Why The Rent's So High
Around a year and a half ago, when I first moved to the quasi-urban belt of beige high-rises surrounding the District of Columbia, I had little trouble securing a decent apartment, one within walking of some bars and restaurants and a good coffee shop/office. My rental agent worked for free (she would be paid by the landlord) and all that was demanded of me was one month's rent as a security deposit and a "yes" to the landlord's question, "Do you have a job?" ("Uh-hu" also being acceptable.)
As I'm in the process of moving up to New York, I've entered the very different world of completely annoying agent's fees, intrusive income verification, two month's security deposit, and even the prospect that I might have to get my beloved employer or some generous relative to become my "guarantor." All this even though I've managed to find an apartment with a lower rent than my place in Arlington, VA. My agent has mentioned that landlords often want to see a six-figure salary even when they're renting out a two-bedroom for $2500.00 a month.
The DC area and the Big Bagel seem to be pretty similar places in terms costs of living, demographics, etc. So what gives? Why was it that in DC the landlord just wanted a check, while in NYC he wants to verify my middle school GPA?
Answer--the unintended consequences of "tenant's rights" in New York. (Rent control is also a major problem, which I'll save for another blog.)
In New York, it's almost impossible for a landlord to evict a tenant who doesn't pay. Indeed, the state has made it illegal for a property owner to kick out deadbeats, or even do milder stuff like shut off the water, unless the landlord has been victorious in a lengthy, and undoubtedly extremely costly, trial. There are horror stories of people living in apartments for years without paying.
These kinds of laws are great for deadbeats, wastrels, and inveterate layabouts; they're terrible for the rest of us. (And let's remember, a delinquent tenant is essentially a squatter. I'd be curious to know how many advocates of "tenant rights" wouldn't be a bit inhospitable if someone decided to come and camp out on their front lawn.)
Anway, "tenant's rights" dramatically increases the landlord's risk (he might get stuck with a bad client for ages) causing him to raise rent prices as well as demand that all potential clients have huge salaries and go through elaborate, potentially embarrassing, background checks.
The great irony is that those best suited to run this gauntlet are the wealthy or at least have those with the proverbial rich uncle who can back them as a guarantor. Those who suffer are the guys making $30,000 a year with no rich relatives who only want a chance. It'd be interesting to study just how much gentrification in New York has been driven by rent control and "tenant's rights." If I were living day to day, I might see the whole thing as a big Yuppie conspiracy.
add to del.icio.us
add to digg
add to yahoo
related at technorati
share on facebook
Check our most impactful articles and see how popular these opinions are with you.
Will others follow in your footsteps? Share your thoughts and ideas for changing the world.
This is all true, but there are shades of difference between the boroughs and even within the boroughs.
I've heard of lawyers making $160,000/year who've had to get guarantors when looking for an apartment in Manhattan. Meanwhile, I've had four apartments in New York City, three of them in Brooklyn, and have never even been asked for a guarantor. (My Manhattan apartment was my first, and an illegal sublet, which I kept for three miraculous years.)
What accounts for my luck? I tend to rent directly from owners of buildings, who own that building and only that building. In two cases, the owner has lived in the garden apartment downstairs.
This is much easier to come by in Brooklyn, where you're more likely to find real people, i.e. working class native Brooklynites who bought cheap brownstones in the 1970s in cheap neighborhoods like Park Slope and Boerum Hill, only to find themselves sitting on real estate gold mines 30 years later.
For the best of them, the New York of today is as disheartening as it is for the transplant frustrated beyond belief by his or her inability to find a place to live.
There are people who don't want to fleece you, and who believe that a person's word is the best "guarantor" they can get. And after nearly a decade in these five boroughs, I'm convinced that you won't find them in Manhattan.
David: It doesn't make it right. The city is becoming harder and harder for the non-affluent to survive in, and it's a travesty. Now, don't get me wrong; I live in Brooklyn, and I love living in Brooklyn, but even here it's getting ridiculously expensive to rent (much less buy), and it's taking away much of the character for which this great city has become known. Why shouldn't a writer moving from DC not be able to move to Manhattan if he so chooses? Why should our city's government allow landlords and brokers to fleece us whenever and however they can? I'm not saying everyone is entitled to a 2 bed on Jane St., but Manhattan should be reasonably accessible to someone with a job and a decent credit history. And it's not.
As for Brooklyn, just look at what they did to DUMBO. What could have been a burgeoning neighborhood on the waterfront has become a dead, uninteresting condo cemetery with no character. Bloomberg lets his developer buddies do whatever they want. If he gets his 3rd term wish, I will seriously consider moving.