Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

1600hazenstreet OP t1_j1m5hl9 wrote

Could you imagine NYCHA getting the same treatment. They would be fined into the billions of dollars for all their code their violations.

31

Expensive_South9331 t1_j1lzizh wrote

Pretty typical. Landlords are also on the hook for whatever violations are currently outstanding, which can get pretty wild if the previous guy never fixed anything.

24

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_j1x1zkd wrote

Goes for a lot of things. Owning a home or business too. Hell your position can get sued when you accept a job, and yes you can be fired "with cause" for something your predecessor did... which means no unemployment if your predecessor wasn't punished. One of the many stupid things in US law.

1

ryanhoulihan t1_j1nl9xm wrote

That’s the risk you take on as a business.

4

AutoModerator t1_j1k4nzp wrote

Users often report submissions from this site and ask us to ban it for sensationalized articles. At /r/nyc, we oppose blanket banning any news source. Readers have a >responsibility to be skeptical, check sources and comment on any flaws. You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue. If you do find >evidence that this article or its title are false or misleading, contact the moderators who will review it.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

An-Angel_Sent-By-God t1_j1o9nl7 wrote

LOL. There must be a landlord association that calls in and dictates these articles. "SQUATTERS" "SEX ABUSERS" none of these things have anything to do with the landlord maintaining their property. They're all excuses. The NY post doesn't accept excuses for stealing a travel stick of deodorant from a Walgreen's, why should they accept these people's excuses for getting in over their head with a property they can't attend to?

−7

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1lziwf wrote

Well maybe they wouldn't have squatters living in there if the building was up to code. These landlords are trash and ruin neighborhoods

−29

soyeahiknow t1_j1ochfw wrote

Are you stupid? The property was inhabitable and someone broke in and stayed there. Its like someone who broke into your car, used it as an illegal taxi, run red lights and tolls and they fine you for it.

12

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1ofjvq wrote

Oh please. These idiots rented out an illegal shitty apartment to an illegal shitty tenant who knew exactly how to get over on them. Happens every day to people who rent their illegal shitty basements to people send a letter telling them to get a C of O and they stop paying rent knowing they will NEVER get a legal C of O for their shitty basement.

When you do something illegal as a slumlord and someone throws it back in your face....you get ZERO sympathy from me.

−1

soyeahiknow t1_j1ohz2x wrote

They guy was living in the shed in the backyard... he was a known homeless person. I doubt they would rent to him lol

9

levhow t1_j1nme2r wrote

Again suggesting you read the whole article. It's the archaic tenant/landlord rules of NYC that permitted a squatter to occupy a property (sometimes for years on end) doing as they please (no matter how illegal) while the landlord has to sit at the courts mercy and wait.

7

SolitaryMarmot t1_j1ofwqi wrote

Same old story they knowingly rented an illegal apartment to someone who knew it was illegal and went into professional tenant beast mode. I love stories like this.

−4

newestindustry t1_j1kkd87 wrote

We’re supposed to feel bad for the wannabe slumlords who threw 10 people out on the street right before Christmas? Fuck these idiots

−67

Definitely_wasnt_me t1_j1le4jx wrote

You might want to read the article. It’s short and it’s written at a third grade reading level so I think you’ll be fine. You got this.

67

Chewwy987 t1_j1l6mzo wrote

I think it was the city that cleared them out

27