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.

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Good luck, guys!

And I mean it.

Tenants at Riverton (the brother complex to ST/PCV) sue their management company. And guess what company that may be?

http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140915/central-harlem/tenants-at-riverton-complex-sue-management-company-over-rent-hikes

There should be several lawsuits arising from what's going on in ST/PCV, but that surely would hold up the dream of tenant ownership, so no go.

42 comments:

Anonymous said...

Lead the way Riverton! We are with you!

Anonymous said...

CompassRock, which also manages Peter Cooper Village / Stuyvesant Town, did not respond to requests for comment.

I am shocked, SHOCKED!!

Anonymous said...

Any day somebody sues CW/CR is a good day.

Anonymous said...

Sometimes in an election year there is a good candidate to vote FOR

Sometimes there are not good candidates so you vote for the lesser of two evils

Sometimes the candidates are on in the same, equally bad, so the best message to send is to vote for none

I am exercising my right to vote by withholding my vote as both these candidates will frack and f*** us over

Sometimes there is a politician who is getting it right showing us what we should be getting from our local politicians.

Assemblyman Keith Wright got it right. Thanks for the article STR and the commentors.

Teachout got it right.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/14/meet-the-democrats-secret-savior-against-cuomo-corporatism.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/10/andrew-cuomo-can-t-ignore-it-now.html

We cannot support these NRA, Wall Street, RebNY backed candidates.

Anonymous said...

I wish we had a Tenants Association of that caliber! I don't feel like we have a Tenants Association at all!

Anonymous said...

Smart move by Riverton to halt the Compass Rock dilapidation of the property and demise of the community.

Anonymous said...

MCIs & other such means are probably how CW has been operating in Riverton. In other words, STPCV and Riverton probably have much in common and we should join the suit, It appears that CW intends to sell to Fortress and Fortress will continue STPCV as a rental property steadily renting to students for the rent churn and steadily using bogus MCIs in order to jack up all rents. As such, we have nothing to lose by joining Riverton's suit.

Anonymous said...

Worthless.

Anonymous said...

What lawsuits STR? The ones you were proposing to go forward with using interns?

Anonymous said...

Not suing our management company - owner has nothing to do with dreams of ownership. We have no balls, everyone says they have no time, they're afraid to complain.. btdt

Anonymous said...

How could we bring a lawsuit when we are saddled with a worthless TA and Dam Garodnick. Sleaze balls!

Anonymous said...

Our TA has no balls! that's the problem. WHAT THE F ARE TEHY DOING AT OUR TA?

Anonymous said...

As long as TA continues its ridiculous dream that CW will actually sell this place to the tenants , there will be no TA-lead lawsuits against CW. Somehow the TA continues to believe that if they don't make much (or any) fuss about the myriad of problems in our complex, CW will be nice to them and will sell this complex to the tenants. Meanwhile issues like leasing to multiple unrelated parties, non enforcement of dog size and dog poop rules, laundry facilities that are frequently broken, Sandy repairs that still haven't been completed, construction work conducted outside normal work hours etc, etc, etc, go unaddressed or, most, are asked about and when CW refuses to respond no further action is taken except to suggest that the tenant call 311 which itself is usually a huge waste of time

Stuy Town Reporter said...

The dream of tenant ownership is, in reality, a dream that places a death watch on affordable housing. Yes, a number of our wealthier tenants will make out as bandits (including Dan and some members of the TA, I assume), but the more apartments become tenant owned, the less availability there is of affordable apartments. Seems logical. The only comeback from the advocates of tenant ownership is to strike fear into tenants by suggesting that rent stabilization is somehow going to end in the future, permanently.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

I don't know if they ever revealed this, but I do believe it would be only fair and good for transparency for all office holders in the TA and for our councilman to declare whether they would purchase their apartment if condo conversion were possible.

Anonymous said...

I feel Riverton's pain (and we don't, who can?), but none of the fulminators here has indicated how we can be a party to this lawsuit or even what the terms of the suit are (not clear in news reports). And no legal eagle here knows that Keith Wright is head of the Assembly's Housing Committee? n more than one occasion, all I've heard from his is "Ain't nothin' goin' on but the rent," which may be true but doesn't say what he's planning to do about it. Maybe now that his own pocketbook is in play, we'll see some action from him.

10:51 a.m.: What are you talking about? Our assemblyman Brian Kavanagh is up for reelection this year. Are you suggesting that he hasn't worked hard enough on the rent law issue? Seriously? Brad Hoylman, our state senator, is also a staunch supporter of strengthening the law.

Anonymous said...

Str - there is no affordable housing for fast growing majority of stpcv tenants right now. At least a conversion would possibly offer an affordable purchase price. The existing situation is unaffordable for most and the rent laws will never turn back the clock. A conversion is the only alternative and a likely inevitability,

Anonymous said...

6:24 pm

no no no no. That's such BS. No one is being nice to CW hoping they'll sell to tenants.

How very 4th grade of you. Seriously?

CwC is not selling this place to anyone . STR - we are not going condo or coop even if we want to or don't want to. It's never going to happen. Why would it.

Anonymous said...

Upstairs neighbors are at it again. 10 pm and kids are playing ball above us and running back and forth. I'd like to contact a lawyer. Can anyone recommend who has btdt or a form letter to file in small claims court? I'm not putting up with this shit another day or night.

and why can't stuytown PCV post notices on the properties about noise rules and violations? because they don't give a damn and enjoy our misery. And neither does the T.a.

Anonymous said...

I look forward to the opportunity to buy my apartment. STR, it's not that R/S will die , but that inherently it will cause unaffordability through the phony mci's and RGB increases every year. Yes, I'll be buying.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, STR. No matter how much realistic common sense is offered about a conversion, at least a co-op conversion, I keep seeing the same unrealistic idealism about rent stabilization. Impossible to get all of us on the same page. Impossible.

Anonymous said...

10:31 that is your prerogative of course however there are people here who support the community, caring not just about themselves but about their neighbors too. And that is their prerogative. Somehow the self-centric and the compassionate need to find a way to form a community or the self centric will be overcharged (perhaps deservedly if you go along with the scheme) and the compassionate who care about the whole community will be gone. That is the direction of PCVST with transient dorm dwellers who are by nature self-centric as your neighbors. Again, perhaps deservedly, all the self-centric can live together in a cluster of transients and owners. Or we could find a way to keep the remaining 5500 affordable homes, (if there are that many), and the 5500 dorms/owners but that requires an attitude of community over self-centric.

Anonymous said...

We should be suing for the overcharge on our renovations.

Anonymous said...

"We should be suing for the overcharge on our renovations."

Yes we should. But how do we do that when we have a TA that doesn't care?

Anonymous said...

Has the TA sent out a blast saying they will follow this important lawsuit that is most relevant to us and keep us posted like they did with the junior lender lawsuit (which they never sent me any updates despite saying they would keep us posted).

Where else can we go to keep up with both these lawsuits?

Anonymous said...

"Where else can we go to keep up with both these lawsuits?"

I suppose you could get access to legal websites if you really want to follow all the ins and outs of these suits. But keep in mind that just because a lawsuit is announced doesn't mean it will be in court the next week or that any pre-trial negotiations will be made public.

Anonymous said...

"We should be suing for the overcharge on our renovations."

Yes we should. But how do we do that when we have a TA that doesn't care?

How about devoting a little time to finding out on your own what can be done instead of waiting for someone else to do it for you? Or if that's too much, why not call the TA for an answer?

Are you referring to how your rent got jacked up from the last unrenovated tenant? Check DHCR. I think only the first tenant after a renovation can challenge the cost of the improvements. The law is against us. And how many tenants in newly renovated apartments are going to put themselves through the hassle of looking into the situation and filing the paperwork (they'd have to request the info, not the TA)? If you know of anyone in a newly renovated apartment, why not suggest that they do this and help save an apartment from being jacked into unaffordability?

Anonymous said...

Does the Tenants Association still exist? Something's up!

Anonymous said...

"How about devoting a little time to finding out on your own what can be done instead of waiting for someone else to do it for you? Or if that's too much, why not call the TA for an answer?"

I guess the Resident Scold is on duty today.

I have done as much research as I can, but one person alone cannot do much. It is up to the TA (who never answers queries) to initiate such a lawsuit. Of course they won't because all they care about is appeasing the enemy and owning this dump. It wasn't always a dump, but it sure is now.

Anonymous said...

I know that it feels really good to vent about the worsening conditions, but isn't it time for everyone to open their eyes and acknowledge that ST/PCV was sold to Tishman EIGHT YEARS AGO !! That's when all your local electeds (Garodnick, Maloney, Stringer, Duane) gathered in front of you and swore to protect middle class affordable housing. In those intervening 8 years, we have seen ZERO progress in Albany to that end, with the only exception being the raising of SCRIE eligibility so that people living at near the poverty level can get their rent rate frozen.

At this point, unless there is radical change to the rent laws enacted almost immediately, it will simply be impossible for many of the middle class to stay.

What amazes me is that I never thought it was possible for "Real Estate" to be so rapacious and uncaring that they would wipe out an entire community, but if you think about it, they've already wiped out half of it, and are well on the way to wiping out the rest. Within 10 years, you might very well see almost the entire community brought out of stabilization, leaving the OWNERS free to throw everyone out and knock it all down. I never thought it would happen, but it seems quite possible now. That 5.4 billion dollars that Met walked away with will look like chicken feed by then.

I would think those of you who are intelligent enough to read the handwriting on the wall would have done so by now.

Anonymous said...

10:44 i know someone in a newly renovated flat here and they're being raped here in fees. I also know they filed a form for overcharges to Dhcr and never heard a word back! Laugh laugh.

File again, call them, go there. No one knows what crooks the dhcr are and more.

Anonymous said...

10 :31 YOU ARE SO SPOT ON CORRECT. They have found a way and many more to come (sticky this) to jack up all our rents through charges for this, that, mCi and soon to come will be water bills, electric bills and and Mci for the following: elevator upgrade, roof, plumbing and fire.

Anonymous said...

"10:31 that is your prerogative of course however there are people here who support the community, caring not just about themselves but about their neighbors too. And that is their prerogative. Somehow the self-centric and the compassionate need to find a way to form a community or the self centric will be overcharged (perhaps deservedly if you go along with the scheme) and the compassionate who care about the whole community will be gone. That is the direction of PCVST with transient dorm dwellers who are by nature self-centric as your neighbors. Again, perhaps deservedly, all the self-centric can live together in a cluster of transients and owners. Or we could find a way to keep the remaining 5500 affordable homes, (if there are that many), and the 5500 dorms/owners but that requires an attitude of community over self-centric."

HUH?

Anonymous said...

RE: Stuy Town Reporter said...

"The dream of tenant ownership is, in reality, a dream that places a death watch on affordable housing."

Sorry, STR, but this is a very misleading statement at best, and fear-mongering at worst. Yes, an apartment that is owned by someone can no longer fall under the category of "affordable rent." But for many who are paying market rate rents, their mortgage/mtnc in many cases could be more affordable. And in a non-eviction conversion, people can keep their affordable rents. Makes sense for everyone. The affordable housing argument will never hold water with people that are paying $5,000/mont for an apartment in PCV, so who are exactly is your argument aimed at? Also, while we're on the topic of things that place a death watch on affordable housing, here's another: time. Rents go up every year. And they will keep on going up. You can strengthen RS laws as much as you want, but you can't stop time. Rents will still go up every year. Slowly, maybe, but it won't be reversed. I don't understand how people can;t grasp this fact. I'd rather focus my energy on a plan that would benefit - or at the very least not affect - people that live here. If you can think of a better plan that a non-eviction conversion, I'd love to hear it.

Anonymous said...

Unless you have buckets of cash lying around, I don't see how anyone can say for certain that they will buy their apartment. You might want to, but in the end it might not be a good deal. We don't know what the price would be, we don't know what the mortgage or loan terms would be, we don't have a report on the physical plant and infrastructure (in terms of real dollar replacement costs), we don't know what the maintenance costs will be. Some people will be able go buy no matter what, and some won't no matter what. Lots of us will probably be in the middle with other factors to consider (such as how much of our capital we want to put into an illiquid asset depending on our age). This is not a one size fits all situation, just as the rental situation isn't.

Anonymous said...

"Unless you have buckets of cash lying around, I don't see how anyone can say for certain that they will buy their apartment. You might want to, but in the end it might not be a good deal. We don't know what the price would be, we don't know what the mortgage or loan terms would be, we don't have a report on the physical plant and infrastructure (in terms of real dollar replacement costs), we don't know what the maintenance costs will be. Some people will be able go buy no matter what, and some won't no matter what. Lots of us will probably be in the middle with other factors to consider (such as how much of our capital we want to put into an illiquid asset depending on our age). This is not a one size fits all situation, just as the rental situation isn't."

Which is precisely why the non-eviction conversion plan is the way to go. Of course with the complete lack of communication from the TA, who knows where that stands.

Anonymous said...

There is no such thing as a non-eviction plan when the buyers and sellers did 6000 evictions in the 3 years prior to the sale to make it look like after a sale it is a non-eviction plan. Big failure RE deal when it forces thousands middle class out of home.

Anonymous said...

When the Riverton TA has successfully completed its fight against the bastard CW/CR criminals, would they consider coming downtown and fighting for us? We don't have a TA. All we have is the illusion of a TA. Maybe the Riverton TA could encompass us, too? I would throw my wallet into their coffers if they would do that. Of course, they are not handicapped by a useless and slimy councilman who has whispered sweet nothings into the ears of their leaders about not making waves because there's a pot of gold in the form of a condo conversion at the end of the road.

Anonymous said...

Keep in mind that all the current, past and future McI's cannot be reversed. wE'll never go back to our original leases.

Anonymous said...

8:18 That simply is not true. Why are you trying to discourage those fighting for tenants -- what is in it for you?

Anonymous said...

re; 8:18 comment - There is nothing in it for me. I'm a tenant. I know the deal. No one will fight this, not you nor me. But yes, keep wondering what's in it for me. duh.

Anonymous said...

Is it true the TA no longer exists? People are saying now that they've slit and some have just walked away.

Can we get a new one in place quickly??? This is absurd. They've made no progress , we've gone backwards with them and haven't heard from them in months. We as tenants DEMAND answers.