There is no depths to how scum will sink. I'm glad these folks got legal advice.
August 12, 2014 at 6:39 AM
Anonymous said...
When buildings from this era are free standing as in the supporting buildings were demolished 30 years ago then I could understand possible structural damage, This building is flanked by buildings from the same time period so my assumption it is solid. This is a lie put out by the landlord during the present building boom land grab and nothing more.
August 12, 2014 at 9:39 AM
Gojira said...
And the fact that he says it has to be "rebuilt and most probably demolished" is a dead giveaway that this is BS on a grand scale; who rebuilds a building only to demolish it?
August 12, 2014 at 10:29 AM
Anonymous said...
Up until three years ago, I lived in one of the bldgs that they are suggesting the tenants contact. Shudder. I would not go back. I now have a management company that fixes things, cleans things, and answers calls and emails. For a long time, I had no idea how crappy I had it.
I wish these tenants well.
August 12, 2014 at 11:12 AM
Anonymous said...
The landlord doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.
If he wants these people out, he'll need to pay up.
Minimum $200G per tenant so each tenant walks away with at least $100G/six figures after taxes.
Wow two studio apartments. Gee, are they so big everyone in the building can live in them? Is it a loft bed setup? LOL
D
August 12, 2014 at 11:31 AM
nygrump said...
Ah ha ha those studio apts are in my building! Wow, I'm $700 under market. I can tell you, if you like noise and vibration, these are the buildings for you.
August 12, 2014 at 3:04 PM
Anonymous said...
Thanks for the update on this story. I am rooting for the tenants. What this landlord is trying to do is illegal and insane.
August 12, 2014 at 4:19 PM
Anonymous said...
A little italy landlord not long ago emptied his building of a large number of tenants with similar tactics, though certain tenants either were or weren't targeted for scary bogus "imminent condemnation and demolition" shock letters, accompanied by "sign here" help with ASAP exits from their homes -- maybe a third of scared tenants now gone though those that knew better stayed with no trouble
August 13, 2014 at 3:22 PM
Anonymous said...
you are saying the landlords are greedy and then you are saying 200G per tenant as if it's a guaranteed asset you own.. you guys are basically the aging beatnik and generation X version of welfare queens.. actually he has an ambiguous legal leg to stand on if I understand it from stories I've read. Certainly he or the investors behind this will use brute force and illegal tactics. depends on how it goes down in housing court..
August 14, 2014 at 11:03 AM
Anonymous said...
I lived there for three years from 2010-2013 and am so glad I moved out. My floors were sunken in and my ceiling was leaking onto my bed (woke up in the morning with water on my face many times). My floor also leaked onto my neighbor's ceiling below and even though the location is awesome, the apartment building and apartment itself was falling apart.
For one, I agree with everyone in regards to what Lee is doing is absolutely illegal. He should go through the city in order for it to be deemed uninhabitable.
However, I do think that 149 1st Ave will have to be demolished if the city or any independent contractor hired by the parties were to come in and make an assessment (through the proper legal channels of course).
All of the apartments had structural problems to where the moment someone moved out, the entire apartment was to be gutted. I remember before the roof had an emergency exit I would try to go up there to relax and couldn't because the roof was not level, it was sunken in to the point where for 2 out of the 3 years it was open I refused to go up there because I felt like it was going to collapse. (some had parties and I just couldn't believe my neighbors felt safe enough to bring other people there and risk injury).
While I was there at least 5 apartments had been redone (front and back), taking over 6 months per apartments. I believe that Lee is desperate to make back all the money he spent on renovations and probably feels that this is the best way to go about it.
Obviously not.
Anyways, I am sorry to hear about your current plight and wish the current residents the best of luck.
August 15, 2014 at 2:06 PM
Anonymous said...
I can't believe how many ignorant people are in this world. Everyone assumes the world is against them that instead of figuring out what is really going on; they go call the news and get city agencies and even people at city offices to call this harassment and that nobody needs to leave. First off. Stabilized tenants are able to come back after any renovation has occurred to the property where they live so this is not an eviction letter. It's called a 90 day curtesy letter to give tenants time to get a place. But it seems everyone would rather see the Department Of Buildings and HPD banging down doors and forcing tenants out within minutes when realizing the building is really unsafe. That way tenants have nowhere to go. Or maybe everyone would rather see the building collapse and god forbid people die. Then what? Oh yea. Lawsuits and same tenants crying about how the city failed them and nobody did enough to warn them about the issue. Nobody can see an issue with a property by just looking at someone's apartment. So many people acting like victims. So much tax payer money going toward agencies and city employees to go on tv and look good calling all landlords scum. Yes there are a ton of landlords that really are scum. But in this case. Never embarrass yourselves coming to a conclusion without seeing the actual reports by the engineer. Not a typical idiot that an agency brings in to look at a Sheetrock wall and determine a building is safe so he can look good. I'm talking about a real engineer with his report and pictures . What the stabilized tenants are doing will actually hurt them in the long run. By not taking this curtesy letter seriously and able to come back. They are forcing the city to look at the reports and if the building is really unstable. The Department of Buildings Emergency unit will remove all these tenants with no warning and they can kiss the 90 day good bye.
August 28, 2014 at 9:05 PM
Anonymous said...
Only the Dept of Buildings can assess whether building is unstable and issue vacate order. Landlord cannot make this decision. They try, sometimes, to empty their buildings.
As we reported last week, all tenants (and all rent stabilized) at 149 First Ave. received a letter from the landlord — a "notice of non-renewal and vacate request."
The letter read in part:
I'm truly sorry to tell you that we will not be renewing your lease. We have been advised by our engineer that the building has serious deterioration issues and has to be rebuilt and most probably demolished. As a matter of safety, we have to vacate all the apartments in the building. The building will not be habitable during the construction phase. Please do not take longer than 90 days to leave. Thank you.
And it didn't matter how long the tenant had left on his or her lease. Everyone was told to leave.
"After some understandable initial panic, it's clear that residents here are not ready to start packing their bags," one tenant told us.
On the contrary, the residents are said to be banding together to fight this. Tonight, the residents will be meeting to discuss the recent events that have transpired here just north of East Ninth Street. (Also, given tonight's forecast of rain, the tenant meeting is being moved from the building's courtyard to next door at My Little Village Postal Store, who a tenant says were kind enough to agree to stay late and donate the space for the meeting.)
To date, there aren't any permits on file at the Department of Buildings for a renovation or demolition at No. 149.
The tenant also said that everyone in the building received letters from the landlord telling them about $1,900-$2,000 studios available to them on East Sixth Street.
Word is none of the tenants have taken the landlord up on this generous offer.
Lastly, WPIX picked up on the story last Friday. They took a copy of the landlord's letter to Alan J. Goldberg, "an expert in landlord-tenant law."
"First of all it sounds like it’s clear harassment to me," Goldberg told WPIX. "Any rent-stabilized tenant in New York City had the right to remain in their apartment unless they are ordered out by court after a trial or unless there is a vacate order by the Department of Buildings or Department of Housing Preservation and Development."
12 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formThere is no depths to how scum will sink. I'm glad these folks got legal advice.
August 12, 2014 at 6:39 AM
When buildings from this era are free standing as in the supporting buildings were demolished 30 years ago then I could understand possible structural damage, This building is flanked by buildings from the same time period so my assumption it is solid. This is a lie put out by the landlord during the present building boom land grab and nothing more.
August 12, 2014 at 9:39 AM
And the fact that he says it has to be "rebuilt and most probably demolished" is a dead giveaway that this is BS on a grand scale; who rebuilds a building only to demolish it?
August 12, 2014 at 10:29 AM
Up until three years ago, I lived in one of the bldgs that they are suggesting the tenants contact. Shudder. I would not go back. I now have a management company that fixes things, cleans things, and answers calls and emails. For a long time, I had no idea how crappy I had it.
I wish these tenants well.
August 12, 2014 at 11:12 AM
The landlord doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.
If he wants these people out, he'll need to pay up.
Minimum $200G per tenant so each tenant walks away with at least $100G/six figures after taxes.
Wow two studio apartments. Gee, are they so big everyone in the building can live in them? Is it a loft bed setup? LOL
D
August 12, 2014 at 11:31 AM
Ah ha ha those studio apts are in my building! Wow, I'm $700 under market. I can tell you, if you like noise and vibration, these are the buildings for you.
August 12, 2014 at 3:04 PM
Thanks for the update on this story. I am rooting for the tenants. What this landlord is trying to do is illegal and insane.
August 12, 2014 at 4:19 PM
A little italy landlord not long ago emptied his building
of a large number of tenants with similar tactics, though
certain tenants either were or weren't targeted for scary
bogus "imminent condemnation and demolition" shock
letters, accompanied by "sign here" help with ASAP exits
from their homes -- maybe a third of scared tenants now
gone though those that knew better stayed with no trouble
August 13, 2014 at 3:22 PM
you are saying the landlords are greedy and then you are saying 200G per tenant as if it's a guaranteed asset you own.. you guys are basically the aging beatnik and generation X version of welfare queens.. actually he has an ambiguous legal leg to stand on if I understand it from stories I've read. Certainly he or the investors behind this will use brute force and illegal tactics. depends on how it goes down in housing court..
August 14, 2014 at 11:03 AM
I lived there for three years from 2010-2013 and am so glad I moved out. My floors were sunken in and my ceiling was leaking onto my bed (woke up in the morning with water on my face many times). My floor also leaked onto my neighbor's ceiling below and even though the location is awesome, the apartment building and apartment itself was falling apart.
For one, I agree with everyone in regards to what Lee is doing is absolutely illegal. He should go through the city in order for it to be deemed uninhabitable.
However, I do think that 149 1st Ave will have to be demolished if the city or any independent contractor hired by the parties were to come in and make an assessment (through the proper legal channels of course).
All of the apartments had structural problems to where the moment someone moved out, the entire apartment was to be gutted. I remember before the roof had an emergency exit I would try to go up there to relax and couldn't because the roof was not level, it was sunken in to the point where for 2 out of the 3 years it was open I refused to go up there because I felt like it was going to collapse. (some had parties and I just couldn't believe my neighbors felt safe enough to bring other people there and risk injury).
While I was there at least 5 apartments had been redone (front and back), taking over 6 months per apartments. I believe that Lee is desperate to make back all the money he spent on renovations and probably feels that this is the best way to go about it.
Obviously not.
Anyways, I am sorry to hear about your current plight and wish the current residents the best of luck.
August 15, 2014 at 2:06 PM
I can't believe how many ignorant people are in this world. Everyone assumes the world is against them that instead of figuring out what is really going on; they go call the news and get city agencies and even people at city offices to call this harassment and that nobody needs to leave. First off. Stabilized tenants are able to come back after any renovation has occurred to the property where they live so this is not an eviction letter. It's called a 90 day curtesy letter to give tenants time to get a place. But it seems everyone would rather see the Department Of Buildings and HPD banging down doors and forcing tenants out within minutes when realizing the building is really unsafe. That way tenants have nowhere to go. Or maybe everyone would rather see the building collapse and god forbid people die. Then what? Oh yea. Lawsuits and same tenants crying about how the city failed them and nobody did enough to warn them about the issue. Nobody can see an issue with a property by just looking at someone's apartment. So many people acting like victims. So much tax payer money going toward agencies and city employees to go on tv and look good calling all landlords scum. Yes there are a ton of landlords that really are scum. But in this case. Never embarrass yourselves coming to a conclusion without seeing the actual reports by the engineer. Not a typical idiot that an agency brings in to look at a Sheetrock wall and determine a building is safe so he can look good. I'm talking about a real engineer with his report and pictures . What the stabilized tenants are doing will actually hurt them in the long run. By not taking this curtesy letter seriously and able to come back. They are forcing the city to look at the reports and if the building is really unstable. The Department of Buildings Emergency unit will remove all these tenants with no warning and they can kiss the 90 day good bye.
August 28, 2014 at 9:05 PM
Only the Dept of Buildings can assess whether building is unstable and issue vacate order. Landlord cannot make this decision. They try, sometimes, to empty their buildings.
August 28, 2014 at 11:01 PM