It seems we are making a lot of progress in getting the Loft Board to adopt some modest changes to the proposed rules that will help tenants a lot. Most of the issues we raised in testimony in July were seriously considered on August 2.
Please come out to the next LB meeting 2pm September 6 @ 22 Reade St, Manhattan, to show them we are paying attention.
Here is our thank-you letter summarizing the issues and their responses. There are also a few issues which got lost in a very active discussion.
Letters may be more important than testimony! So please write letters explaining the importance of the changes we are asking, or explaining anything you don’t think is understood. Even a letter just saying you support NYCLT’s position on X Y and Z is helpful! Send to Executive Director Lanny Alexander <email@example.com>
Dear NYC Loft Board:
Thank you for the serious consideration you have given to tenant concerns raised at the recent hearings. In reviewing the rules for the past hearings, we gained new appreciation for the protections offered by the Law and the care which was taken in the design of the Rules which implement it. However, it is very complex to convert commercial buildings to residential use and change the relationship between landlords and tenants, and there are circumstances which the 1980s rules didn’t consider.
2-10: One such circumstance is that landlords wouldn’t properly file their Sale of Rights records as required by Rule 2-10, and would secretly hold onto them until a tenant has expended significant time and money in pursuing a coverage or overcharge claim. We deeply appreciate the Board’s desire to find a stronger remedy, but if one can’t be found, we ask that this fine be raised significantly. It is worth far more than $500 to a landlord to hold onto this “get out of jail free card”.
2-12: We also appreciate the serious thought which was put into making the legal rent more accountable and transparent in Rule 2-12. We are glad that the Loft Board is considering new ways to make it easier for tenants to find out their legal maximum rent, and easier for the Loft Board to process these requests. We urge the Loft Board to also institute a notification requirement on landlords so that it is easy for tenants to distinguish between a legal rent adjustment and a spurious illegal increase.
2-06.2: Thank you for agreeing to clarify the language about use-based escalators in Rule 2-06.2. We hope you can make these escalators easier to understand, and easier to challenge when they are wrong.
2-09: Thank you for understanding the problem with subletting restrictions in Rule 2-09 that could cause prime tenants to be in automatic violation of a rule that hasn’t been published yet. The restrictions should come into effect on the later of the effective date of the rule and the date of coverage.
2-09: We also appreciate the deep interest by a few members of the board in the prime-sub problem, the subject of Rule 2-09. If the rule is this confusing to the members of the Board, many of whom have legal training, you can imagine what consternation it causes tenants! We hope that the Board will continue the dialog with tenants to understand the landscape of tiered leases and the Rule, written when the prime-sub business model was not as well developed or as fluid as it is today.
2-02: Thank you for your concern over legal harassment and the more subtle forms of harassment that afflict loft tenants. From your discussion we understand that frivolous lawsuits and collections claims, and attempts to serve the Narrative Statement Waiver under false pretenses, should already be considered harassment under the current rule. It makes sense that importing the lists from 2-11.1 would be restricting – as long as it is clear that all attempts to infringe on tenant rights should be considered “quality of life” harassment.
2-11.1, 2-12: Finally, thank you for agreeing to keep Rules 2-11.1 and 2-12 open until Rule 2-01 has been heard. We look forward to reading Rule 2-01 and seeing how it interacts with these rules, in particular how the new provisions for “no work” permits affect rent adjustments.
We are ever grateful for your diligence in listening to our concerns and weighing solutions. We attach an addendum of a few issues which didn’t seem to get adequate attention in the last meeting’s crowded agenda.
Addendum: Unresolved concerns
|2-09||landlord consent||Define “landlord consent” so that a tenant who moved in after June 2010 to an eligible unit (where the rights have not been bought) is eligible if the landlord accepts their rent directly. Make it easier for tenants to attain coverage, and easier for the Loft Board to determine eligibility.|
|2-06.2||liability for illegal overcharges||Please add language to make it clear that illegal overcharges prior to the effective date of the rule can be used as a defense in collection or holdover claims. Many tenants face large “past due” notices from their landlords because they have refused to pay illegal increases the landlord attempted to make since June 2010, even being taken to court or having collections agencies hound them. As the rule is written, it is clear the tenant can retrieve any illegal overcharges they paid, but there is no protection for the tenant who refused to pay them.|
|2-06.2||no repayment of overcharges through a discount||Overcharges should be repaid in a lump sum or on a payment plan, not as a discount on rent. Not only is the rent changing with milestone increases, making accounting difficult, but if the building changes hands or a tenant leaves, it will be almost impossible to make sure the rent is correct and debts have been settled.|