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)
 
 
Old 04-04-2010, 11:19 AM
 
19 posts, read 51,710 times
Reputation: 19

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lamontnow View Post
Your reference to "upthread" is apparently to my posts. I gave a detailed description of the actions of a clearly abusive tenant. You ignore most of what I said and twist the rest. How DARE YOU accuse me of "denial of service and maintenance"??? I clearly stated that this tenant does NOT inform me of any repairs that are needed (for the nefarious purpose of creating a counter claim).


Yes. There is a pro-regulation website that is run by a lobbyist and activist who takes things to the extreme. Even to the point of urging tenants to take illegal actions. The verbiage of this poster is very similar to the administrator of that website.
lamontnow,
We appear to have cross posted.

I am not your attorney but I'll make a suggestion. You allege that a tenant of yours is deliberately destroying your property. You did not state what, if any, proof you have supporting this claim. Something functioning one day and broken another day is not proof of the tenant deliberately damaging your property. Your version can just as easily explain failure from normal wear and tear, from neglecting routine maintenance, and/or from improper previous repair work. If you have proof – not mere speculation – that the tenant is deliberately destroying your property, you have the legal means to remedy this. I suggest you pursue them. If, on the other hand, your allegations are not more substantial than speculation on your part, you’d be better served revising your assessment and strategy regarding the breech of warranty of habitability issues. Again, quality routine maintenance and preventative maintenance (regardless whether you like or dislike the tenant), in addition to routine inspections of the property (i.e., hands on knowledge of the condition of your rental units) will do much to prevent your breeching the warranty of habitability. You have to be willing to put the time and money in and to conduct quality property management, Also, hire a better attorney if you believe the tenant is destroying your property. Just be aware that there are financial and legal consequences and repercussions in conducting a witch hunt.

As regards your comment about a ‘pro–regulation website’, I have no idea at all what you are referring to. Stop beating around the bush. Spit it out. Inform me of who you have convinced yourself that I am, and what my alleged motives are.

Frankly, I do not see that reality plays much of a factor in your case. I can see a definite pattern here. You are delusional. You delude yourself and based on your delusions you to jump into the breech with both feet. You, your business, and your tenants would all be better served if you operated less on wild speculation and delusion and more on sound decisions based on solid fact. You are not alone (the mere fact of repeating the refrain ‘Saddam has weapons of mass destruction’ do not make them exist).

As with VictorFox, my suggestion is to expend more energy on thinking clearly on factual realities and putting your energies into better managing your own property and business, instead of getting wigged out by the vast governmental conspiracy to destroy your business and hand it over to your rent regulated tenants.

Good luck lamontnow, I wish you and your tenants well.

 
Old 04-04-2010, 11:42 AM
 
19 posts, read 51,710 times
Reputation: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox View Post
I for one like to think that I have a very AIR TIGHT lease that covers just about any tenant-landlord scenario that I can think off. IT'S 12 PAGES LONG!!!
Good lord. It's difficult to imagine the type of tenant that you actually manage to convince to conduct business with you and the multivariate currents, sub-currents, and totalizing atmosphere of paranoia and distrust that likely saturates your properties like a bad perfume. Why not just request that your tenants surrender all their rights, including constitutional rights, when they are in contract with you? Or perhaps expend your efforts in screening for, and convincing prospective tenants that you are some sort of deity that they must blindly obey? Or get an agreement from them that they request to be treated like animals in a kennel under lock and key?

It's no wonder you have/had severe property management issues.
As is often the case, it's not the machinery but the operator that is the problem.

Good luck, I wish you well and may enlightened judgment prevail.
 
Old 04-04-2010, 01:14 PM
 
461 posts, read 1,766,167 times
Reputation: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovegasoline View Post
It's no wonder you have/had severe property management issues.
As is often the case, it's not the machinery but the operator that is the problem.

Good luck, I wish you well and may enlightened judgment prevail.

Who said I have or had severe property management issue???? Not me. Stop putting words in my mouth. In fact, I'm proud to say that I have the best building in the community. Thats saying alot since my building is in the Bronx (the land of the low-income, low lives and headquarters for public program residents).

I have excellent tenants because I screen the heck out of them. I use every known screening tactic to ensure I get a desirable tenant. In addition, my vacant apartments are fully renovated, plus I have a sqweaky clean building, no graffiti anywhere, no hanging out nowhere, no loud music, etc. that makes my building more marketable to attract classier tenants. How many buildings do you know, especially in the Bronx that is graffiti free, hangout free and loud music free???? (Typical ghetto behavior). Very rare find especially in the middle of the "hood" where my building is located at. In fact, if you look at my building, its so well kept that it looks like a building that belongs in Manhattan, not the Bronx. No open HPD violations or nothing.

I am the IDEAL landlord but I'm actually the manager but run it as if it were my building. And for that, tenants actually love me in my building because they know I wouldn't dare accept trashy tenants into my building and degrade the building. I can never be accused of being a slumlord because I put in 110% effort in making sure my building and tenants (fair market tenants) are kept happy and satisfied.

The only tenants I have issues with (about 9 tenants) and who are difficult tenants are the OLD and very liberal tenants that pay $600 for a 3 bedroom apartment and were grandfathered into the "old", more lax system before I took over and started laying down the law and kicking butt if you get out of line.

They are the ones who have this "entitlement" mentality and give me a hard time. The type to complain and call 311 if we turn off the hot water for several hours to replace old plumbing in the building despite the fact that ALL tenants were notified personally and signs were put up in the lobby at least 2 days before the job was to begin. Fair market tenants never complain but these older tenants have the nerve to complain and be so demanding yet they're the ones who pay peanuts for their apartments. I just laugh in their faces and ignore their rants. If they're that unhappy, then they should move. Right?

Little do they know that I'm one step ahead of them to the point that I have dirt on them and if I really wanted to, I can get them evicted legally and maybe morally too but who cares. If they want to play dirty with me, then I'm a play dirty with them back and win. And they know this because I've done it to other longtime difficult tenants that stick their chest out and think they are untouchable because they are protected by the Rent Stabilization law. Oh please!

The facts are that new tenants (fair market) love me because they see that I am passionate about preserving a desirable living environment for them to enjoy in a peaceful manner as oppose to accepting the first welfare or section 8 tenant that throws money in my face to convince me to rent to them than to rent to a regular educated working tenant. While other landlords are dumb enough to fall for the bait, I'm not and thats one of the reasons why I've been able to keep my building desirable and marketable while other landlords purposely look for section 8 tenants because their buildings are NOT marketable to "desirable" people and has all the "tell-tell" signs of "hood" lifestyle with the graffiti, hanging out, empty liquor bottles in the hallways and urine in the elevators. Section 8 tenants will have more tolerance to that and will take whatever they can get just so they can get a roof over their heads. Beggers can't be choosers!

So if my leases are 12 pages long...so what? I'm protecting myself and my business from people like you Lovegasoline that know RS laws inside out and try to get over on rent stabilized landlords. So if a tenant is uncomfortable signing a 12 page lease, then they can leave and look elsewhere, I don't care. I have a waiting list of people that wouldn't mind signing a 12 page lease because they know that they are getting a good product in return, which they are.

Last edited by victorfox; 04-04-2010 at 01:38 PM..
 
Old 04-04-2010, 04:06 PM
 
1,263 posts, read 2,064,592 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamontnow View Post
Your reference to "upthread" is apparently to my posts. I gave a detailed description of the actions of a clearly abusive tenant. You ignore most of what I said and twist the rest. How DARE YOU accuse me of "denial of service and maintenance"??? I clearly stated that this tenant does NOT inform me of any repairs that are needed (for the nefarious purpose of creating a counter claim).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovegasoline View Post
lamontnow,
We appear to have cross posted.

I am not your attorney but I'll make a suggestion. You allege that a tenant of yours is deliberately destroying your property. You did not state what, if any, proof you have supporting this claim. Something functioning one day and broken another day is not proof of the tenant deliberately damaging your property. Your version can just as easily explain failure from normal wear and tear, from neglecting routine maintenance, and/or from improper previous repair work. If you have proof – not mere speculation – that the tenant is deliberately destroying your property, you have the legal means to remedy this. I suggest you pursue them. If, on the other hand, your allegations are not more substantial than speculation on your part, you’d be better served revising your assessment and strategy regarding the breech of warranty of habitability issues. Again, quality routine maintenance and preventative maintenance (regardless whether you like or dislike the tenant), in addition to routine inspections of the property (i.e., hands on knowledge of the condition of your rental units) will do much to prevent your breeching the warranty of habitability. You have to be willing to put the time and money in and to conduct quality property management, Also, hire a better attorney if you believe the tenant is destroying your property. Just be aware that there are financial and legal consequences and repercussions in conducting a witch hunt.

As regards your comment about a ‘pro–regulation website’, I have no idea at all what you are referring to. Stop beating around the bush. Spit it out. Inform me of who you have convinced yourself that I am, and what my alleged motives are.

Frankly, I do not see that reality plays much of a factor in your case. I can see a definite pattern here. You are delusional. You delude yourself and based on your delusions you to jump into the breech with both feet. You, your business, and your tenants would all be better served if you operated less on wild speculation and delusion and more on sound decisions based on solid fact. You are not alone (the mere fact of repeating the refrain ‘Saddam has weapons of mass destruction’ do not make them exist).

As with VictorFox, my suggestion is to expend more energy on thinking clearly on factual realities and putting your energies into better managing your own property and business, instead of getting wigged out by the vast governmental conspiracy to destroy your business and hand it over to your rent regulated tenants.

Good luck lamontnow, I wish you and your tenants well.
(Cross-posted two hours apart? That's a new one.)

I didn't ask you for legal advice and I would NEVER ask YOU for legal advice. And you're the last person in the world to tell me how to run my business. How DARE you be so pretentious?!

You accused me of denying service and maintenance. And with no basis whatsoever. You ignore what you want to ignore and then twist the rest. YOU are the delusional one here. In nine years I have had excellent relationships with my tenants, both regulated and non-regulated. Never even came close to litigation with any of them with this one exception. But then you have yet to meet a bad tenant, have you?

I read your post history. It is litigators and agitators such as you who have contributed to running the housing market of this city into the ground. And that is to the detriment of the city's people, including tenants, home owners, and tax payers, not just the building owners.

Last edited by lamontnow; 04-04-2010 at 04:42 PM..
 
Old 04-04-2010, 05:55 PM
 
19 posts, read 51,710 times
Reputation: 19
Post #139 written while #138 was posted. No mysteries here.

Since when is asserting one's rights and abiding by the rule of law considered agitation? Perhaps when one's desire is to deny others their rights? By this logic all lawyers are 'agitators' and all laws are just agitating for trouble. I'm as supportive of your rights as of your tenant's rights. You need to read what I wrote more clearly.

I nowhere stated I was offering legal advice. I offered a suggestion in resolving a problem you have. Interpret it, as you will. Take it or leave it.

I do not need to accuse you of denying services or maintenance: your tenant apparently does so successfully and the court's findings are in agreement with him, according to your account. If what you state is true, it's now public record.

You allege a tenant is damaging your property. You claim to have been repeatedly burned by a 'tactic' the tenant is using and his withholding rent for no reason. If what you allege is true, I claim you are perhaps enabling it by not employing a rigorous repair and inspection policy. If you keep his unit maintained you preempt this possibility. See what happens if he withholds rent again. If you INSPECT as I suggest, you will have a better basis for denying the tenant's claims, if they are indeed false concerning when such new condition(s) appeared. The former can be brought into play at the time of the filing of your non-payment petition to cut off any possibility of 'coincidental' violations appearing at the last minute. You can follow up the inspection by a certified letter inquiring if there are any items in need of repair in the tenant's apartment. If he states 'no', you have evidence of his own admission. If he claims yes, you go in ASAP and repair the minor new problem(s). If he ignores, you schedule an re-inspection to confirm previous repairs have been successful. Re-inspect if need be. Rinse and repeat (without harassing the tenant and without making undue demands on his time) until you have your court date. A second pair of eyes, like a super accompanying you, will lend weight to your testimony. If you have any outstanding HPD violations on your building, this would also be an opportune time to apply for a re-inspection to remove them...then you'd have HPD's official clearance report to add to your evidence: a third set of eyes owned by NYC. Corner the tenant...keep this up until you get your day in court. You'll be able to test your hypothesis. If the tenant has legitimate disrepair issues, he should be quite pleased with this royal treatment, as he is getting the attention his unit requires and receiving quality repairs. If he is lying, he'll deservedly be smoked out and he'll get the memo. Have your attorney fill in the blanks.

Be mindful that access rules demand you give 7-day notice in writing for repairs, 24 hours notice for inspections. Keep a paper trail. Carefully time and plan your actions in coordination with each other and any court dates.

You can send me a check when this is behind you

Last edited by Lovegasoline; 04-04-2010 at 06:34 PM..
 
Old 04-04-2010, 07:27 PM
 
10,612 posts, read 20,745,224 times
Reputation: 8155
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox View Post
In fact, if you look at my building, its so well kept that it looks like a building that belongs in Manhattan, not the Bronx. No open HPD violations or nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovegasoline View Post
If you have any outstanding HPD violations on your building, this would also be an opportune time to apply for a re-inspection to remove them...

You can send me a check when this is behind you
Lovegasoline, it doesn't look like you are reading very carefully.
 
Old 04-04-2010, 08:08 PM
 
461 posts, read 1,766,167 times
Reputation: 361
Lovegasoline, tell me this...what incentive does a landlord have to keep a rent stabilized tenant's apartment in good repair when they pay $600 a month???

The tenant is paying rent that is consistent with rent of the 1970's while the landlord is paying 2010 rates such as oil, insurance, water and sewage, etc. How does that sound fair to you or how do you justify that? The math doesn't add up.

That's why the RBG has imposed a minimum flat dollar rent increase or what you liberal rent stabilization advocates call a "poor tax" (to gain sympathy from people) so tenants like the example I used above can catch up to reality rates faster than using a percentage increase.
 
Old 04-04-2010, 09:14 PM
 
19 posts, read 51,710 times
Reputation: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henna View Post
Lovegasoline, it doesn't look like you are reading very carefully.
Right back at ya Henna. My reply was to lamontow.
 
Old 04-04-2010, 11:07 PM
 
19 posts, read 51,710 times
Reputation: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox View Post
So if my leases are 12 pages long...so what? I'm protecting myself and my business from people like you Lovegasoline that know RS laws inside out and try to get over on rent stabilized landlords. So if a tenant is uncomfortable signing a 12 page lease, then they can leave and look elsewhere, I don't care. I have a waiting list of people that wouldn't mind signing a 12 page lease because they know that they are getting a good product in return, which they are.

You have a persecution complex?
I’m not seeking to, or advocating, that tenants ‘get over’ on landlords.
My point is simple, clear, and supported by the laws of NYS/NYC. If an owner and tenant sign a lease, they are obligated to abide by the rules and laws that govern their responsibilities. The more they know about the laws and their respective responsibilities, the better.

[OTOH, I understand your position fully. You are screening for ignorance, sheepishness, and gullibility. As P.T. Barnum said, “There's a sucker born every minute.”]

If an owner reneges on this contract, the tenant is entitled to seek compliance. How can this be construed as ‘getting over’ in any way, shape, or form … except in an orientation that places a high value on cheating the tenant, promoting his/her ignorance, and systematically violating his/her rights? If you sign the lease, you assume legal liability. If you disagree than it is simple, don’t sign the lease, don’t be a building owner, if you are unwilling to meet your legal obligations. Getting incensed at those that understand their rights and NYC/NYS laws is a very distorted perspective. It’s sociopathic.



Quote:
Originally Posted by victorfox View Post
Lovegasoline, tell me this...what incentive does a landlord have to keep a rent stabilized tenant's apartment in good repair when they pay $600 a month???
What incentive?

It's simple.
It's the law.
An owner has a legal contract with his/her tenants and a legal responsibility to keep the apartment maintained in accordance with the NYS and NYC rules and statutes.

Liking the laws or disliking the laws, thinking them fair or unfair in your estimation, all have nothing whatsoever to do with it.
You may not like to pay taxes either and think them unfair.
You may not like your neighbors, think it’s your city and your neighborhood, you may convince yourself they do not have the right to live there and how unfair it all is, and may even wish to...

I advocate abiding by the law.

If you despise the laws of NYS/NYC so much, move to another city, another state, or another country and conduct your business under another set of laws more to your liking.

We are veering away from the buyout issue. Let’s try to get back on track.

Last edited by Lovegasoline; 04-04-2010 at 11:45 PM..
 
Old 04-05-2010, 08:52 AM
 
461 posts, read 1,766,167 times
Reputation: 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovegasoline View Post
Y
What incentive?

It's simple.
It's the law.
An owner has a legal contract with his/her tenants and a legal responsibility to keep the apartment maintained in accordance with the NYS and NYC rules and statutes.

Liking the laws or disliking the laws, thinking them fair or unfair in your estimation, all have nothing whatsoever to do with it.
You may not like to pay taxes either and think them unfair.
You may not like your neighbors, think it’s your city and your neighborhood, you may convince yourself they do not have the right to live there and how unfair it all is, and may even wish to...

I advocate abiding by the law.

If you despise the laws of NYS/NYC so much, move to another city, another state, or another country and conduct your business under another set of laws more to your liking.

The law my left foot! This RS law that you speak of is a law that was written to suppress the power of ownership and a blunt statement to stick it to landlords. Written by corrupt LIBERAL poliTRICKians to satisfy their voter base. Its a total sham of a law that solely protects the tenant's rights and ignores the rights of the landlord who OWNS the property. They'll throw a bone here and there to landlords to make it appear to the public like landlords have rights too but in reality, the whole Rent Stabilization law is a Pro-Tenant and Anti-Landlord law.

Just because something is LAW doesn't necessarily mean its right. Rent Stabilization goes far beyond price control. A rent stabilized tenant pretty much has to commit murder for a landlord to have enough "evidence" and grounds to evict a tenant. How ridiculous is that? The landlord should have 100% control of who he decides to evict or NOT to renew their lease.

The city shouldn't be telling Landlords that they have to automatically offer a RENEWAL lease to a tenant. That should be solely the landlord's decision whether or not to renew the tenant's lease especially if the tenant is undesirable. Thats why we have these stale pockets of neighborhoods throughout the 5 boroughs that are crime and drug infested because there is no movement of new tenants moving in or out.

Having such a law that FORCES a landlord to renew a tenant's lease is a main reason why we have these ghettos in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, and throughout NY.

For example, I as a property manager or landlord walk into my building and smell weed coming from apt #X. I clearly know where its coming from and know how weed smells. There's no denying that.

I call the cops complaining about my tenant smoking weed in his apartment to the point that it leaks into the hallways for everyone to smell, degrading my building and very disrespectful. They tell me legally they can't arrest him UNLESS he was smoking weed in the hallway out in the open.

Now what? I have a pot head that lives in my building who I can't get arrested and who I have no proof that he smokes weed to present to court so I can evict him or have good reason to not renew his lease.

Under the Rent Stabilization law, I have to renew this pot head's lease when it expires. Are you kidding me? If NY never had Rent Stabilization like the rest of the country, I could of easily opted to send a 60 day notice to the tenant that I have no intentions of renewing his lease and to start looking for a new place to live....end of story, end of the smoking weed problem. Problem solved!

But NOOOOOO! That's not reality in the wonderful world of Rent Stabilization in NYC. RS goes beyond price control folks, in this case, this weed head, drug dealer, or crackhead under the RS law would of been protected by me being obligated to renew his lease despite his poor conduct and performance as a tenant. And thats why we have "hoods" in NY because landlords are helpless and all their rights of being a property owner have been striped away by these liberals who created and enforce these Rent Stabilization laws.

One can argue that landlords purposely don't want to renew a tenant's lease so they can jack up the price but thats NOT always the case. Of coarse you have landlords that unfortunately would do that which ultimately mess it up for good intentioned landlords like me that just wants to have a clean and peaceful building with NO RIFF-RAFF of any kind.

This pot head tenant was a rent stabilized tenant but was already paying fair market rent so even if I evicted him or had the power to NOT renew his lease, I couldn't jack up the rent price anyways if its already at its fair market rent for my neighborhood. I would of offered the same rent price to the next tenant had I evicted him or had the power to NOT renew his lease.

But for longtime tenants that pay cheap rent, lets say I provide proof in writing that I have no intentions of raising the rent and I am willing to charge the same rent to the next tenant as long as I have the ability and the right to NOT renew a tenant's lease that I deem undesirable as far as conduct and tenant performance. Sound fair to you? Is that too much to ask? Sounds pretty reasonable to me. I wonder what the liberals would think of this idea...hmmm?

This is just an example that happened to me several years back with a tenant. Many of you on this board may not consider weed smoking a big deal BUT you can easily replace the weed smoking with drug dealing, prositution, a crack house or whatever and the situation would play out the same way and the tenant would STILL be protected by the Rent Stabilization law as long as they pay their rent which they all do unfortunately.

Luckily for me, I was able to evict the tenant for non-payment 4 years later which is 4 years of undesirable behavior that reflected bad on my building. And 4 years of embrassement when showing vacant apartments to prospective tenants and they smell weed in the hallways. All that did was deter them from renting one of my apartments. All because of one bad apple in the building thats protected by the Rent Stabilization law. Thank you Rent Stabilization.

Last edited by victorfox; 04-05-2010 at 09:09 AM..
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.


 


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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top