HABITAT
Subscribe for Daily Updates!
This is happening in a NYC midtown Manhattan luxury 250 plus unit Co-op built in the late 50’s.
My niece has lived in my apartment without issue for over five years. I live in NY but not at this apartment. Under the original proprietary lease this was allowed. I recently received a letter saying my niece has to move out since I am not living there concurrently with her. This is due to a new house rule.
Is it legal for a board to make a house rule of this magnitude? I would think that a change to apartment occupancy would be more suited for a vote by the shareholders and not just a majority of the board. I think the intent was to combat Airbnb issues but I think the board overstepped their authority by making this change under house rules and not taking it to the shareholders for a vote.
Does anyone have any experience with a situation like this?
Can just a board make a house rule that has such a substantial impact to the shareholders?
Generally speaking, the terms of the Proprietary Lease supersede any House Rules. If the two are in conflict, the PL is the governing document.
I read through the case cited by another poster (221 Middle Neck Owners Corp. v. Paris). Any time a decision uses the word "ambiguity", the results are not going to have a happy ending.
Your best bet in this situation is to contact an attorney for an opinion and advice on what your options are and how to proceed. Do not try to be your own attorney, write any fierce letters, or do anything to antagonize the board. They hold most of the power, courtesy of the Business Judgment Rule, and really, all you want is to have your niece to continue living in your apartment as before.
Rules made to counter the encroachment and illicit subletting of AirBnB tend to carry a lot of weight. If your niece's occupancy termination is collateral damage, it's a shame, but it may be reality. I checked my Proprietary Lease and nieces and nephews are not listed as permitted family members.
Perhaps you could post the verbatim text of the new House Rule. That might help us come up with some creative ideas.
Good luck!
As per Steve sad but true, the sad part is you have to get a lawyer. As time goes on I find some boards get carried away with power an as boards do not change because share holders have something more important to do. As the old saying goes if one share holder tries to pull something off all the share holders get punished. Do you know if other share holders got a letter and if so maybe you can get together and all higher one lawyer to fight for all. Best of Luck
This is very good advice. I'd like to see the wording of the House Rule to try to figure out if the board is being arbitrary or if they're making an honest attempt to control what they feel is an epidemic of very short term and questionable rentals. In my Proprietary Lease, the list of recognized family members is in paragraph 14.
The original applicable part of the lease says:
The lessee shall not, without the written consent of the lessor, occupy or use the apartment, or permit the same or any part thereof to be occupied or used, for any purpose other than as a private dwelling apartment for the lessee, the family, employees and servants of the lessee........
1. The occupancy policy statement from the board says:
Family members enumerated in the lease may occupy an apartment when the shareholder is also in residence without the prior consent of the board.
2. If the shareholder is not in residence of the apartment, family members other than the Shareholder's spouse will require prior Board consent to occupy the apartment.
There are several more restrictions that followed.
I read through my proprietary lease. It looks like yours is different than mine, in that mine enumerated who is considered a family member (paragraph 14):
"14- The Lessee shall not, without the written consent of the Lessor on such conditions as Lessor may prescribe, occupy or use the apartment or permit the same or any part thereof to be occupied or used for any purpose other than as a private dwelling for the Lessee and Lessee's spouse, their children, grandchildren, parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters and domestic employees, and in no event shall more than one married couple occupy the apartment without the written consent of the Lessor."
It's possible that your board used this list as a guide for who is considered a family member for the purpose of the new House Rule. Check your PL to see if there is any list of included family members.
Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Log in below or register here.
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.
Habitat u
visit habitat uHabitat U: learn about how to manage a building, and what you should know as a co-op or condo board member.
Archives
search
Search, by word or phrase, all magazine articles from January 2002 to present. You may print or email your results. Print subscribers receive free access to the Habitat Article Archive.
Ask the Experts
learn moreLearn all the basics of NYC co-op and condo management, with straight talk from heavy hitters in the field of co-op or condo apartments
Professionals in some of the key fields of co-op and condo board governance and building management answer common questions in their areas of expertise
Subscribe
join nowGot elected? Are you on your co-op/condo board?
Then don’t miss a beat! Stories you can use to make your building better, keep it out of trouble, save money, enhance market value, and make your board life a whole lot easier!
Hi - You may be OK in tha coop has waived it rights in your case by not acting sooner. On the other hand, , a "niece" may also not be a close enough family member. There was just a case/lawsuit about this where the owner of the apt. basically won due to "ambiguity" in the lease bout who could / can reside in the apt. . You should get a lawyer and have them write the coop a fierce letter bout how they have waived their rights and the situation is ambiguous. Also, a Hour Rule is different than the lease. Did they actually change the lease? That requires a shareholder vote.
The case: 221 Middle Neck Owners Corp. v. Paris
Thank you for rating!
You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!
Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.