I didn't know that, every place I lived in here had much slower rent increases (despite the market around the apartment raising more than that - in fact in my current place I'm still paying then same rent 3 years into living here).
Contrary to your point, I don't think that's a better description. I live in a non-rent control building and received rate increases of 7% and then 12% after, and this was already on top-of-market rent.
I also don't know how well correlated property prices and rent are, especially across countries. I think there are a number of confounding factors such that I'm not sold on how directly it translates.
Ok, its true, there is some sort of rent control where I live, the inflation can only go up by the same as inflation - for the duration of the contract. But then one the contract is up they can charge what the market will let them. Contracts were 5 years, went down to 3, and are now back up to 5.
At the end of our last 5 year contract the rent went up by around 45%. Bought a small place further out instead.
Most people in the US don't have any rent control, not even controls for percentage increase year to year.
When I was renting, I could expect a 10-15% increase year to year. With the current average apartment cost being $1700, that can mean paying an additional $500-$800 per month after 3 years. At that point it becomes worth it to look elsewhere.
That's a consequence of rent control laws, which limit the percent that you can raise rent by per year. Ever lowering rent in a place with such a law is penny-wise but pound-foolish.
Yup, all the new building (buildings built after 1992) weren't under rent-control. Since last year, they now are under rent-control which means landlord can only increase rent by 1.7% every year, which is why you saw that jump in rent. Not leaving my condo until i manage to buy my own place, which is going to be very difficult as well.
It is, but it doesn't affect the base rate, so it allows a bigger increase when things get better again, because the increase limit is a percent of the current rent (not including discounts).
Indeed, NYC rent control has been weakening since the 70s.
And the annual rental increase 1970 to now is roughly double what it was 1920 to 1970. Yet for housing, 1920 to 1970 saw roughly 50% growth while 1970-now saw roughly 20%
Are these numbers so low because of rent control? I lived in a 300 square foot studio last year that cost me $1400 a month. That exact same studio now costs $2800. I've seen similar increases from craigslist posts throughout the city, compared to what I was looking at last year. What I wouldn't give for it to only have increased 15%.
It's 5% rent increase, not the 1-2% seen in SF and NYC. Properties don't typically increase in rent that much. This isn't likely to lead to the absurd $1000 studio apartments in Manhattan.
It's really not a big change. The rent on the market is the visible marginal rate and skews upwards because of locations that are way above their market rate being not taken for a long time.
Real estate is, unironically different this time. A key component in this run up vs the last is, last time rents did not increase nearly as much as home prices. In 2005-2006 I was paying $2200/mo to rent a house worth $1 million. And no, it wasn't rent controlled.
That rent prices haven't massively dislocated from housing prices makes me think it's not the same situation.
Either way 15% in 3 years is still rent control.
reply