Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ConstitutionalCarrot t1_itnfi1p wrote

Succession claims are the tenant’s burden to prove precisely because the landlord would not have enough information to know whether the relative has stayed with the tenant long enough to be entitled to succeed. Even if the tenant has a valid claim, they apparently never sought to be named as a co-tenant on the lease, despite claiming to have lived there for 2 years.

0

SenorJuansie t1_itpqmeb wrote

c'mon now. no landlord would ever willingly add a non spouse to an rs lease for a valuable apartment.

1

ConstitutionalCarrot t1_itpxnsp wrote

Why not? They get someone else on the hook for the rent and tenancy obligations and it’s not like if they get rid of the prime tenant they can drastically increase the rent if it is a rent stabilized apartment. They’d either have to spend $$$ litigating the successor’s claim or time and $$ finding a new tenant who would be sbj to the same RGB increases anyway.

Again, it would not matter if the LL rejected the request to add the relative because it is the successor’s burden to prove they asked. If they cannot meet that extremely low bar, set by statute, then maybe they are the ones full of shit.

1