MFNYC

jwsl, the very odd thing is my son, met up with a UDel friend who I believe knew your D! He mentioned that they went to an apartment that a fellow UDel girl was renting for the week. He said it was a small studio, walk-up on 26th St. & 6th av. Was that your D?

Small world if it is! I'm glad it worked out. My son is no way mature enough to stay alone in an apartment in an unfamiliar city by himself, in fact I doubt he'd even want to. Sounds like your D is.

Bowsprit

Just to be clear: My comments were only directed toward the decision of going forward with renting an illegal apt. in NYC and not to the issue of age.

NeoPatrick

I think it's time some people gave up on this "illegal" sublet thing. Just because many New Yorkers live in rented apartments doesn't mean there aren't many CONDOMINIUMS in NYC which really do allow owners to rent out their apartments. Another recent thread turned to ugliness against someone until it was finally decided where he is renting -- in a condo which DOES allow rentals. Then suddenly the ranters had nothing more to say.

Maybe it's time to just "get over it"?

sf7307

Patrick, it's still illegal even if the condo allows it. Transient rentals = hotel = permits and taxes. Very unlikely the apartment owners have the proper permits or pay the required taxes. If the condo allows it, noone will get turned in, and it likely won't be a problem, but that doesn't mean it isn't illegal.

SusieQQ

As sf7307 says, just because the condo "looks the other way' doesn't make it legal. I guess to some people it doesn't matter that you're doing something completely unethical. The same can be said for example if you take a piece of rock from the Petrified Forest, walk on protected sand dunes, don't tip waitstaff, sneak into venues without paying, etc.

michelleNYC

Here's the thing (perhaps you might see it from my perspective): I've spend A TON of money on my home here in New York City. My neighbor, who perhaps would like to make a little extra money on the side, decides he/she would like to VRBO their place and now I have "transients" walking my hallway, disturbing my peace and perhaps (who know) engaging in dangerous or illegal behavior. There's no way to monitor what these folks are going to do and why would they care since they are coming from who-knows-where and probably don't give a crap! Think about how some people treat rental cars. Sorry, but I would NOT be happy about this and would take very strong action against any owner who pulled this.

jwsl

to MFNYC sure sounds like my daughter's place! It is truly a small world.

NeoPatrick

michelle, thank you for letting me know that the problem with VRBO is that travelers who do short term rentals tend to be the lowclass types who do more illegal and dangerous activity and are considered "transients". Wow. I'm almost embarrassed to admit now that I am a regular VRBO renter. Oddly I've owned several condominiums (and live in one myself) and so far it's always been owners who did the illegal things. It's one thing if a condominium association forbids rentals all together. But some do allow rentals, and to assume that anyone renting an apartment from an owner will automatically be a trouble maker is far from the truth.

If your building allows rentals, are you saying you'd still be angry if someone rented one according to rules?
But no, I DON'T see it from your perspective. Actually if someone in my complex rented to a troublemaker, we'd have them out of there in no time. It's been the OWNER troublemakers who have always been our problem and virtually impossible to get rid of them. Most renters here have been wonderful people.

michelleNYC

An owner formally renting an apartment to an individual is one thing - they must go through a credit and background check, etc. and must meet overall approval of the owner - when you "rent" via VRBO, you have absolutely no idea who this person is nor any idea of their character, ability to incur costs should there be damages, etc. Anyway, we've extensively beaten the dead horse and can agree to disagree.

NeoPatrick

Yes indeed we can.

I recently mentioned on another thread about Worldwide Plaza -- a huge condominium building which does have some VRBO and other short term and executive rentals in it. It does allow owners to rent out apartments. Are they 100% legal? Well, no because there is NO way to do that advance approval and meeting with a board to rent an apartment a month or two fin advance to an out of town renter. Is the board and the management aware of this? Yes. Are the realtors who sell and resell the apartments aware of this? Yes, they even mention that it is standard procedure when selling apartments to buyers.
So why does it continue to happen? Because there is a rule in place which in the event of a problem, a bad renter can be evicted -- but most people with common sense have LEARNED from experience, that these "high paying" executive rental lessees are rarely if ever a problem, and they know that the system in place works even though the "strict" rules cannot and will not be followed. People who think all renters are horrible transient people who will trash the building and lower property values would be smart not to buy in such a building. Those who do buy them seem to have learned that it has not been a problem for them.

Austin

So all the apartments on www.homeaway.com are also illegal?

nytraveler

There is a difference in renting out an apartment illegally based on NYC hotel, tax and fire laws (I don;t like it but if it's nt my building so not my business) and the people who are doing this against the co-op or condo association rules.

In that case I do object- and strongly - since as noted above the person who is renting out their apartment without aproval (which would not be given without review of detailed financial info, background check and interview) of the board is abrogating their contract - and defeating the purpose of the co-op/condo (allowing owners to ensure living conditions they want and the financial stability and physical well-being of the building).

We have a significant portion of our financial reserves locked up in our apartment - and have not spent the money to purchase, combine and renovate them to give strangers (who may well be perfectly pleasant - or not) aceess to our private residence.

That is the part that people who don't live in co-ops or condos don;t get. The building is a private residence - no open to the public. And each tenant is legall responsible for anyone they invite ino thebuilding. With relaives or friends they presumably know the people are reliable. With strangers, they may be loud partiers, they may not be careful about building security, or they may have several loud children. Not waht we pay all this money for.

NeoPatrick

Excuse me, but I DO live in a condo and I DO get it. I am just not of the belief that charging high rents for executive rentals demeans the quality of my life, nor do I believe that having some renters in the building who abide by rules will lower my property values and ruin my financial reserve. Thank God, some of you don't live in a Ritz Carlton -- heaven forbid -- total strangers check in and out day by day -- it must be a horrible financial disaster for the corporation who owns it to have those transients ruining their property! Do you assume that people who check in to high end hotels are all troublemakers too?


Please tell me how you assure that owners don't have loud parties or loud children? I think some of you truly live in a dream world. Once again -- my experience with condominium ownership is that renters are often MORE respectful of the rules than many owners who have the attitude "I OWN this place, so nobody can tell me what to do". Congratulations if that is not the case in your condo. It HAS been the case in several condos I've owned, but renters have NEVER been a problem.

nytraveler

In a Ritz Carlton you are renting a room - the same as all the other strangers - and there is a full staff, including security, to deal with any problems. The hotel is makng money off all the guests, has financial guarantees in advance, and can summarily remove any that are undesirable. (And no - I would not want to live in a Ritz Carlton.)

In a building with 40 to 50 apartments you are at much closer proximity to other tenants (or non tenants) and there is no security staff. There are farily strict house rules, which potential purchasers are made aware of. And tenants are personally interviewed by the board - as well as having full fnancial and backgroud checks. I know that my neighbors haven;t been convicted of serious crimes, have seen their tax reurns for the past several years (at time of application for purchase, since I'm on the board), and know how many kids they have and what ages.

People naturally have parties, esp at holidays - but they aren;t hideously loud and don;t last until 3 am. Kids are kids - but the parents of any that create problems in public areas (this has happened only once or twice) are notified-and if it became a problem they would have to cover the cost of any damage -and possibly face penalties, including evication.

We have turned down as purcahsers 1)a guy who owed alimony/child support to 2 ex wives and was running some sort of all cash business, 2)a couple of college girls (the parents of one tried to buy the apartment for her and an unidentified friend wihout telling us) and 3)a family with 3 kids trying to buy a one bedroom apartment. Not criminals (maybe #1) but not people we want to live with.

And no - this isn;t a "white gove" building - it's middle class - but people who prefer to live in a fairly orderly atmosphere. And have paid a lot for the right to do so.

NeoPatrick

I never meant the Ritz Carlton as a direct comparison, but only as an example to show how silly the idea is that people doing short term rentals are generally transient troublemakers. I have no idea where the idea comes from that the typical couple who would do a one week rental for their week in New York are going to be up at 3 AM having wild parties. What you don't understand about typical VRBO renters is astounding! I think we are entirely on two different wavelengths here.

But I really don't get this --"In a building with 40 to 50 apartments you are at much closer proximity to other tenants (or non tenants)." ?????????????

BUT yes we are probably talking about two entirely different things -- I was talking about renting a beautifully furnished apartment in a "white glove", concierge building like Worldwide Plaza and at a rate equal to or above most deluxe hotels and for a week or perhaps a month only. People renting them are doing so because they want a full apartment experience even thought they'd normally be staying in a deluxe hotel. If you're talking about a cheaper building and owners renting out their places for $100 a night or less, well then yes -- now I fully understand your worries. Totally different situation.

michelleNYC

Sigh... Patrick, you (and others like you) are the exception, not the rule, unfortunately. Here is an example for you (and then I'm done with this topic). Our close friends (a couple, no kids) live in a very high-end condo close to Lincoln Center. Their neighbor down the hall was called to London for work reasons and would be gone for close to four months. Said neighbor enlisted the "help" of a friend to rent the apartment on a short-term basis while he was gone (hey, what's a little extra cash?). Said friend committed a number of critical errors: 1) he listed the apartment on Craig's List albeit for a fairly substantial amount of money; 2) the friend became lazy about "screening" the "renters", after the first few were without incident; 3) did not heed warnings from residents who noticed the "variety" of strangers in the building (decent sized building but with few, very large apartements). The last "renter" caused the biggest problem. Not only did he (and his numerous "girlfriends") completely trash the place, worst of all terrible situations, he would not vacate the apartment at the end of the "rental" period and had to be evicted (and obviously stopped paying any "rent" for over a month while the eviction was being handled) which was terrible for the owner AND his neighbors. This is, of course, partially to blame on the owner's bad judgment on a variety of fronts but, let me assure you, this happens frequently, unfortunately. One would assume that if you're charging over $3k per week, that would eliminate the "bad element" but it doesn't. Eviction is one of the biggest problems owners who illegally rent face.

NeoPatrick

Yes, I believe you. I could tell you an even worse story about the couple who bought a unit in my complex for over half a million dollars. They were screened, investigated, and approved for ownership. They ended up selling drugs, had a multitude of animals living in the place, and had to be evicted. Let me tell you -- evicting OWNERS of a condo is way more difficult that evicting renters. It cost our condo a LOT of money. If they had been renters, it would have been a snap by comparison.

Another owner was a horrible alcoholic WITH a gun. He shot the tires out of a car which parked where he didn't like it. He screamed at the top of his lungs some mornings and would shoot the gun into the air because birds chirping in the trees bothered him. Fortunately for us he DIED, and his wife sold the apartment.

There have been numerous rentals -- both short and long term -- in our very small complex. In the 15 years I've lived here, there has never been a single complaint about a single renter.

You are right. There are a lot of bad apples in this world. Some rent, some buy. What exactly was your point about a bad incident with renters if it wasn't to suggest that renters are bad and owners are good? Meanwhile, of course, you've even admitted that the owners who rented to these bad apples didn't properly screen them or check them out. It sounds like it was primarily the owners of that apartment who suffered the most, but admittedly they brought it on themselves both by not screening and by ignoring the signs of trouble. And I have yet to hear anything that would make it different if someone simply let their relatives or friends "housesit" for them while they were away. Bad people are bad people. Trying to pretend it is the fact they are "renting" a place that makes them bad is just plain silly.

Nikki

I think one of the reasons there is so much misunderstanding of this issue is that New York has the unique form of apartment ownership as co-ops that are far more common there than anywhere else. In a co-op, the owners do screen all purchasers as described above, seeing detailed financial information and personal information about their prospective neighbors and having the power to block sales to people they don't want. This gives a far greater degree of control over the population of a building than most other people have. People who have no experience of this type of ownership (which would be just about everyone who hasn't lived in New York) may not understand exactly how it works.

In a condo, on the other hand, the owners of the individual condos in a building do not get to decide who buys any of the other units. They do not see the financial and personal information of their neighbors. The issues of renting apartments as vacation rentals in these properties are the same as they would be in condos in any other city. And vacation rentals are quite common in condos in many cities and tourist destinations. All would have to deal with the issue of eviction as described in the previous post. And we have no way of knowing whether the condominium regulations are followed in each instance, but again this is true in every other city where vacation rentals are much more common.

New York is unique because of the large percentage of apartments that are owned as co-ops.

In the case of the apartment rented by the original poster here, she says above that the person renting it out actually owns the building. If I understand the discussion above, this would make the rental legal.

Bowsprit

>

There's no guarantee of that based on the information given. There isn't enough information available to determine if the apartment is a legal rental.

Generally speaking: Most NYC SHORT TERM rentals are illegal. The rest are scams. The ability for the tourist to determine either status is limited, time consuming and requires more experience than one visiting may possess.

However, there are plenty of affordable apart-hotels in NYC that are perfectly suited for an apartment like stay and are perfectly legal. The status of apartment rentals in NYC has nothing to do with other experiences while renting other apartments in other cities; NYC law is unique in this regard.

Rent short-term apartments at your own risk and to the detriment of the legitimate tenants of New York City apartments.

NeoPatrick

"Generally speaking: Most NYC SHORT TERM rentals are illegal. The rest are scams."

HUH????

Please read that again. What it says is that there are NO legal short term rentals in NYC that aren't scams! That is absurd. There are a number of legal short term rentals that are also NOT scams. But saying "most are illegal and the rest are scams" is just plain wrong! I think some of you need to get over yourselves, your false statemets, and your attitude. It's one thing to say there are a lot of scams and illegal rentals in NYC, but quite another (and horribly wrong) to say there ARE no legal short term rentals that aren't scams!