Hi Samsaunt,

Before jumping to any conclusions, I would contact the board president to find out if the guest policy was recently changed, and if it was, to what new policy. It is possible the managing agent "misinterpreted" the new policy. You might also ask for a printed copy of the revised house rules.

If the house rules were changed to a no-guest-without-owner policy, check your proprietary lease. If there is anything in the lease about guests, I believe it trumps (i.e. "your fired") the house rules.

If that doesn't work, politely ask the board president for the reason the policy was changed, and explain your situation to her/him. You may find that the rules were changed because of the advent of AirBNB, Craig's List, and the other venues where apartment owners "rent" out their apartments to strangers for very short periods of time to generate income. This is almost certainly against the rules for subletting. I realize this is not your case, but unfortunately the proliferation of these illegal sublets has caused boards to become much more restrictive with their guest policies.

As a board member, I recommend that you approach this with the idea that you and the board will be able to work out a compromise. If you can come up with ways of differentiating your situation from short-term rentals to strangers, propose them to the board. You may have to provide background info about your guests and the board may want to meet with them before the they stay in your apartment for the first time. You might even offer to pay for the managing agent to run a background check on your guests. This is not prying, but the board's way of protecting the safety and security of the other shareholders. I would do this in my building.

I'm sorry you've been caught on the cusp of a policy change, but I do understand your board's perspective. With the explosion of tourism in NYC and the corresponding dramatic increase in hotel room rates, any reasonably-priced accommodation is now very valuable. You need to work with your board to validate your personal relationship with your guests and also to prove to the board that they don't pose a threat to the building or the shareholders.

Good luck with your efforts.

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

Thanks for writing back, to both of you! Your input is very helpful. I totally DO understand why the board is doing this. In our interview they talked about the NYC hotel law, and that people were breaking the law by renting out their apartments. The thing is that we also made it clear in our interview, against the advice of our realtor (!), that we wanted to be able to have family and friends use the apartment occasionally, since it was not our primary residence. I feel like they must have known that they were contemplating this move, and I feel duped that they didn't tell us. I did ask for the new policy in writing, and it's very clear. It says "Under no circumstances is a Guest permitted unless you are in residence". It seems really so sad that, since we aren't "In Residence" most of the time, we can't occasionally let our close friends and families enjoy the property we just purchased. I will look at the proprietary lease, and if that doesn't work, I guess I'll try and reach out to the board. Thank you again, and if you have any other ideas, let me know!

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

Check your proprietary lease on this. Immediate family (parents, kids over 18, siblings) may be exempt from being classified as guests. Not a good solution but a partial one.

Another possible compromise might be to offer some sort of escrow or bond against any damages to the building or any extra expenses incurred by the building related to your guests. Clearly this would never be used, but might give the board a warmer and fuzzier feeling.

> Join the conversation

Hi Samsaunt,

I am a Board President of a 111 unit co-op in Inwood. I would check your Proprietary Lease as well. The Proprietary Lease is usually more difficult to change and usually governs. Finally, since you just bought and the Board did not disclose their new policy to you (or contemplated new policy), ask for an exception (in writing) as a way to smooth things over.

> Join the conversation

It would be quite unusual for a co-op to allow guests to stay in your apartment when you aren't there. This is often spelled out explicitly in the Proprietary Lease, and you should check yours to see what it says. In ours, which uses the same template as many other NYC co-ops, it's under Paragraph 14 (Use of Premises):

"... the apartment may be occupied from time to time by guests of the Lessee [shareholder] for a period of time not exceeding one month, unless a longer period is approved prior thereto in writing by the Lessor [co-op], but no guests may occupy the apartment unless one or more of the permitted adult residents are then in occupancy or unless consented to in writing prior thereto by the Lessor."

If your Lease explicitly allows you to have guests in your absence, which is possible but unlikely, then it's not clear the board would be able to override that provision with a House Rule. The permission to have guests at arbitrary times could be considered a material term of the lease. You'd need to ask a lawyer about that.

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

As a followup to the good responses you've received, you might try to work out a compromise with your board. If you can limit your stay-alone guests to one family (for example), you might find that the board is willing to make an exception. "My sister Mayella and her husband would like to stay in the apartment for two weeks every summer" is much more appetizing than "Random friends of my choice will be living here in my absence whenever I feel like it."

Also, don't try to argue that you shouldn't be bound by a new House Rule you didn't expect. That argument is going to lose. See Horwitz v. 1025 Fifth Avenue, in which a new House Rule required a shareholder to remove an awning that had been in place for *decades*. But again, if your Proprietary Lease contains the unusual provision that guests may stay in your absence, then there's a good chance a House Rule wouldn't be able to override it. A lawyer would need to address that question.

> Join the conversation