midtown Manhattan (The Homeless guy apartment is in this building)...


----------

