Master Tenant Quagmire

Q:  The master tenant in one of my units has decided to evict the subtenant.  The subtenant has said she would prefer to stay.  Should I get involved and is the subtenant protected by rent control laws?

If the building was built before June 13, 1979, the subtenant may be protected by the rent law.  In 2001, the City’s rent law was changed to clarify when a master tenant could evict a subtenant without one of the fourteen “just cause” reasons.  The regulation states that, for tenancies commencing on or after May 25, 1998, a master tenant who is not an owner of record of the property may only evict a subtenant without just cause if, prior to the commencement of the tenancy, the master tenant informed the subtenant in writing that the subtenant can be evicted without just cause.  Absent this written disclosure, a master tenant cannot simply decide to terminate a subtenancy; rather, the master tenant is subject to the same stringent just cause rules that the owner must contend with in order to evict a tenant.  This same law also requires the master tenant to disclose in writing to the subtenant the amount of rent the master tenant pays to the landlord, and further requires the master tenant to charge the subtenant no more rent than what is attributed to the subtenant’s proportional use of the rental unit.  Thus, if the subtenant leases half of the apartment, the master tenant can only charge the subtenant fifty percent of the total rent that is paid to the owner.

 Most master tenant and subtenants are unaware of this regulation.  Consequently, it is commonplace to see situations where subtenants are being charged more than their proportional share of the rent and master tenants evicting their subtenants without just cause, even in instances where the required disclosures were not made. Owners should refrain from assisting a master tenant in this endeavor for several reasons.  First, the eviction attempt could likely be illegal.  As such, the owner would invite personal liability for wrongful eviction by assisting the master tenant in this instance.  Second, owners should not involve themselves in any tenant versus tenant dispute.  An owner who sides with one occupant against another is risking a lawsuit should the offended tenant contend, and perhaps prove, that the accusations used to justify the eviction were false.  The one exception would be if any tenant, master or sub, was committing a verifiable “nuisance” by engaging in highly offensive conduct that caused serious annoyance or harm to the other residents of the building; however, if someone is causing a nuisance, the owner would seek to terminate the entire tenancy.

In sum, a master tenant who decides to terminate a subtenancy may not have grounds to do so unless the appropriate written disclosures were made at the inception of the tenancy.  Even if this writing was provided, the landlord should not get involved.  Instead, master tenants, who are legally considered landlords, may have to employ their own counsel to assist them with this effort. 

Dave Wasserman