- John H. Banks | REBNY President
- William C. Rudin | REBNY Chairperson
- Code of Ethics
- REBNY Residential Listing Service
- Become a Member
- Benefits & Rewards
- REBNY Action Network
- REBNY Services
- Our History
- Contact Us
- Looking for a NYC real estate broker?
- Contests & Awards
- Sponsorship Opportunities
- REAL ESTATE EDUCATION
- MEMBER SPOTLIGHT
- GIVING BACK
Memo Regarding Intro No. 924
April 18, 2016
BILL: Intro No. 924
SUBJECT: In relation to vacate orders
DATE: April 18, 2016
SPONSORS: Espinal, Jr., Chin, Johnson, Kallos, Levin, Levine, Menchaca, Reynoso, Rosenthal, Mendez, Constantinides, Rose, Lander, Lancman, Rodriguez, Van Bramer
The Real Estate Board of New York (“REBNY”), representing over 17,000 owners, developers, managers and brokers of real property in New York City, opposes Introduction No. 924 because as set forth below, the proposed time frame is not adequate for performing corrections and securing relevant permits.
This legislation would require written vacate orders to require that the condition for which the vacate order was issued to be corrected in no more than ten days.
The time frame proposed in this bill is simply unreasonable. There are a number of reasons a vacate order may be issued, and most if not all are to ensure public safety from illegal, damaged, or immediately hazardous conditions. Correcting these conditions often requires permits, licensing, special equipment, or all of the above. Due to demand, supply, backlog at permit or license-issuing departments, or other extenuating circumstances, it may not be possible for these owners to secure the services required to meet this bill’s vigorous ten-day deadline. Worse yet, requiring owners to rectify these conditions so quickly could result in the quality and safety of corrective work being sacrificed in exchange for speed, resulting in unnecessary and potentially harmful consequences for building owners and tenants.
Due to the unpredictable nature of acquiring licensing and permits and the range of reasons a vacate order may be issued, it is unreasonable to place a time limit on the correction of conditions requiring vacate orders. For these reasons, REBNY opposes Intro No. 924.