Comment Policy

All comments to posts have to await approval. Please be aware that, depending on when I'm logged onto the internet, it may take me hours, even longer, to moderate comments, so if they don't turn up in a speedy fashion, they are still in the queue. Comments that cross a line I'm not comfortable with will not get approved. NOTE: Comments reflect the opinions of the person writing them and should not be assumed to reflect the opinion of the blog.

Sunday, November 10, 2013

CWCapital's "MCI Help Center"

From the TA:

Owner’s “MCI Help Center” Will Help Owner More than Tenants

CWCapital has set up an “MCI Help Center” in Peter Cooper Village. Make no mistake: this is not a tenant-friendly helping hand. The thrust of this help center is to rope in the confused, the scared, and those who may think CW’s offer is generous or worthy of serious consideration.

According to the Tenants Association’s attorney, there are powerful reasons why you should not sign CW’s offer:

• The proposed agreement is illusory, deceptive and unenforceable.

• The language of the form encourages acceptance while the Owner holds a trump card of unilateral termination.

• The agreement appears to be an attempt to intimidate those tenants who support the TA’s challenge to the MCI’s, by penalizing or diminishing their rights, in direct violation of §230 of the Real Property Law.

Furthermore:

• There is no explanation that the retroactive portion of the MCI orders is subject to the 6% annual cap, making it appear that the 35% will be an immediate windfall. (A PCV tenant has done the arithmetic on the MCI for the Security System and Video Command Center and finds that signing on to the management offer would save $1.60 a month.)

• The Owner’s offer to withdraw its appeal of $15 million of MCI costs that the DHCR did not approve is almost meaningless—it consists of sales tax, which can never be included, and other costs DHCR almost never approves.

• Roberts tenants were never served with MCI orders at all. Therefore, there is no present obligation on the part of the Roberts tenants to pay any increase, and no reason to sign.

• Tenants give up the right to file a PAR to challenge the validity and accuracy of the MCI costs.

• Tenants give up the right to challenge the Rent Orders in an Article 78 proceeding.

We need volunteers in front of 360 First Avenue starting this Monday to hand out a copy of Tim Collins’s letter and Public Membership Pledges to passersby or those who want to access the MCI Help Center at these hours:

Monday, November 11: 5 p.m.–8 p.m.Tuesday, November 12: 8:30 a.m.–11:30 a.m.Wednesday, November 13: 11 a.m.–2 p.m.Thursday, November 14: 5 p.m.–8 p.m.Friday, November 15: 8:30 a.m.–11:30 a.m.

59 comments:

Anonymous said...

From the TA's FB page: "another glaring failure regarding CWC's "offer": The landlord can opt out of the agreement at any time; if you sign you can’t." Good point, that!

Anonymous said...

CW Capital is simply and utterly DESPICABLE.

Reading the endless stream of comments from unhappy current and former tenants on Management's Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/PCVST?hc_location=stream

...and the postings on the TA's Facebook page, you can't believe what is going on here and how low this place is sinking everyday. So sad.

MEMO TO CW CAPITAL: GET OUT OF HERE AND LEAVE US ALONE. HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT OR LOOK AT YOURSELVES IN THE MIRROR IN THE MORNING???? YOUR ARE MONSTERS.

Anonymous said...

"Landlords often have multiple legal actions in court at any one time and keep attorneys on retainer. These firms specialize in housing court procedures and loopholes as well as the weaknesses in the system. One such firm, Belkin Burden Wenig & Goldman, LLP, whose partner was disbarred, is one of a handful of rent-regulation litigation firms that feast on landlord-tenant acrimony."

http://www.sohojournal.com/content/assault-affordable-housing-0

Anonymous said...

Looking forward to meeting some STR regulars at 360 First Ave this evening.

Anonymous said...

STR regulars should go to the MCI help center and report back on their encounters. Ask if the management people are lawyers or whether any management lawyers are there. Don't sign anything from management - just take names and publicly report.

Anonymous said...

Fred Knapp, PCVST's Corporate Counsel (aka: lead attorney for the complex... errrr... I mean compound) was the one (mis) informing tenants at their MCI (mis)Information Center yesterday (Monday) evening. God only knows what other cretins they'll have lined up for the rest of the week. No matter, even if you sign up for their "offer," they can withdraw it at any time and you've signed away the right to contest it. Nice to be able to have it both ways, huh?

Anonymous said...

Fred Knapp was the attorney speaking to tenants according to the people who went in. Nobody we spoke to signed anything. They did take pledges though.

Only TA volunteers showed up. Nobody from STR. Three days to go though. Miracles do happen.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Nobody from STR.<<

How do you know? Can't TA people be STR people?

Anonymous said...

You don't have to go to MCI center. You can sign up online or over phone. Hope the TA doesn't screw this up for us just so they can scare up some members. If they do this will get ugly.

Anonymous said...

"Only TA volunteers showed up. Nobody from STR. Three days to go though. Miracles do happen."

I wasn't aware that there were two separate "camps." I am an STR fan and follower and am also an active (not the word "active") member of the TA. Just because STR allows us to post as "Anonymous" doesn't mean that we don't post under our names on the TA FB.

Anonymous said...

Isn't Fred Knapp the sleazeball who goes spying on RS tenants to try to "prove" that they don't live in their apartments full time? Isn't he the guy who caused so many people unnecessary grief, heartache and expense by forcing them to prove that they did actually reside in their RS apartments? Isn't he the guy who put so much pressure on elderly RS tenants that many of them just moved out because they were too intimidated or couldn't come up with the money to defend themselves? Isn't their a special place in Hell for Fred Knapp and other filthbags such as he?

Stuy Town Reporter said...

From Bagli's OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY:

"Fred Knapp, a private detective once described by the New York Times as the 'scourge of illegal tenants,' was brought in to dig into the background of tenants whose leases were up for renewal."

Stuy Town Reporter said...

A blast from the past:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/feb/10/usa.edpilkington

The company that bought a huge housing complex in lower Manhattan in the largest residential deal in American history has employed a private detective to catch tenants in breach of the letting rules.

Tishman Speyer paid $5.4bn (£2.8bn) in October for more than 11,000 apartments clustered in 110 tower blocks along the east side of the island. There was speculation from tenants' groups that the firm would seek to end controlled rents in many apartments to get a return on its investment. The New York Sun yesterday revealed that the company has brought in private detective Fred Knapp to find tenants in breach of rental controls.

Mr Knapp is well known for such work. For his fee of $1,000 to $2,500 per case tenants on low stabilised rents can be evicted. Once an apartment is renovated it can be let to new tenants at uncontrolled prices, usually twice the amount.

Tenants in Stuyvesant Town complain that an atmosphere of suspicion is being created. "The sweep is so wide that legal tenants who have done nothing wrong are bearing the annoyance and expense of defending themselves," said Daniel Garodnick, a member of the city council who lives in the complex.

Mr Knapp, who was not available for comment, tracks down tenants who live out of town and sub-let their apartment for a profit or take in extra people without permission. He relies on clues such as postmarks on envelopes from outlying areas and money orders from tenants who used to pay by personal cheque. He once caught a cheating tenant by tracking down his real address through a dog licence.

Tishman Speyer said using a detective to help cope with illegal tenants was standard practice.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Yeah, I'd say it would be a good idea for tenants to speak to Mr. Knapp. LOL.

Anonymous said...

That CW offer was an insult. It's worth a couple hundred bucks to me just to stick it to them.

Why are they being so "generous?" A big MCI fight will slow down their progress in selling this place at a profit for their benefit and the benefit of the first lien holders. I'm sure they've figured out how to get a cut for themselves somewhere along the line.

Anonymous said...

"You don't have to go to MCI center. You can sign up online or over phone. Hope the TA doesn't screw this up for us just so they can scare up some members. If they do this will get ugly."

Are you saying that tenants should go along with management's offers? If so, why? Management will renege on their "agreement." They even pretty much say as much in their "offer." I strongly suspect that you work for management!

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>I strongly suspect that you work for management!<<

I've also considered the possibility. Or else it's a troll.

Anonymous said...

Wow, you got me. I'm both a troll and I work for management. Can't get anything past you guys.

Wrong, on both accounts. I just don't support the TA in their membership drive by trying to scare tenants. Their appeal is bogus and I would rather accept the $1500 gift that management is offering. If they insist on their appeal and do not get results better than the terms management is offering they should prepare to be held financially liable. Period.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Mr. Knapp is waiting for you to sign on the dotted line.

Anonymous said...

Issue 1.) Fred Knapp: General Counsel, Stuyvesant Town & Peter Cooper Village at Rose Associates, Inc. Past: Senior Counsel at Tishman Speyer, Partner at Fred D. Knapp ...

Per his LinkedIn page.

Issue 2.) @ 11:23 AM

There can be no deal because your neighbors all over ST-PCV have already signed pledges and will be filing MCI appeals if or when it comes to that. The Owner spelled out in the Agreement that ANY appeals filed will result in "a permanent withdrawal of the Offer."

Furthermore, the $1500 you cite is not a gift, it's a chimera. The Owner’s claim to withdraw its appeal of $15 million of MCI costs is stuff that the DHCR won't approve anyway.

And regarding the retroactive fee. CW Cap doesn't really care about those fees, they're temporary. From a financial standpoint, they only care about the permanent MCI rent rent increases because the inflate the rent rolls, which inflates the property value, which inflates the asking price. So in any serious negotiation, the permanent rent increase going forward would likely be the real focus and 35% off the retro sounds like chump change.

But I actually don't think that you care about any of this. Like STR, I'm certain that you're a mgmt shill. But if by some slim chance you really are an actual ST-PCV resident, your anger at the TA and your neighbors who have chosen to exercise their rights under NY state law is foolish and misplaced. Period.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Knapp is waiting for you to sign on the dotted line.

No, he isn't. why would he wait for me to sign TWICE?

Anonymous said...

Dear November 13, 2013 at 12:48 PM,

Like STR you would be wrong. I do not work for management. I have lived here for many many years. I am a realist and I am sure the TA will NOT be able to reduce the permanent MCI amounts already approved by the DHCR. Therefore, I would rather get a reduction of $1500 on the retro amount I owe than see the TA ruin that for everyone in order to scare a handful of tenants into paying membership fees. The TA represents less than 10% of tenants, most of whom have signed the TA pledge. However that is less than 1000 of 11,000+ apartments. the other 10,000+ will be watching closely and holding the TA accountable. I hope the TA, it's law firm and its pledge members have deep pockets.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>However that is less than 1000 of 11,000+ apartments. the other 10,000+ will be watching closely and holding the TA accountable. I hope the TA, it's law firm and its pledge members have deep pockets.<<

Sorry for being so frank, but this is both bullshit and laughable. Those 10K you refer to are not watching anything closely and no one is holding the TA accountable legally for their pledges, with the possible exception of you. If you are not a troll or from management, then you are just a solitary atypical tenant voice who is powerless in the bigger picture of things.

Anonymous said...


Sorry for being so frank, but this is both bullshit and laughable. Those 10K you refer to are not watching anything closely and no one is holding the TA accountable legally for their pledges, with the possible exception of you. If you are not a troll or from management, then you are just a solitary atypical tenant voice who is powerless in the bigger picture of things.

Wrong again, but you must be used to that by now.

Anonymous said...

2:44 PM

I signed a pledge. Are you seriously threatening to sue me? If so, you know what else you can do? You can go f–ck yourself.

But you're not really a tenant. You're a management shill breaking
§230 of the Real Property Law, which states:

"No landlord shall interfere with the right of a tenant to ... join or participate in the lawfulactivities of any group ... formed to protect the rights of tenants; nor shall any landlord...punish, penalize, diminish or withhold any right, benefit or privilege of a tenant ...for exercising such right."

Whatever you are, you a a vile creature. "Period."

Anonymous said...

Sorry for being so frank, but this is both bullshit and laughable. Those 10K you refer to are not watching anything closely and no one is holding the TA accountable legally for their pledges, with the possible exception of you. If you are not a troll or from management, then you are just a solitary atypical tenant voice who is powerless in the bigger picture of things.

Your statement is the one that is pure bullshit. I get it, you have jumped on the TA bandwagon. However, that still puts you in the huge minority. Just because someone (who happens to be in the vast majority) doesn't agree with your position does NOT make them a troll or a member of management whether you like that or not. Everyone I have broached the subject with has been against the TA and it's stance. None want to give up a sure thing and hang their hopes on the TA's appeal. What's the saying...A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. As for powerless, well, we will see about that once the TA acts.

Anonymous said...

I think I know who Anony 12.48 is. This person lives in a bubble and got his legal background from the back of a match book cover.

"I hope the TA, it's law firm and its pledge members have deep pockets."

This is fucking hysterical. Fantasy world delusional. BTW, STR, I had two attorney friends review Tim's TA letter, one who has had some experience (represented himself) fighting TS re a primary residence eviction notice (he won)and both think the letter was spot on.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Everyone I have broached the subject with has been against the TA and it's stance.<<

Let's rewrite this more accurately:

"Everyone in CWCapital/CompassRock that I have broached the subject with has been against the TA and it's stance."

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>I think I know who Anony 12.48 is.<<

RK?

Anonymous said...

Sure sounds like RK. Or maybe he has a twin...heaven forbid! One of him is more than enough.

Anonymous said...

The 5,000+ FMR tenants could give a rats ass about the MCI issue, as it's factored into their sleazily inflated "legal" [cough, cough] rents. The actual RS tenants have a perfect legal right to file PAR's on this issue, and the bullshit tactic of CW offering a phantom giveback probably is against the RS law regarding landlord interference. Nobody's suing any tenants over this, and you'd have to be the most gullible stooge in the world to believe a word of these insinuations.

BTW, my money's on RK as well.

Anonymous said...

This troll is clearly sent to this board by management. What an idiot! Hey Fuckface, I signed the pledge as did almost everyone I know who is an RS tenant. Not everyone who signed the Pledge is actually a member of the TA, though I suggested that they should join the TA, but even those who had only vaguely heard of the TA or who had not bothered to renew membership in years, told me that after reading management's "offers" put under their doors, they knew that management was trying to screw them up the ass even more than ever. You RE trolls should not assume that we are all stupid. Just because you are smartly sleazy and corrupt it doesn't follow that people can't see through you. Now go slither back under the rock you usually live under.

Anonymous said...

>>Everyone I have broached the subject with has been against the TA and it's stance.<<

Let's rewrite this more accurately:

"Everyone in CWCapital/CompassRock that I have broached the subject with has been against the TA and it's stance."

Wow STR, good one. When are you gonna bust out your "A" game, you know, I'm rubber you're glue.

Anonymous said...

I signed a pledge. Are you seriously threatening to sue me? If so, you know what else you can do? You can go f–ck yourself.

But you're not really a tenant. You're a management shill breaking
§230 of the Real Property Law, which states:

"No landlord shall interfere with the right of a tenant to ... join or participate in the lawfulactivities of any group ... formed to protect the rights of tenants; nor shall any landlord...punish, penalize, diminish or withhold any right, benefit or privilege of a tenant ...for exercising such right."

Whatever you are, you a a vile creature. "Period."

Screw up my chance at getting something back and you're damn skippy I'll sue you. You can go f_ck yourself too, you piece of sh_t. Because I disagree with you, you think you can say that crap to me, f_ck you.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>BTW, my money's on RK as well.<<

Yeah, after reading the latest from RK on the TA Facebook--interestingly exhibiting the same views with the same "in your face" attitude--it's almost a certainty. Can you imagine a guy spending time on the TA Facebook and here just for the purpose of annoying people and validating that he exists via the amount of angry responses he gets? What a life! But all good things must come to an end, at least here, so we may read a couple more troll-like missives from this gentleman before I refuse to allow more of his purposefully antagonistic commentary through. Or, then again, I may decide not to let any more commentary from him through right now. So this may well be a sayonara.

Anonymous said...

Sadly, there will always be trolls where people are given a choice, as in the case of CW's offer & the TA's objections to the MCIs. However, there's also a sense of satisfaction when these hens occasionally get plucked.

Anonymous said...

@ 9:47 PM

1.) Read the unserious settlement offer again. There's not a chance in hell you're gonna get something back that way because even if only one tenant in ST-PCV files a PAR, mgmt says the settlement offer's off.

And good luck finding an attorney to represent you in your sad, pathetic crusade to sue individual tenants like me or our tenants association (and Tim Collins too?) for exercising our rights under state law by filing PARs.

2.) You weren't "disagreeing" with me. You were threatening to sue me, you moron.

Anonymous said...

STR "purposefully antagonistic" can be useful in moving things in a preferred direction, but in this case, it's not beneficial for the greater good. My god, all the years we spent under the thumb of Met, afraid to ask for anything more than a working refrigerator. Tenants here have a right to object to these MCI charges, without fraudulent threats of non-existent legal action.

Anonymous said...

I guess "RK" is the guy who is always opining and arguing over on the TA FB. I think there's something wrong with him (as in not-too-tightly-wrapped) and this is how he spends his time. When I go to the TA FB, I skip over his posts because he is utterly and insufferably boring. He is obviously the ultimate narcissist. .

dcf said...

STR, how ARE you able to tolerate the nonsense? (I once asked Lux the same question.) Just want to thank you for all you do on behalf of our community. By the way, I am FMR, signed the pledge, and I urge all other FMR tenants to support your neighbors by signing, as well.

Anonymous said...

Questions for all the supposed geniuses on this site. If the TA's ultimate goal is to see a condo conversion take place here, then wouldn't the permanent MCI increase be much less valuable than the cash offer to reduce the retro portion given the fact that after a conversion you wouldn't have to pay the increased amount since you wouldn't be paying rent anymore but you would still be liable for the retro amount? Doesn't the TA's posture on this issue fly directly in the face of their conversion plan? Isn't this really more about increasing their membership numbers than it is about the MCI's? If you say it's not about membership then explain why the TA's pledge requires membership in order to be included when in fact everyone who lives here gets any permanent rent break whether they signed on to TA's pledge or not?

Stuy Town Reporter said...

The pledge is independent of TA membership.

Anonymous said...

The TA does not require membership of anyone signing the Pledge. They encourage membership, of course, but they do not make it a condition of signing the pledge, filing for a PAR, attending a meeting, or anything else. Get yer facts straight, Buddy.

Anonymous said...

"STR, how ARE you able to tolerate the nonsense? (I once asked Lux the same question.) Just want to thank you for all you do on behalf of our community."

I have written to the Pope asking him confer Living Sainthood on STR.
I hope he never gets too exasperated by the assholes on this blog who just want to make trouble. I'd hate for him to throw in the towel.

Anonymous said...

Your talking point regarding requiring TA membership for the pledge form, checkmated by the STR, Anony 1.05 PM. As per usual, I am guessing you did not attend the MCI meeting at PS 104 or look carefully at the actual stand-alone pledge form itself. How a non-eviction condo/co-op conversion impacts current, pending or future MCIs, well that could be another can of worms which your hatred of the TA overshadowed.

Anonymous said...

When you sign the pledge, you give the TA's lawyer Tim Collins the right to represent you with DHCR. The lawyer will do the work of filing our protests in various forms (and he knows how to do it correctly), and we'll look more united and more to be reckoned with than if we leave it to individuals to file their own PARs (or Requests for Reconsideration). The more people who sign the pledge, the stronger the position the lawyer is to negotiate. You can always rescind your pledge if you change your mind.

Anonymous said...

"If the TA's ultimate goal is to see a condo conversion take place here, then wouldn't the permanent MCI increase be much less valuable than the cash offer to reduce the retro portion given the fact that after a conversion you wouldn't have to pay the increased amount since you wouldn't be paying rent anymore but you would still be liable for the retro amount?"

We have to worry about right now. CW's offer isn't really an offer (when was the last time you signed a legal document that wasn't dated and signed by the other party?) so it's really irrelevant, especially since there's no guarantee CW will follow through. Anyone who chooses not to buy will still be RS, and in those cases the prospective increase will definitely matter.

Anonymous said...

1:05 PM

Talk about supposed geniuses. When trying to be insulting, at least attempt to get your facts straight first.

And you clowns can repeat "cash offer to reduce the retro portion" all you want but that doesn't make it a real offer for a whole lot of reasons not the least of which is that if only 1 out of 25,000+ tenants files a PAR, there is no deal.

Why do I think this is the same doofus as earlier this thread?

Anonymous said...

It IS the same doofus. Betcha a dollar!

Anonymous said...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Ubi0k1yLXeQ/UnY7SzxzrhI/AAAAAAAACmI/W8dl35FGVew/s1600/tenantspublicpledge.jpg

See attached pledge which states that the undersigned are "members" of the TA. If you signed the pledge you're a TA member, you owe your dues so pay up geniuses. You even gave TA permission to use your name.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>If you signed the pledge you're a TA member, you owe your dues so pay up geniuses. You even gave TA permission to use your name.<<

If you sign you give permission to be part of the TA effort and be represented by the TA, but you do not owe any dues.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Also, if you were at the TA meeting (which obviously you were not), you would have realized that the TA membership form was handed out as a separate letter.

Anonymous said...

This is a troll, STR. Ignore it.

Anonymous said...

This is a troll or a managemt plant trying to snoop and discredit the TA.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Yeah, it's obvious this is someone with a motive. I've said this before: The TA is not perfect and I disagree with its focus on tenant ownership of this complex, but the TA is the ONLY entity that can fight for our rights in Stuy Town/Peter Cooper Village. The ONLY ONE. Decide it is not worth supporting and you have given your support, even if unintentionally, to CWCapital.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

So, to sum up, anyone who comes here and tries to discredit the TA is working (even if unintentionally and without monetary gain) for the lord and master, CWCapital.

Anonymous said...

Of course I have a motive. I want to get back the most money I can. I think that lies with CW's offer not the TA's crap shoot.

Anonymous said...

"Of course I have a motive. I want to get back the most money I can. I think that lies with CW's offer not the TA's crap shoot."

If you really think that, then you're an idiot.

Anonymous said...

I'm really beginning to think that 12:33 PM actually works for mgmt. At this point, there can't be a sentient life form in the galaxy who really thinks that what we got slid under our doors is an actual "offer" --- for a lot of reasons that have been laid out in this thread and remain unaddressed by whoever's responsible for 12:33 PM and similar comments.

The way he repeats the phrase "get the most money back" is another giveaway. Even if mgmt's proposed "offer" was for real, we would not be "getting money back" as if we'd be walking away with cash in hand. No tenant would phrase it that way. A used car salesman or Fred Knapp might.

This shill works for mgmt. This shill is not interested in dialogue as his use of the word "Period" nicely points out in his first comment. Please ban this shill.