Skip to main content

Today's Poll: Should landlords be held accountable for conduct of tenants?

By Howard B. Owens
Thomas Mooney

Should landlords be responsible for renting to decent law obeying citizens? Should the landlord be responsible for changing the community fabric of a neighborhood from decent to disgusting?

I ask every landlord when you are interviewing a potential renter (if this even happens .) Ask yourself ,Would I want to live next to these people that I am renting to ? If the answer is yes , then rent to them .

Better judgment and better up keep of the so called trouble rentals is what we are asking for .

May 29, 2013, 8:49am Permalink
Kyle Couchman

That may be so Thomas, but you may rent to decent law abiding citizens after screening your applicants, but in today's society those are also the good and kind people that end up helping friends and family that may not be so good. The one who take advantage or flat out take over. Then what? Evict the decent person? What if your decent renter was a Lowes employee, who then had to take in people to help with rent cause they couldnt move out?

Once again people dont realize that Landlord can have their hands tied by the system of laws set down from State and Federal. For example straight from the State AG's guide of Tenant's Rights, did you know that...

APARTMENT SHARING
It is unlawful for a landlord to restrict occupancy of an apartment
to the named tenant in the lease or to that tenant and immediate
family. When the lease names only one tenant, that tenant may share the apartment with immediate family, one additional occupant and the occupant’s dependent children, provided that the tenant or the tenant’s spouse occupies the premises as their primary residence.
When the lease names more than one tenant, these tenants
may share their apartment with immediate family, and, if one of the tenants named in the lease moves out, that tenant may be replaced with another occupant and the dependent children of the occupant. At least one of the tenants named in the lease or that tenant’s spouse must occupy the shared apartment as a primary residence.
A tenant must inform the landlords of the name of any occupant
within 30 days after the occupant has moved into the apartment or within 30 days of a landlord’s request for this information.
If the tenant named in the lease moves out, the remaining
occupant has no right to continue in occupancy without
the landlord’s express consent. Landlords may limit the total number of people living in an apartment to comply with legal overcrowding standards. Real Property Law § 235-f.

and also this is what NYS guarantees Tenants as well...

RIGHT TO PRIVACY
Tenants have the right to privacy within their apartments. A landlord, however, may enter a tenant’s apartment with reasonable
prior notice, and at a reasonable time: (a) to provide necessary or agreed upon repairs or services; (b) in accordance
with the lease; or (c) to show the apartment to prospective
purchasers or tenants. In an emergency, such as a fire, the landlord may enter the apartment without the tenant’s consent. A landlord may not abuse this limited right of entry or use it to harass a tenant. Additionally, a landlord may not interfere with the installation of cable televison facilities. Public
Service Law § 228.

As for evictions, I dont know much about how Social Services or HUD have their rules structured, but this is verbatim what NYS says about evictions and tenants rights... By the way, in this case as was pointed out by a judge to me years ago in dealing with a tenant. Formal notice from a Landlord means going to a lawyer and getting a legal eviction notice notarized and served. Not just sending a letter...

EVICTION
A tenant with a lease is protected from eviction during the lease period so long as the tenant does not violate any substantial
provision of the lease or any local housing laws or codes. For both regulated and unregulated apartments, landlords
must give formal notice of their intention to obtain legal possession of the apartment.
Unless the tenant vacates the premises by a specified date, the landlord may commence eviction proceedings through: (a) a summary non-payment court proceeding to evict a tenant
who fails to pay the agreed rent when due and to recover
16
outstanding rent, or (b) a summary holdover proceeding for eviction if a tenant significantly violates a substantial obligation
under the lease (such as using the premises for illegal purposes, or committing or permitting a nuisance) or stays beyond the lease term without permission. Real Property Actions
and Proceedings Law (RPAPL) § 711.
Landlords of rent regulated apartments may be required to seek approval from DHCR before commencing a court proceeding, depending on the grounds for eviction. Where a tenant fails to pay rent, is causing a nuisance, damages the apartment or building, or commits other wrongful acts, the owner may proceed directly in court. Other grounds, such as where the owner seeks to demolish the building, require that the owner first receive approval from DHCR.
A tenant can be legally evicted only after the landlord has brought a court proceeding and has obtained a judgment of possession. A tenant should never ignore legal papers; an eviction notice can still be sent if a tenant did not appear in court to answer court papers (petition) sent by the landlord.
Only a sheriff, marshal or constable can carry out a court-ordered warrant to evict a tenant. Landlords may not take the law into their own hands and evict a tenant by use of force or unlawful means. For example, a landlord cannot use threats of violence, remove a tenant’s possessions, lock the tenant out of the apartment, or willfully discontinue essential services such as water or heat. When a tenant is evicted, the landlord may not retain the tenant’s personal belongings or furniture. The landlord must give the tenant a reasonable amount of time to remove all belongings. RPAPL §749; Real Property Law § 235.
A tenant who is evicted from an apartment in a forcible or unlawful manner is entitled to recover triple damages in a legal
action against the landlord. Landlords in New York City who use illegal methods to force a tenant to move are also subject to both criminal and civil penalties. Further, the tenant may be entitled to be restored to occupancy. RPAPL § 853; NYC Admin. Code § 26-523, § 26-521.

Things just arent as simple as people believe. Yes a Landlord can do background checks and decline to rent to known criminals but.... Not every drug dealer or delinquent or thug has a record of convictions that is available and every arrest doesnt result in a conviction either. So even that is no guarantee. This definately is not the simple solution it has been presented to be.

And to those who complain about those properties near you that are nuisances. This law would result in those properties being empty and eventaully abandonded. The you would have to deal with vermin and squatters using them. Is that a desireable alternative?

May 29, 2013, 9:24am Permalink
Mark Potwora

Should the government agency that issues housing vouchers be held accountable for those they issue the vouchers to...Why isn't council and Molino and the police holding the tenant responsible... If these unrully tenants are causing so many problems then the police should be arresting them and then raising the fines and penalties for such behavior..Does the city have a rule book to what qualifications a tenant should possess..Maybe the city should require all people who what to rent in the city to obtain a licence..That way the city can be responsible for doing the back ground check......

May 29, 2013, 10:32am Permalink
John Roach

Mark,
Last night the Council agreed with some landlords that any new rules have to address the issue of tent misbehavior and removal.

This whole thing was brought up before and went nowhere and things have not gotten any better. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, comes of this attempt.

May 29, 2013, 11:01am Permalink
david spaulding

mark, right on. . a license should be issued to any and all renters in the city... a little twist to this law will be that all tenants are responsible for the actions of the landlord or landlady....

May 29, 2013, 5:11pm Permalink
scott williams

I wonder how many of the landlords who are so concerned about being responsible would live next to their own tenants? The guy who owns the house across the street from me said I dont make problems with the tenants because they will only do things to spite then. Yea your right you live in another town why would you care and this goes on all the time. I told one landlord he has two drug dealers in his house he said how do I know? well their company parks down the street and one walks up and the others wait in the car (drug dealers think there so smart duh) the owner said really I dont know what to do.
Well I bet its mostly absent landlords who are suddenly attentive that have a problem with any new regulations. My OPINION is the city should enact fines for dirtbag tenants and absent landlords but they should be $250 first offense $500 second offense 21 days in jail on final offense any other lower fines would only be an attempt at a new tax for the city coffers if they are serious about cleaning up these neighborhoods then they will get serious. And they should also look into allowing only a certain amount of apartments to a street and not allow no more new ones there is enough.

May 29, 2013, 5:59pm Permalink

Authentically Local