Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-09-2016, 10:33 AM
 
31,750 posts, read 26,706,619 times
Reputation: 24626

Advertisements

This isn't a "deal", but what the guy was rightfully due in the first place. Landlord was fined and forced to revert the apartment back to RS rent because he ran game pure and simple.


Had things been on the up and up in the first place there wouldn't have been a basis for proceedings. At best the guy would have joined scores if not more of RS tenants living in swanky units/areas merely based upon luck of the draw.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2016, 10:38 AM
 
1,369 posts, read 1,249,245 times
Reputation: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlem resident View Post
As do I. That's why I pointed out the landlord's gains at taxpayer expense and over quite a period of time.
Of course, you could explain how the landlord actually "earned" the extensive tax breaks. I know many of this ilk and quite few deserve anything at all. They take because they believe they are better than you.

In addition. The tenant likely expended an enormous amount of energy to follow through. You have no idea. Little luck is involved. More like persistent diligence. Good for him.

Hopefully, more landlords and investment groups will be exposed in the coming year.

You know what I find interesting ? The blinders; inability to see that the landlord is the culprit, instead blaming someone more convenient. Eclipse of critical thinking. Very common these days.
I agree with your post, Harlem resident: you also have a thread on this topic posted in this forum. I truly believe 2016 is the
Year!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2016, 10:43 AM
 
1,369 posts, read 1,249,245 times
Reputation: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlem resident View Post
And anyone who thinks that Mann is a victim here needs to seriously figure out the facts. If they can even tell the difference between fact and fairy tale.

Is it something they put in the water ... ? People simply cannot be that clueless.
I hear that loud and clear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2016, 10:46 AM
 
Location: NYPD"s 30th Precinct
2,565 posts, read 5,500,041 times
Reputation: 2691
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluttereagle View Post
I think it is crazy that the powers of the state have been mobilized to provide such an individual with lavish housing benefits
You misspelled "mobilized to enforce the rightful laws of a duly elected legislature that I just happen to disagree with".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2016, 10:47 AM
 
Location: West Harlem
6,885 posts, read 9,903,803 times
Reputation: 3062
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
This isn't a "deal", but what the guy was rightfully due in the first place. Landlord was fined and forced to revert the apartment back to RS rent because he ran game pure and simple.


Had things been on the up and up in the first place there wouldn't have been a basis for proceedings. At best the guy would have joined scores if not more of RS tenants living in swanky units/areas merely based upon luck of the draw.

This is exactly the point.
And it's okay to give developers credits but they should not take them and run with them.

Do you know about any of their other "involvements" ? I do.

A lot existent at the level of gossip although true enough, maybe more will now come out in the press.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2016, 10:53 AM
 
1,369 posts, read 1,249,245 times
Reputation: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
This isn't a "deal", but what the guy was rightfully due in the first place. Landlord was fined and forced to revert the apartment back to RS rent because he ran game pure and simple.


Had things been on the up and up in the first place there wouldn't have been a basis for proceedings. At best the guy would have joined scores if not more of RS tenants living in swanky units/areas merely based upon luck of the draw.
Agree with your post, BugsyPal: who knows? there might be more tenants in swanky who are victims and don't know it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2016, 11:12 AM
 
31,750 posts, read 26,706,619 times
Reputation: 24626
Quote:
Originally Posted by beanniebaby7 View Post
Agree with your post, BugsyPal: who knows? there might be more tenants in swanky who are victims and don't know it.

Here is the thing; many, many property owners who took J-51 tax abatements and subsequently raised rents relied upon an interpretation of laws then on books. A case brought by Stuyvesant Town-Peter Cooper Village residents challenging their increases and subsequent ruling by state highest court threw out said precedent and substituted the version we have now. That ruling not only helped bring down the original deal for STPCV but is reverberating still today as we see with Mr. Lane Altschuler's case.


Going forward the results have already been property owners becoming reluctant to get in bed with the City/State unless circumstances warrant. That is those seeing to build in rezoned areas and or cannot raise funding elsewhere for renovations/construction work and need to turn to NYC for tax abatements.


Mr. Altschuler may have won the battle but the war likely will rage on. You can read the case here: http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20...478/480,%20LLC


What stands out to me is that the tax abatements expire starting next year and through 2018. So by 2019 give or take Mr. Altschuler's RS apartment will revert to market rate with all protections ending. Still nearly one million (before taxes) for several years of rent over charges isn't too shabby.


LA should take is ill or whatever gotten gains and make a down payment on a condo or house somewhere. The guy isn't poor by any stretch and can easily afford a mortgage.

Last edited by BugsyPal; 01-09-2016 at 11:22 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2016, 11:15 AM
 
31,750 posts, read 26,706,619 times
Reputation: 24626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kefir King View Post
Crooked Landlord got caught: 1 down, thousands to go.
At the first sign of retaliation, the landlord should be given a prison term.


Nice to know that karma sometimes, if rarely, exists.


With the $800,000 debt, why isn't the rent reduced to zero for the next 1000 months (83 years.) Better yet, since it is a condominium conversion, why isn't the tenant GIVEN OWNERSHIP of the apartment gratis.

You cannot "give" ownership rights to a condo away in a rent overcharge case. That is not how the law works and is meant to address.


Only way RS tenants can get ownership in a non-eviction condo conversion is to purchase. If they do not it is their right to remain as RS tenants but that is about it. Current owner LL (now sponsor) can turn around and sell that unit but the RS tenant will remain long as he does not violate terms of lease.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2016, 02:55 PM
 
31,750 posts, read 26,706,619 times
Reputation: 24626
Just read the entire case documents and it seems the LL screwed himself royally.


Late as 1997 the rent for unit was only $442 and change. LL "deregulated the unit and jacked up the rent. He also applied for J-51 tax abatements and that is where his troubles start and will continue.


In addition to the unfavorable ruling and having to pay out nearly one million in damages; that apartment will remain RS *forever*, or at least while the current tenant resides.


As with so many things NYS law regarding J-51 and RS status is confusing.


If the building/apartment was subject to RS *before* the J-51 it remains so after those tax breaks expire. However if the unit or units only became RS by virtue of J-51 it reverts back to market rate once the abatement expires. However there is a rub; LL must state clearly (in 12 point type) in the original lease and any subsequent renewals that the unit is only RS because of the J-51 and upon expiration....


Clearly the LL did not do this so that is why the courts awarded him a RS apartment for "life". The other rub in NYS law is that once an apartment is made RS by a LL failing to tell the tenant about the J-51 it is *NOT* subject to luxury vacancy control. The tenant can live in that apartment even if he wins Powerball or otherwise becomes a million or billionaire for the rest of his natural life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2016, 04:35 PM
 
1,369 posts, read 1,249,245 times
Reputation: 376
^^^
Wow what a mess that greedy LL got himself into. You do have a point Bugsypal: if I was the guy that was awarded that money.
I would buy a home.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:35 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top