How despicable is CWCapital? This is the company that tries to squeeze every cent out of tenants, that fills apartments with transient students, and has tried, with some success, to rip apart this community through a variety of divide and conquer tactics. This is the company that raised rents mid-lease on "market-rate" tenants. This is the company that said of the unfortunate tenants in PCV whose buildings were affected by Hurricane Sandy, and who were not getting proper services ("basement access, laundry rooms, intercoms, trunk rooms, security, and even elevators", TA report), and who sought a temporary rent reduction, that they were “petty and mean spirited” and that “tenants seek to transform these events into an opportunity to profit.” These are same bastards who now charge you $75 to have your door opened in case you get locked out. These are also the same bastards who do not paint your hallways or clean your buildings or our exterior walkways with regular proper care, but somehow have enough money to spend on a revolving door concept of "landscaping" that has, in the Oval, ripped out beautiful trees, flowers and plants to replace them with a disheartening bare, institutionalized look. This is the same company that doesn't care if it wakes you up in the morning for construction work or leaf-blowing or whatever the hell they want to do. This is a company that doesn't care about you, the middle class, but would be delighted if you left so they could further raise the rent of your apartment, and would celebrate any incident, death included, if it meant getting an old apartment renovated to a new one so that an extra couple of thousand dollars could be added to the rental fee.
And now this company wants to make you an offer.
The second page deals with the waiver, 35% of the retroactive charge, and how much that would be for your apartment. I found this amusing, though. CWCapital wants to "allow our community (italics mine) to move forward."
So don't forget to sign those pledges (see below). And let me repeat what I wrote in that introduction:
CWCapital is very worried about tenants getting together on this issue, which is why they will be making another sleazy offer soon to lower the temporary retroactive charges as they keep, of course, the MCI charges that will permanently burden your rent bill and, furthermore, provide a greater increase in your rent when you renew your lease. Affordable middle class housing is in serious trouble in PCVST, and we must take a united stand against the tactics that are directed toward eliminating such housing and forcing middle class tenants to move out.
UPDATE: If you filed an appeal of the MCI orders with the TA or individually, and you accept CWCapital's offer, you will accept withdrawing from the appeal with prejudice, meaning that will be legally forbidden to refile forever.
2nd UPDATE, from the TA:
On Friday, Nov. 8, many of you received a second offer from CWCapital to reduce your retroactive charges by 35% and withdraw their appeal to collect $15 million of MCI costs that the DHCR denied. Accepting their offer means that you would have to agree not to appeal the MCI orders, which means you would not be able to participate in the Tenants Association's own fight against the MCIs.
The TA is in consultation with its counsel and will be advising tenants what to do. In the meantime do not agree to the terms of CWCapital's letter until you hear from us. We will get back to you as soon as we can.
To all of you with printers: Please help the TA spread the word to residents who are not on our email list or who do not have computers. If you can, please print this message out and slip it under the doors of others on your floor. Thank you.
Tangential Update: Not part of the above, but just a note that we are still losing this city to monied real estate and housing for the mega-rich. How did this monstrosity get approval?...
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/real-estate/narrow-tall-approved-city-article-1.1486771
And more dispiriting info:
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20131016/BLOGS03/131019925
I hope these are the final F.U.s from the Bloomberg era, but I fear it may not be so.
28 comments:
3 questions:
1. It looks as if objections to the MCIs could be to both ongoing & retroactive charges and that CW is saying in exchange for dropping all objections, CW will drop 35% of the retroactive charges. Is this how everyone reads this?
2. Not clear to me if the retroactive charges will be a one-time charge or spread out. Does anyone know?
3. Also, as I understand the TA lawyer Tim Collins implied that the DHCR errors could delay the MCI charges but not stop them. Is this correct?
The way I read it, CW is making a very paltry offer which, if any tenants appeal via the TA Public Pledge, could be cancelled anyway. It's really a non-offer, just a "shut up and don't get in our way" kind of thing.
1) Yes, that's how I read it. 2) I believe the retroactive charges are spread out. I'm almost sure of that. 3) Collins stated with assurance that the DHCR errors would delay the MCI charges, but that it's not a certainty that all or some of the MCI charges could be stopped. That's what the fight will be about.
Anon at 1022 AM
1. Yes, but they reserve the right to cancel offer after you accept it if any other tenants appeal
2. Retroactive charges are spread out. Total monthly increase in rent based on permanent and retros can't exceed 6% of your legal rent when the MCIs were filed (which I think was 2009)
3. Correct but a subsequent appeal on the merits might reduce them . no assurances on that
c w capital offers nothing
they do not even offer a name on the paper they have printed
no phone number
no current correct street address
how would anyone accept this when they even keep the right to ultimately decline!
What's curious about #1 is if CWCapital cancels their offer due to the TA going through with the appeal process does that still leave a tenant signatory to the offer obligated not to file an appeal.
@STR, yes. Their offer asks that you withdraw from the TA's appeal process "with prejudice." Simply put, this means that you cannot refile an appeal after they've withdrawn their offer (and they WILL withdraw their ridiculously paltry offer).
I asked a question on a previous thread as to whether any Roberts class action members received DHCR notices since I did not receive any.
I spoke to the DHCR this AM. While they cannot state that all Roberts class members did not receive DHCR Orders, they did advise that no such MCI orders existed for my specific apartment.
Meaning: 2 MCI docket order (XH410124OM & XF410162OM dated 10/24/13) have been issued to Stuy Town, there is no application of the Orders to my apartment.
BUT... I received the PCVST letters this AM. In it they say the same thing to me that most of you have received. Accept the PCVST offer and Owner will reduce my retroactive charge (specifically defined in the letter).
Question is: How can I owe any retroactive charge or per monthly charge if Owner never filed the paperwork with the DHCR regarding my specific apartment???
I'm thinking many of the Roberts class members are in the same position as I am.
Pointedly, my belief is that the Roberts settlement prohibits Owner from applying the MCI increases to my apartment since, in essence, the settlement established the Legal Rent for my apartment (which I currently pay). And in the calculation for Legal Rent,"all MCI's" from Base Date to Effective Date (terms defined in the Settlement)must have been included in the Legal Rent already.
If Owner didn't apply such MCI's to the Legal Rent calculation prior to the Effective Date, too bad!!!
I believe the Robert's lawsuit settled these charges and it's included in your legal rent.
What is the average overall rent increase due to these MCIs that people are receiving?
I haven't figured out my rent increase yet, but my waiver of retroactive charges is very slightly above 1K.
I am also a Roberts tenant and have not (to date) received any DHCR notices.
I did receive CWC's offer letter this morning with specific charges specified in the letter.
Any ideas on how to proceed or how I can verify if we were to have received any DHCR notices?
"We've got them by the balls"
EXCELLENT !!
35% off retroactive charges doesn't seem like much of a deal.
Ultimately, the retroactive charges are just a nice stocking stuffer for CW Capital, the really big gift under their tree is the permanent rent increase. The permanent MCI rent increases inflate the rent roll which inflates the property value which inflates their asking price when it comes to selling the place, which they apparently would like to do soon. They claim to have us over a barrel because of DHCR's past track record, but we have them over a barrel because they want the permanent MCI rent increases dealt with NOW.
That's why 35% off retroactive charges doesn't seem like much of a deal.
It seems to me, the more of us who sign the pledges, the stronger our hand is.
>>Any ideas on how to proceed or how I can verify if we were to have received any DHCR notices?<<
My only suggestion is to contact the TA.
http://www.stpcvta.org/
If the TA goes ahead and files their appeal and it goes nowhere, which is highly likely since even the TA lawyer left himself an out on that question and tenants lose out on this break will the TA make tenants whole or would tenants who are not TA members have the right to sue the TA and it's law firm?
You can sue anyone you want in America.
Ultimately, the amount of the waiver is paltry compared to the benefit of having an MCI reduced even a small amount. The "offer" is a fixed amount. The increase is forever and will go toward the sum on which RGB increases are figured--so the prospective amount compounds. Don't be fooled that CW is offering anything of great value to us. Keeping them from collecting a retroactive amount right away is a nice finger in the eye from us, and don't they deserve it? (Still waiting for my basement to be restored, CW. Good job by your workers who damaged the Time Warner cable in the basement this week.) If CW gets everything it's asked for, we'll just be paying that fixed maximum of 6% further down the road, when presumably it will effectively be less due to inflation.
"If the TA goes ahead and files their appeal and it goes nowhere, which is highly likely since even the TA lawyer left himself an out on that question and tenants lose out on this break will the TA make tenants whole"
It's a crap shoot--no guarantees. You're free to go along with the TA or not.
STR, your commitment to covering the atrocities in Stuy Town is a huge service to the people of this community. Keep up the good work!
PS. Fuck you CWCapital, you blood thirsty ghouls!
Thanks. I wish I could do more, though I really don't want to spend as much time as I do on this blog, but our landlords have and are always providing fodder for the grist mill. I just can't ignore what's happening here and be silent. Not my style.
5:53 PM
I would suggest this, regarding past appeals. The effort was to get at least one or two PARs filed per building. I know, ours was usually the go-to apartment in our building and we'd always try to get at least one other apartment on board.
Now if you're a DHCR admin and you see that there are, say, 87 apts in 2 Stuy Oval and only 2 PARs are filed to oppose your newly approved elevator MCI, what are you gonna think? If I'm the admin, I'm gonna think the other 85 apartments love their new elevator, and the two who filed PARs are cranks.
So my guess is the new attorneys are suggesting we get more tenants on board the •I object• train. Think about it.
As for the rest of your comment. Please stop trying to be such a horse's ass.
"I believe the Robert's lawsuit settled these charges and it's included in your legal rent"
Turns out I was wrong, I and other Robert's tenants just got notification increases.
In determining the accurate figure for 6% of 2009 rents, since the rents went up in 2009 due to the MCI charge(s) do we take an average of the year's rent and base the 6% on that?
Please advise.
thank you.
Bloomberg is just determined to Uglify everything. That will be his legacy. A nasty, dirty little man with more money than decency took a city with an iconic majestic skyline and filled it full of ugly, Leggo Set buildings that are total affronts to all sensibilities. He was short and ugly, so he wanted his legacy to be everything that was tall and ugly. Pathetic.
3:27 p.m. "In determining the accurate figure for 6% of 2009 rents, since the rents went up in 2009 due to the MCI charge(s) do we take an average of the year's rent and base the 6% on that?"
The MCIs were not added in in 2009. All those requests were held in abeyance. It's only now that we're finding out how much DHCR has approved. The only wrinkle is to see when the MCI was filed and then check what your rent was at that time. If you renewed your lease in 2009, that might make a difference. (Not a legal opinion, just thinking this through.)
Speaking of ugly, I got a look at the Toll Brothers building going up on 22nd Street and Third Avenue. The exterior is starting to be finished, and it doesn't look as though this building will be good to look at. It certainly doesn't blend in, but that might not be possible in any event.
and forget what Bloomberg has done to the NYC's connecting heartline called BROADWAY
totally interrupted with empty chairs....
he was never for the people
for him New Yorker meant a magazine
Please tell me where to post this:
GET CARPETS PLEASE PEOPLE. We don't want to call SECURITY but the kids running , bouncing balls, dropping, scraping chairs might be fine IF YOU HAD carpets. THE FAMILY ABOVE us, DOES NOT. awful. PLEASE HELP. Thanks.
fwiw. cheap carpets at Kmart, target and etc, if you are short on cash.
Post a Comment