February 8, 2026

I was hired by a landlord in Queens to evict a commercial van owner from an off-street parking space. This is the type of case that, if it ends up in court, can take a long time and cost a lot of money. Why? Well, for one thing, there was no written lease. Many landlords make the mistake of believing that the lack of a lease will make an eviction easier. The opposite is true. When there is no written lease, then there is also no waiver of counterclaims and trial by jury, neither is there an attorney’s’ fee clause. All these things protect a commercial landlord. When there is no written lease, it can also be challenging to identify the tenant you are evicting. Who is the tenant? Is the tenant the company whose name is on the side of the van that parks there? Is the tenant the name on the bank account that pays the rent? In this case, the rent was paid from two different bank accounts. When there is no written lease, it can also be difficult to identify the location of the space you are evicting from. Here, the building that the lot was associated with was on a corner and had two addresses.

In this business, you must deal with such problems before you start the case, or you end up with a case that gets dismissed.

I prepared and served the Real Property Law § 232-a notice (“Termination Notice”). In addition to describing where the lot was located in relation to the building and the corner, I had the landlord give me a couple pictures from different angles of the van in the lot, which I annexed to the Termination Notice, so there would be no doubt about its location for the process server, the court, or a New York City Marshal on eviction day.

The van owner was paying the rent from two different bank accounts: one account in the name of a company (the same as the name on the side of the van); and one account in the name of an individual woman. Based upon the last name of the principal of the company, I assumed that the individual woman was the principal’s wife (or mother, sister, or daughter). I decided to turn the weakness of having two potential tenants to evict into a strength. I sent a courtesy copy of the Termination Notice to the principal with a cover letter. Here is part of what I said:

You paid rent, when you bothered to pay rent, in the name of [XYZ Corp.] and [Jane Doe] [These names are fictitious to protect the innocent]. Therefore, if we get into March, and I am forced to sue to recover the Parking Lot via a summary proceeding in New York City Civil Court, I will be suing Ms. Doe, as well as XYZ Corp. That is not because I am trying to be mean. Rather, that is what I am legally required to do to recover possession. Please do not make me sue your wife [I assumed Jane Doe was the wife].”

I also pointed out that the lot was not zoned for commercial parking, which could engender tickets. I added that, if I was forced to sue, I would be seeking rent at a market rate, which was quite a bit higher than what this tenant was struggling to pay anyway. I suggested that the arrears the guy had worked up might be waived if he left without making me sue him.

I will never know what line in the letter did it, or if the Termination Notice alone would have been enough. But the guy left peacefully, without the need for a lawsuit.

Respectfully submitted,

Michelle Itkowitz