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.

Thursday, September 22, 2016

New Dog Rules - Yes, no, we don't care?

Posted here as a matter of policy:

>>The following letter to the editor should appear tomorrow on the T&V website:

On Sep 13, the Board of Health met and passed the following with respect to Health Code 161.03 which bears on dog waste on sidewalks and other public places:

"§161.03 Control of dogs and other animals to prevent nuisance.
(a) A person who owns, possesses or controls a dog, cat or other animal shall not permit the animal to commit a nuisance on a sidewalk of any public place, on a floor, wall, stairway, sidewalk, lawn, garden or roof of any public or private premises used in common by the public, or on a fence, wall [or], stairway or entranceway of a building abutting on a public place."


I'm told this statement of the regulation will go into effect around Oct 21.

The new statement makes clear that 161.03 applies to both public and private property. This means that dog owners in STPCV would have to abide by the same rules by which other dog owners in the city are charged to abide. That is, dogs must be curbed, the waste picked up and discarded.

Dogs would do their business in the streets, presumably where the sanitation vehicles clean. At the public hearing it was said that DHMH legal intends to get in touch with STPCV mgt about enforcement.

Management policy in STPCV has been to permit dog owners to allow their dogs to do their business on sidewalks, in specified grassy areas and on dog day playgrounds. I think the clarified statement makes it clear that the current management policy if continued would be in support of activity the board of health would consider illegal.

Would like to know if management intends to follow the clarified HC161.03 or intends to continue current dog waste policies. Would also like to know Dan Garodnick's position with respect to this issue. To wit, should STPCV management follow the amended HC161.03 or not?<<

71 comments:

Anonymous said...

They should focus on doing something about the speeding bicycles on the property. There's a much greater chance of being hit and maimed by a fucking bicycle than being shit on my a dog and nobody ever died from stepping in dog shit. I'm not saying the dog shit is ok, but I think the the bicycles are a more clear and present danger. That is one thing that I wish Management and the wussy public "safety" officers need to get on the stick about.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

I agree about the bicycles, but I can't forget about our four-legged furry friends and their masters. I think it's possible to enforce several rules, not just one. Aside from speeding bicycles around the Oval, I also see the periodic dog crap or refuse not completely picked up. My betting is that PS or Blackstone will find it difficult to enforce both.

Anonymous said...

Don't care anymore. Know why? Because management could give a %$!@*! They will
continue to allow people to have these ^&*#!! Dogs in order to keep renting out these ridiculously priced apartments. They have taken matters into their own hands by cleaning up whatever residual mess that needs to be cleaned up. Gee, I wonder why Metlife had these rules in place by not allowing dogs here in the first place. Sarcasm ) Hmmmmm.......... Folks, Management DOES NOT CARE ABOUT YOU!!

Anonymous said...

Enforcing the bicycle rules would take guts, strength and leadership. Qualities that BS and PS just do not have.

Anonymous said...

Let's stop agonizing over it and face the fact that this place is finished. It's a stinking shithole dorm and "management" are simply in place to collect the rent.

Anonymous said...

Dog problem is too large now to even worry about @ thus point. Fix the bike problem and fix the student overkill.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

There are several ways to fix the bicycle problem. All of them involve management getting serious. And I'm still waiting.

Atomic Man said...

Once upon a time, back in the Cushman Scooter days, Security did try to enforce the No Bikes rule on the property.

But if you called for a pizza from Frapposa or Adriatic, or a burger from Ambrosia or Stavy's, it'd take an hour to arrive. All the delivery guys had to walk back and forth. How do you think that'd go over with our new and improved tenancy that thinks food comes from an app on your phone?

Barry Shapiro said...

The T & V Letters to the Editor didn't come out today. Sabine Mollot wrote me they would come out soon.

About the bikes: I've posted I've been in touch with the DOT & the 13th precinct. Both have told me that riding bikes on any sidewalks is illegal.

Riding bikes on sidewalks is a violation of city codes; riding bikes recklessly on any sidewalks is a misdemeanor. However, both DOT and 13th precinct community affairs have said they cannot enforce here because we're on private property.

I have written as much to Rick Hayduk. Do you see any change in policy or signage?

There is a legal basis to question dog policy and bike policy here. But my voice alone isn't going to do anything. You can't hope to do anything but complain if you're going to stay anonymous...when there is a clear legal basis for your complaint.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>I have written as much to Rick Hayduk. Do you see any change in policy or signage?<<

No.

Anonymous said...

Don't hold your breath waiting, STR. Management doesn't give a flying fuck about what happens here, just so long as they get the gelt. They don't care if someone is killed or their life destroyed by these kamakazi bicyclists. If it's an elderly person, the life isn't worth much in insurance terms. Let a little kid get hit and killed or maimed and then wait for the uproar!!!!!!! I am not wishing that to happen, but I'm just saying that is what it's going to take. And the StyMoms complain about the fucking squirrels being a danger to their babes? Wait until a 40+ mph fixiei plows into your kid and takes away every bit of potentiality it was ever born with. THEN Blackstone Bastards will have a lawsuit that will hit them where it hurts ----- the bottom line.

Show me a dead or maimed senior - nah, no big deal.

Show me a dead or maimed child - Oh Boy!!!!! LAWSUIT LAWSUIT LAWSUIT AND BIG BIG BIG PAYOFF AND CRIMINAL CHARGES!

Stuy Town Reporter said...

I'm not firm on this place being completely "private" property. Any trouble comes, the police are here in an instant. If it's truly private property, then this complex can deal with ALL the problems.

Anonymous said...

Deliveries to any building in ST or PCV might take 5-7 minutes longer if bike riding were not allowed in the complex. Access by 14th, 20th, 23rd, Peter Cooper Road, all the service roads and all the loops and then walking the bike for a bit provide all that's needed.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

This place, owned by Blackstone now, would love for it to be "private" property when it suits it. They will take as much as they can. The job of the city and our councilman, and our TA, is not to make it a done deal.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>But if you called for a pizza from Frapposa or Adriatic, or a burger from Ambrosia or Stavy's, it'd take an hour to arrive. All the delivery guys had to walk back and forth. How do you think that'd go over with our new and improved tenancy that thinks food comes from an app on your phone?<<

Food can come, gasp!, from one's kitchen!

Barry Shapiro said...

People at the DOT and Community Affairs 13th precinct don't go into detail about the private property issue, but here are the factors I think actually come into play:

1. The 4th Amendment in the Constitution provides protection from unwarranted search and seizure. So the government can't enter your property to actually do something official without a warrant or reasonable cause.

If there's a fire or bloody murder screaming or even a noise complaint, those are all reasonable causes and FDNY or NYPD will respond.

2. In general NYPD and other agencies have bigger fish to fry than dog and bike complaints. A case could be made that there is reasonable cause here given management policy, but who's going to make that case and who's going to listen? In both cases I think the answer is nobody.

3. So in our case enforcement would mostly likely fall to management...which probably doesn't see enforcement as in its business interests. And so they will do as they like.

4. There is an open question. It is...does the city have a code or a position about a property owner that openly encourages or supports the commission of violations and misdemeanors? I don't know. I'm still looking into it.

Now, there is one other factor that could have an influence...or is supposed to have an influence and that's our councilman. Any comment about that?

Last but not least, in the case of biking for example let's say there is an accident where someone is badly injured by a deliveryman. Naturally,the injured party could/would sue the business involved. But given management policy here that allows biking in violation of city codes, could not a case also be made against management?
Anybody with $20 in his pocket can sue. But one lawyer told me that encouraging or supporting any illegal activity would certainly strengthen the case.

Anonymous said...

Again: if several, if not MANY of US determined to PROTECT OURSELVES and employed either spray bottles or water guns with clean water inside of them, it's a pretty good bet people would no longer want to bike, scoot or skate here any longer.

I am not advocating hurting anyone. The jackasses on wheels are the potential maimers. Simply squirting one of these deliberate (and potentially literally murderous) criminals is a right we have if we want to remain both uninjured and alive. Period.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Last but not least, in the case of biking for example let's say there is an accident where someone is badly injured by a deliveryman. Naturally,the injured party could/would sue the business involved. But given management policy here that allows biking in violation of city codes, could not a case also be made against management?
Anybody with $20 in his pocket can sue. But one lawyer told me that encouraging or supporting any illegal activity would certainly strengthen the case.<<

A smart lawyer would not take management's response at face value. Yes, there are signs galore now, but are the rules enforced? Hardly. A smart lawyer pounces.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Again: if several, if not MANY of US determined to PROTECT OURSELVES and employed either spray bottles or water guns with clean water inside of them, it's a pretty good bet people would no longer want to bike, scoot or skate here any longer.<<

But...it is all legal, so you would be committing a crime?

Anonymous said...

they and i mean THEY are fully protected by the mayor, DOB, DHCR and all the corrupt politicians running this shitshow in NYC. Residents are basically fucked and i am truly sorry.

Anonymous said...

When some baby gets seriously bitten by a dog or is killed by a bike, only THEN will
the rules change. It has to go to that extent so that a change in these rules will happen. Until then, nothing will change. Don't ya just love living here?

Anonymous said...

Dear Stuy Town Reporter:

1. Bike riding, etc. on pedestrian paths is illegal. As Barry Shapiro wrote above: Riding bikes on sidewalks is a violation of city codes; riding bikes recklessly on any sidewalks is a misdemeanor.

2. If legality is the issue, then here is the legal definition of the attitude fueling the actions of Blackstone and their minions:

DEPRAVED INDIFFERENCE

“To constitute depraved indifference, the defendant's conduct must be 'so wanton, so deficient in a moral sense of concern, so lacking in regard for the life or lives of others, and so blameworthy as to warrant the same criminal liability as that which the law imposes upon a person who intentionally causes a crime.

"Depraved indifference focuses on the risk created by the defendant’s conduct, not the injuries actually resulting.”

http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/depraved-indifference/

In other words, Blackstone and its agents, acting out of depraved indifference for the life or lives of others, is daily, consistently and deliberately behaving in a manner defined as CRIMINAL by the law.

This is serious. This is legally actionable.

I may, if you permit me, sir, continue to post this particular comment on some or all of the threads here on your blog, and perhaps repeatedly.

Deliberately exposing us to physical danger, and actively encouraging behavior which can cause injury, permanent disability, and death, is not a matter for simple debate or complaint. The bikers, skate-boarders and scooters threaten life and limb every moment we walk out of a building's doorway.

That, of course, includes the growing number of vehicles which they send onto pedestrian walkways day and night.

Blackstone has, and continues to, engage in escalation of conduct which poses a threat to every human being who walks upon and through its so-called "property."



Barry Shapiro said...

STR - I think you make an important point about the bike signs. Generally, signs like this mean nothing legally. For example, signs about not being liable for something have little applicability. In a law suit, a jury will decide if there is contributory negligence.

Not that the following has any great meaning, but the 19-176-3b code does say that bike riding is only allowed if there is a sign allowing it.

So I have queried the DOT and NYPD to ask about private property owners putting up signs. Does this make bike riding legal? I think the original intention is clear. It has to be a city government sign.

But business guys only see things in terms of what is advantageous for them. So to me this is a loophole that needs to be closed. Just as HC161.03 needed to be clarified.

The rest is instructive about city agencies. The DHMH board immediately forwarded my inquiries to its legal department and the head of the DHMH legal department, Thomas Merrill took immediate action to clarify the code.

That's not the kind of responsiveness I've seen from the DOT. If the answer is easy, they respond. If the answer is not easy or might require something like getting their legal side involved, they either don't respond or try to send you somewhere else.

I've also encountered some non-responsiveness from the Department of Investigations and so far as the DOB is concerned....you'll get more of a response from a stone.

The NYPD enforces the law and takes its marching orders from those parts of city government that make the laws so they are not really primary sources for a response.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Blackstone will merely respond that it's their property so the normal rules don't apply. Normal being what is normal for the city.

I don't understand this, as:

1) When there's a law enforcement issue, the police are ultimately called. Even when PS holds their "man."

2) When there's a fire in the complex, the city fire department is called. Not the Stuy Town Fire Brigade.

3) When there's an ill resident who needs to go to the hospital, it is the city transport that is called.

I think there are other cases of the city needing to be involved, which includes rent guidelines, etc.

But when the city mandates that pedestrians only can walk on pedestrian walkways--well, Blackstone is ace and the final word on the subject. And don't get me sidetracked with this area not being pedestrian only! BS, as the past can prove.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>But business guys only see things in terms of what is advantageous for them.<<

We can mention Dan our Man. He stated that every commercial enterprise here must state that it is for "residents and their guests." Where is anything stated as such in the Farmers Market or the new cafe?

Anonymous said...

Enforcement of rules here?
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Anonymous said...

About dog poop:

The law intended to ‘prevent a nuisance’ has been clarified to include private as well as public spaces, good, but the writer has misunderstood what a ‘nuisance’ is. A ‘nuisance’, in law, is not a euphemism for dog poop.

From http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/public+nuisance
“Public Nuisance

The term public nuisance covers a wide variety of minor crimes that threaten the health, morals, safety, comfort, convenience, or welfare of a community.”

The law does not mean dogs are not allowed to poop on the sidewalk. Dogs pooping in the street would be dangerous and impracticable in NYC. This is recognized by the city and its administrative code, which allows pooping on the sidewalk but does not allow said poop to be left there, and which specifically mentions sidewalks:

From the NYC complaint site
http://www1.nyc.gov/nyc-resources/service/1535/dog-or-animal-waste-complaint

‘The City enforces the Pooper Scooper Law and accepts reports of places where dog walkers regularly fail to pick up after their dogs. These locations include streets, sidewalks, and other areas such as open front yards next to the public sidewalk.’

Further misunderstanding: ‘to curb’ does not mean ‘to put off the curb.’ Here the letterwriter is conflating the noun ‘curb’ and the verb ‘to curb’ into one wishfully imagined notion. The word he uses is the verb, and it means . ‘To restrain or keep in check. “she promised she would curb her temper” synonyms:restrain. It does NOT mean ‘Put the dog off the curb and onto the street.”

Misunderstandings or intentional twisting of meanings, unknown.

I don’t understand the intense anti-dog sentiment in Stuyvesant Town. The dogs there are, and have always been, subject to the same rules as they are throughout the city. Why is their presence in Stuyvesant Town so much more of a burden than anywhere else?

Anonymous said...

Thank you 12:45! If Mr. Shapiro and his anti-dog fight wants clarity, he needs to understand things like this. I don't care if he's lived in 6 neighborhoods in NYC, I don't know any dog owner sending their dog off into the street to go poop. It just does not happen.

I do agree that owners should be fined the $250 if they don't pick up after their dog though.

Anonymous said...




September 23, 2016 at 12:45 PM

It's ironic that when MET Life ran this place, and no dogs were allowed, we never
had any of these problems. That's why for the anti-dog sentiment! Sorry, but that is a fact.

Anonymous said...

Dogs do leave all their stains all over the place, and frankly, it looks rather disgusting.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

I think we need to determine who owns the sidewalks here--the city (via the public) or Blackstone (the landlord)? If the landlord, then the landlord can do anything within reason. I don't think this issue has been settled. I'm sure that certain of our council members would love it to be the landlord because then there is no "trouble"?

Stuy Town Reporter said...

If things keep up, this place will have more and more dogs (and more dog stains) and more bicycles/skateboards? And, in part, some dogs will be over 50 pounds and some will be of banned breeds. That's just the way it is. I don't know what Blackstone's plan is in this case. They certainly do see the potential of what I'm talking about. Maybe they figure that down the line these buildings will go down to be replaced by new deluxe ones. By agreement this change is going to take a couple of decades at least, but it may happen. If I were a betting man, I would say it is going to happen eventually.

Anonymous said...

perhaps we should just have a dog section on blogs, sites to quibble over this. they're not leaving, there will be countless more coming and i don't want them but what's done is done. moving on to things we can change.... ?

Anonymous said...

1:52

This is not the good old days whenet Life ran the place and dogs weren't allowed. It's 2016 and the dogs are here to stay. What we need is for owners to understand there are repercussions if the dog does shit and they leave it there.

Anonymous said...

Really puzzled. Sidewalk ownership is not at issue here. Blackstone-Ivanhoe own the sidewalks. The laws in this case applies regardless of ownership.

The problem is that for reasons stated above, city officials cannot or will not come onto the property to enforce the law.

Consequently, the enforcement is left to management. Management has chosen not to enforce. So the violations go on constantly. Because of the concentrations of small children here and the elderly, there is more reason to enforce here than anywhere else.

This leaves only two legal recourses. The city might be able to take an action against mgt here because it is supporting or giving aid to illegal activities.

The other is when and if a lawsuit is brought against mgt in the case of a biking accident or a child getting seriously ill.

Anonymous said...

"Curbing" dogs used to mean just that. It did not mean "control, restrain," etc. where dogs were concerned.

"CURB YOUR DOG" meant, and in most parts of this miserable city, continues to mean: WALK YOUR DOG TO THE CURB AND WAIT UNTIL THEY DEFECATE THERE.

In addition, many people here of all ages and beliefs put their filthy, germ-ridden, dog-shit-and-piss-covered feet up on our benches and our tables. More and more older folks have chosen to live like self-entitled slobs and deposit dog shit and piss on the benches, along with the young narcissists.

Every time you sit down on a bench or spread anything at all out on a table, you are guaranteed that you are encountering minute amounts of dog feces and urine, among other wastes and poisons.

Blackstone does not have a legal right to endanger us. They have, in fact, a legal, contractual, fiduciary duty to protect us. "Depraved indifference" is recognized as a legal concept and it is what Blackstone practices.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>> moving on to things we can change.... ?<<

Ideally, we can change a lot of things. However....

Today, just around 3pm, I passed two large residues of dog crap by a building. These residues were something you did not want to step on, but who knows? I also passed, around 8 or so feet away, two large dogs tangling with each other. (They may have been playing or not.) The few people around them thought it was cute, but they, the dogs, could also be some kind of mixed breed, one of which is not allowed in Stuy Town. Both seemed Stuy Town dogs. About the same amount of feet away, I saw more large dogs coming close. It was dog heaven. I know: What's it to you?

I'm sorry. You may be quite right that we can't change the dog rules, but I will continue to alert readers, when I want, to dog infringements or when the dog population gets too much, which is seeming to happen.

Management may or may not want to hear these things, but they will hear them. These instances will not be "swept under the rug," so that everything seems wonderful and perfect. Robbie Speyer wanted the rules changed, so they are changed. We should always inform him of that, despite him not giving a fuck about this property any more.

Anonymous said...

You can let Robbie know all about it through his good friend Dan Garodnick.

Barry Shapiro said...

As mentioned, the DHMH won't/can't do anything with respect to enforcing dog codes here, that is, directly with respect to dog owners. However, I think there would be a general DHMH legal concern when it comes to management policy that supports the commission of violations of HC161.03.

Therefore, if you'd like to do something that may have an effect, I suggest you write to DHMH general counsel Thomas Merrill and express your concern.

Email is: tmerrill@health.nyc.gov

Anonymous said...

There is other recourse. Why are people so afraid, so reluctant to protect themselves, their families, other people?

In addition, it might well be there is a class action suit BEFORE anyone is seriously injured or killed.

Passivity stemming from fear or indifference is historically a killer.

Anonymous said...

Elderly (and even not so elderly) people are afraid to go out and walk around the complex because of Blackstone's DEPRAVED INDIFFERENCE when it comes to the bicycles.

Anonymous said...

I'm thinking of getting mace to spray at the next fucker on a bike who side-clips me.

Anonymous said...

12:45...you are apparently unfamiliar with common usage of terms here in New York City. It's like maybe you're not really from New York or like maybe you just got here from some place like Florida.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>I'm thinking of getting mace to spray at the next fucker on a bike who side-clips me.<<

While I understand the concern, the reality is: one, the mace spay will probably strike you before it strikes the speeding bicycle rider, and two, if your action is successful you will be the one to face charges. I've seen it happen where the person "defending" themselves is the one to get in trouble. My suggestion is to get out of his way. Until the law changes, which it still hasn't here, even in the Oval, believe it or not.

Anonymous said...

"Every time you sit down on a bench or spread anything at all out on a table, you are guaranteed that you are encountering minute amounts of dog feces and urine, among other wastes and poisons."

Carry some disinfectant wipes with you and wipe the surfaces before putting your bottom or your food on them. Have been doing that for years.

Anonymous said...

I can hesitantly deal with the dogs and bikes. The real issue for me is the students. Not their college age behavior, but rather the sheer numbers that have taken over the property.

We need to be more worried about our infrastructure (elevators, pipes, etc) then we do about what's going on on the sidewalks.

Anonymous said...

"My suggestion is to get out of his way. Until the law changes, which it still hasn't here, even in the Oval, believe it or not."

how can you get out of the way of someone who comes up behind you silently? You have to constantly look behind you whether on the sidewalk or in ST because these mofos are zooming along and you only have to sidestep and be right in their path. True, mace would be of no use really, but I can understand the posters ire. Something has to be done about these cyclists who ride on the sidewalks, go the wrong way on the streets and blow through traffic lights. The City can do something about them, but it is Blackstone who can do something about the mofos who speed through PCVST. Blackstone chooses NOT to enforce the law and its pussy wussy Public "Safety" officers are as useful as tits on a duck.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

I continually see the "law" violated around the Oval. Even if a PS officer is around, the bicycle goes the other way. I am really starting to believe that Blackstone doesn't give a damn a whole lot. If it does, then it has to spend a lot more money here.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

And the weight classification for some of these large dogs? Where is it?

While there are times of relative quite and peace (I'm speaking of the Oval), there are times where "the rules" are clearly not obeyed and few care or seem to care. Some people have just given up. Woe to any landlord when the tenants (the good ones) give up.

Anonymous said...

speaking for myself, and having lived here for 20years the student population explosion has gone wayyyyyyyy overboard. at the very least Rick needs to discuss and address. our apartment next to 4 kids and one bathroom - the toilet is backed up once a week with shit and hair and more shit. Normal, legal, I say AND cry lawsuit.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>at the very least Rick needs to discuss and address<<

Rick is okay in the BS department, but let him, finally, put some teeth into his "rules."

Stuy Town Reporter said...

BTW, did you see the Oval grounds where the grass is? Despite or rather because of the constant pruning and cutting, the grass is starting to really look a mess. Patches everywhere of dried or grass too low, etc. It looks terrible. As well as the places where people don't sit or lie.

And pizza boxes in the garbage! Filled up, until cleared away.

The Oval Fountain area? Workers there for a few minutes, and then they are gone.

Good job, Rick.

Anonymous said...

"In addition, it might well be there is a class action suit BEFORE anyone is seriously injured or killed."

I would most willingly be party to such a class action law suit. This place is a hazardous place to live, especially if you have to walk through the property. There is bound to be a horrible accident involving a bicycle and (probably) an older person or a child; and there have already been dog-on-dog attacks. Let's hope there will be no dog on child or adult attacks. This is a horribly dangerous place to live now. Horrible and hazardous.

Anonymous said...

"We need to be more worried about our infrastructure (elevators, pipes, etc) then we do about what's going on on the sidewalks."

The infrastructure is already shot and Blackstone's policies are making it worse. They will probably patch up these things by way of MCIs. The dangers outside, particularly the cycles and dogs, are of more concern to me. I may not be able to recover physically and/or emotionally if I am injured by one of those hazards. The pipes and elevators - I can just walk away from this dump with my body and soul intact. It's not the last place in America to find a home! Maybe one of the worst, but not the last.

Anonymous said...

I wish they would or could restore the Oval to being a beautiful tree park. The way it looks and is used now, it might as well be asphalted over and turned into a parking lot. This place bears almost no resemblance to the way it used to look and operate. It is a squalid dorm and I am very grupy today because I was kept up all night by horny, giggling, woo-hooing girls and braying drunken frats in the apartment downstairs from me. However, I got revenge with my high-powered, very noisy vacuu cleaner at 9 am. Happened to bang into a lot of furniture with it too. Shame, those poor babes must have been sleeping after all the boozing and shagging I had to listen to last night. I did hear them get up and go the bathroom (the ONE bathroom they all had to share in their one-bedroom converted squat) and there were a lot of moans and groans of the not ecstatic kind. I love my LOUD and heavy Hoover! Don't suggest I should have called PS because they are fucking useless at best.

Next time they are all congregated for a night of drinking and bonking, I'll record it and play it at top volume so they can hear it. I'll play it in the bathroom where the accoustics are excellent.

Anonymous said...

11 :34 that's a cool idea and I'll do same tomorrow! My old neighbor used to play baby tunes and kids music real loud for the neighbors at about 7 or 8 am. Imagine being blasted in a drunken sleep to the sound of Barney and friends? woohoo good times.

Edmund Dunn said...

"Don't suggest I should have called PS because they are fucking useless at best.


Sorry, but please call PS (gets the audit trail going) AND do the 311 on line noise complaint that goes direct to the 13th precinct at the same time. I have had around a 50% success rate with the 311 NYPD responses. Also creates an audit trail. Beats a zero success rate.


http://www1.nyc.gov/nyc-resources/service/1197/noise-from-neighbor




Anonymous said...

how do you play it in the bathroom and how can they hear it - are you using a phone or ?

Anonymous said...

"how do you play it in the bathroom and how can they hear it - are you using a phone or ?"

You can hear EVERYTHING that goes on in the bathroom! More than you ever want to hear. Just stick the iphone in a dock and turn it up loud.

Anonymous said...

har ha Har Ha. If & when PS shows up they do nothing - you have to bring them in your apartment, in your nightgown, pjs with your kids last time it was 11 30 pm here. and they just kind of stare at you like you annoyed them and why are you even calling them?

Anonymous said...

The point on infrastructure is worrisome. Have they done any engineering audits on the added holes in the exterior walls under windows being added now that the air conditioners are in the walls and not in the windows? Will the whole building wall crumble from the added holes?

Anonymous said...

"The point on infrastructure is worrisome. Have they done any engineering audits on the added holes in the exterior walls under windows being added now that the air conditioners are in the walls and not in the windows? Will the whole building wall crumble from the added holes?"

I'm sure that never even crossed their greedy little minds.

Anonymous said...

Have they done one thing to protect tenants or the buildings from another Sandy hurricane? No Sir. Want to know why?

Anonymous said...

Class Action

Anonymous said...

We would need a good lawyer for a class action and I don't know where we would find one who would represent us. Certainly, the TA is not interested and, besides, they have the worst and most inferior lawyers that there are. At least from a tenants' point of view. Just like the TA itself.

Anonymous said...

Yeah. This place blows!

Anonymous said...

If you have everything turned off in your apartment, yes, you can hear EVERYTHING!

Anonymous said...

10:57 AM: You don't even have to turn everything off in your apartment to be able to hear every fuck, fart, piss and more. The uncarpeted renovated apartments are like echo chambers. The acoustics are perfect for public performance with a microphone!

Anonymous said...

Peter cooper dad here. The good or not so good people of peter cooper should know everyone and everything is heard throughout these walls.

Anonymous said...

This sound vibrating echoing throughout is an easy fix. Only a douchebag management corp. wooulnd refuse to rectify.

Anonymous said...

"This sound vibrating echoing throughout is an easy fix. Only a douchebag management corp. would refuse to rectify."

Well, what kind of a management corp do you think we have? Mm?