Posted by lfresh on October 24, 2000 at 17:35:34:
In Reply to: Re: wrong posted by TenantNet on October 14, 2000 at 01:52:35:
Ummmm thank you I was, unfortunately, just able to get back to this site. All the information was helpful.
I responded to all the e-mail to try and clarify the situation my neighbor is in.
Yes the apartment was registered just once in 1984.
Sorry Ken, Tenantnet was right I was just trying to take advantage of a vacant apartment situation. Sorry it wasn't clear. Frankly my mom currently lives in the apartment with the current tenant(he is her bo who she moved in with to help him make ends meet, he was laid off...she got along better with him at the time than me so she moved.)
My question was basically about me getting the apartment in case they lose it. (yes to the primary residency problem my neighbor owns a summer/winter home he had finished paying off in the 80's and now only pays taxes.He splits his time between that home and his apartment with my mom. When my mom moved in she paid all the utility bills there so all of them are in her name. He does his taxes at the upstate home. has his drivers license at that home. sigh it looks really bad but he actually does live there.he just goes back and forth.They Just made big mistakes which I think will cost them the apartment.)
I will give her back her rent stabilized apartment back and I will look for another apartment. (if it helps we have lived there for 14 years and I stayed when my mom decided to move next door with her bo. meanwhile rent has soared. we have a new landlord and they are now screwed.) Hopefully the one next door, where they lived won't be too badly over priced (yeah right) I get paid only a little more than my mom(I'm hoping a masters degree will fix that!) but meanwhile I will need a place to live and wondered about my options in that apartment.
: We read it correctly; you didn't. We corrected your erroneous statement regarding apartments not being registered. If the tenant has lived in the unit since 1971, it's possible the apartment is rent-controlled -- meaning it was registered once in 1984 and not annually since then. Rent stab apartments must be registered every year.
: The poster stated the landlord was trying to boot the tenant. You jumped to the conclusion that the poster was part of this scheme. He may wish to take advantage of a vacancy at a reasonable rent, but there's no indication he is advocating (or even helping) in the owner's efforts.
: But perhaps your most inane asertion is that rent regulated tenants are somehow "privileged." What's next, will you follow the landlord playbook stating that rent regulation creates abandonment and is responsible for the lack of housing construction and the sharp citywide increases in rent? Yes, your response speaks for itself; it makes no sense.
: : Tenant Net, you need to re-read this string and clarify your statements. Only rent-regulated apartments are registered in NYC; free market ones aren't. I know you like to advocate on behalf of privledged rent regulated tenants, but you should recognize that the apartments most typically available to the newest and poorest New Yorkers aren't regulated at all. They're free market apartments, even illegal apartments.
: : I also find it surprising that you and Chelsea would respond to someone who basically seeks to have another tenant removed and take over her below-market rent apartment. If anyone should be called "greedy" here, it is the questioner. Rent regulation often brings out the worst in people as they seek to gain cheap apartments through personal and political connections, or by underhanded moves.
: : This much said, I am not going to respond to further posts in this thread. I think each person's response (including mine) speaks for itself.
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup