@Harrison Sharp I'm a Brooklyn, NYC small Multi-family Investor with 9 Buildings and 25 apts. I'm not selling for a while longer.
The properties I buy are in neighborhoods where the tenants generally are not going to lose their jobs or are above the requirements to meet the ERAP requirements (ie. income is below 80 AMI, etc.)
Furthermore, I require the tenants to have 1 year savings to the equivalent of 1 year rent.
That way, should I ever have to take them to Court, I can argue that the tenant could have paid rent through Savings, but chose not to do so.
However, throughout this Pandemic, 40% of my tenants chose to leave rather than stay and not pay rent. These are the kind of Renters I can find in NYC. They were highly qualified and have assets to lose.
I promptly re-rented those apts. Today, I am getting higher rents than pre-pandemic.
Everything is about how you set up your Portfolio and the quality of the tenants in that Portfolio.
@Laura Guy The big issue I see is that for those Tenants that KNOW they will qualify for ERAP, they don't really have a choice but to stop paying rent, even if they have savings OR if they have enough money through UE and the Booster (which ended).
Imagine you are a Renter and you had enough savings to pay your rent for the year. However, the Tenant Advocate tells you that you can get your rent paid for free as you were affected by Covid-19, which maybe true. HOWEVER, if you paid your rent, you certainly will not be reimbursed from ERAP.
That's the biggest flaw in the program. The Law should have promised to Pay the tenants back should they have paid their Landlords the rent through their savings if they were affected by COVID-19. Furthermore, if the tenant had the means to pay the Landlord AND that could be proven in Court, the Landlord should be able to win a judgement on future income after the Pandemic.
Only IF the tenant was both affected by Covid-19 AND they did not have enough Savings OR enough UE / Federal Boost would they be allowed to stay until the Landlord get's paid.
At the same time, the Landlord should have been able to take the Covid-19 Hardship Waiver from the Tenant and give it to their Municipality so that they stop paying Property Taxes and Building Utilities as well as the Bank's Mortgage.
The Gov'mit should have allowed the Landlord to put a lien on the Assets of the tenants who owe rent right away until the Gov'mit is able to pay the back and future rent.
This is an extremely one sided help for the Renter and disaster for the Landlord.
The problem is always that these laws could have been worked out in such great ways for the Majority, both Tenants and Landlords, if only the Politicians would just think several steps ahead instead of just ONE.
This is EXACTLY why, when I do buy properties in Liberal NYC, the epicenter of Liberalism, as long as my Portfolio of Properties can be steered away from the mess of the unintended consequences of bad politics.
I also now have the added advantage of having NONE of my properties affected except for minor leaks during the Hurricane IDA historic flooding.
Sometime after the Pandemic, I may convert all my Multi-Family properties to Condos and sell it all as it will be the highest appreciation I will see at any point of time in the 24 years I have been buying NYC properties when considering that I have easily survived the Pandemic and Hurricane IDA.
What we need to do is to try to buy investments that can withstand the Long Arm of the Laws that are passed by Liberals who just make it worse for everyone, including their constituents, the Renters, who will suffer from much higher rents in the future.