Would You Take This Guy's Deal?

• I stumbled on this article on Bing despite the fact that I was looking for something similar, but I just wanted to say fine stuff and I utterly agree. Is there any way to subscribe to fresh content?

• You'll be able to purchase books by going to their online store which is similar to how they sell music with iTunes.

• Hello, I found your weblog in a new directory of blogs. I dont know how your weblog came up, must have been a typo, Your blog looks great. Have a great day.

• What Mr. Peckham is is a loser. He did not strike when the iron was hot. Now the fire is almost out and he is being offered a pittance of what he previously was offered and if he continues to be obstinate he will get nothing except a six-day notice of eviction. It does not matter whether you are a landlord lover or a tenant advocate: when it is your apartment at stake you have to be realistic and recognize that the current state of the rent regulations after 12 years of Pataki strongly favors landlords in this situation. The commenter who stated that the people here complaining about how unfair this is to the tenant should take their complaints to the state legislature is dead on. Of course, so long as the Republicans remain in control of the State Senate, their complaints will fall on deaf ears. What tenants need to do is write letters to Spitzer to convince him that he has to bust up the cabal of people in DHCR's Office of Rent Administration who are bucking for employment with private real estate developers when they retire from DHCR with their state pensions. Disclosure: I am a tenant attorney who concentrates his practice in the area of the rent stabilization law. P.S.: I would have been nice if other commenters disclosed their biases.

• I would also like to address the "Tauber Inmate" as I am also a tenant of Mr. Tauber. Not so long ago I had some financial problems and was behind in my rent 3 months, when I explained the matter to Mr. Tauber he was thoughtful enough to allow me a payment schedule until I was paid up, this took close to a year. Unlike other Tenants that take their Landlords for a ride through the legal system as this Tenant is. Mr. Tauber was generous and a total gentleman. You guys have got off the subject, Mr. Peckham is a loser trying to profit from something he does not own. Perhaps if he ever really worked for a living or was any type of businessman himself, he would have appreciated the hardships involved with owning a business, instead of trying to cash out on his lease. Mr. Peckham lives off the system that hard working New Yorkers pay for and is a rude, uncaring, selfish, greedy person himself who actually belongs on the street.

• Dear Tauber Inmate: I also live in a Tauber "facility" and it's a beautiful brownstone, well maintained and the Landlord's are great at addressing all my concerns. I bet Trump has a few dis-satisfied customers too.

• Dear Tauber Inmate: Last time we checked, we still live in a free country....move

• I'm currently living in a Tauber-run facility. Holes in walls, windows that leak, bathroom cabinets rotting and falling apart, dirty hallways and a landlord (Tauber) who won't return phone calls, letters or address items which 311 has repeatedly called out. Luckily, I understand that political leaders and the AG's office are actively pursuing legal action against this uncaring, rude and greedy landlord. Do what you can to stop him - I applaud every effort to do so.

• In response to Manhattanville: You are truly a dim-wit, If you took the time to actually read the article you would have learned that this tenant had many options, from $$$ to relocation at less rent to the right to return to his "home" when the construction was completed. A "home" mind you that would have been larger, brand new and at the same rent he was paying. Also although he was offered apartments all over the city, he was also offered some right next door (where he would still know everyone). As to your claim that the Landlord is a cheap a$$ tightwade, since when does a lease give any tenant the right to be a partner to the property and share in the Landlord's profits, if any. Does the tenant share in the Landlord's losses (NO), can the Landlord pass along tax hikes, insurance hikes, fuel costs hikes, etc, etc, NO, NO & NO. But this fellow feels that he is entitled, and deserves a huge compensation package for what, A LEASE... People like you will be the death to all rent regulations in this city very soon. Mess with tenants heads, please yours is so far up your a$$ you could see what you had for dinner. Rent control should be abolished, would it surprise you to know that our ex-mayor Koch lives in a rent controlled apartment and so do many other wealthy people and we pay for it.. As for all the lawyer crooks, I hope one day when and if you ever need one, I could defend you.....

• In response to Dirty Bodega: Maybe you should learn to read all over again. Although Mr. Tauber purchased this property with rent regulated tenant's, he has the motive and more important the legal right to remove these tenant's either by relocation or financial arrangement. This is not a loophole in the law; on the contrary, this law was negotiated at length and is a legal option of all owner�s who want to upgrade his or her buildings. The only difference between gut renovating and demolition is the removal of the facade, which the owner's can do at basically the same cost. The reason some owner's don't is because they want to preserve the cosmetic integrity of the neighborhood instead of putting up some contemporary monstrosity. Tax breaks?? What tax breaks, you mean the 18 1/2% tax increase the mayor passed along to landlords, you mean the outrageous insurance premiums, the cost of fuels, and all the other associated expenses. This tenant received more generous options then he should have, and he had the right to return to his "home" at the same rent as before or he could have resided in many other apartments for less rent and full stabilized protection for the rest of his miserable, complaining life. An apt negotiator would not have worked in this case as this tenant is greedy, obstinate and a selfish head case.

• Dear Glammarama...... Please try reading more carefully before criticizing me and slandering my good name by misattributing Jeffrey's ignorant comment for mine. For the record I wrote: Larry Tauber purchased a property whose price was determined by the fact that it was regulated through the Rent Stabalization Law. Such properties also include a variety of tax breaks and other subsidies. And now Larry Tauber along with many landlords are taking advantage of a loophole enabling them to evict rent-regulated tenants based on the premise that they are demolishing the building in its entirety but in truth are only performing a gut renovation.....

• This is in response to Dirty Bodega: This is not about keeping a poor guy off the street - the landlord has offered him a place to live, this is about entitlement and racism... OH PLEASE!!! Give me a break! He offered to move him to West 69th St. I don't think that constitutes as "the ghetto". Did you read the article? The man is on a fixed income and on disability. He collects FOOD STAMPS every month. Got news for ya! There are poor white people too. You have a three bedroom apartment, under $2000.00 and a spouse to help pay the rent. And you arrogantly sit there and say I'll hide income so I can keep it. I've got news for ya. It's because of people like you why there is no affordable housing in this city. It's obvious by the way you brag that you can afford a much more expensive apartment if you're "hiding" income. I think it is you who have a problem white people and are the racist. I think in your mind you think every white person drives around in a Mercedes, sips champagne for lunch, and jets off to Aspen every Winter. Get your head out of the clouds. That's not reality! Your views are COMPLETELY deluded!

• What people aren't understanding, this is this man's HOME! The landlord looks at the building as just another building. This man looks at it as home. Some people get very attached to their apartments, houses and dwelling spaces. They have memories and a history there. Also, he'd have to relocate to whole new area where he won't know anyone...etc! That's fine when you're 25. But this guy is 54. To be perfectly honest, considering the wealth of the landlord, and how much more he will gain from the conversion, I think he's being a cheap a$$ tightwad. And the landlord's lawyers don't give a rat's you know what about the landlord. The longer it goes on, they get paid. And quite a bit at that! Most lawyers in New York are downright crooks. If the landlord was smart he would have hired one of those apartment negotiators rather than a blood sucking lawyer. An apt negotiator that is calm, listens to the tenant and works out a resolution WITHOUT harassment. I completely admire this man for standing up for his rights. Renters are left with very few, if any in this city. I say at this point... If he wants him out THAT BAD, 1 MILLION on the table! If not, I encourage Mr.Peckham to keep on plugging. It's obvious this landlord has NO RESPECT for his tenant rights, nor does the DHCR, who are nothing but a bunch of PRO - LANDLORD Scum bags that hide behind a facade that they are there to help tenants. I encourage Mr. Peckham to keep sueing his landlord AND the DHCR, until these people get in their heads...That you CAN NOT mess with tenants heads, or rights in this city anylonger.

• What a greedy little freak. His pursed lips say it all in that picture. This isn't about being right, it's about screwing the landlord for every little penny you can get...and then turning him down so you can be perverse. I loved reading about how no one wants to visit him--I guess so! I wouldn't want to stay over night in an apartment in an empty building either--MOST NORMAL PEOPLE WOULDN'T. I think this guy has some sort of socialization problems. I might even laugh at the whole thing except that it's greedy jerks like him who will end up being the death of tenant-protection laws.

• rent control was never institutued so white guys could stay in tony neighborhoods - it was meant to protect the widows of war veterans and was supposed to end many years ago. Hey, i have a huge three bedroom uptown for under $2000 - and you can bet that my wife and I will hide income to ensure we keep the place, but let's not forget that a stabalized lease is a privilage unheard of in most parts of the world - in fact, it's one of the few laws meant to control private property and private business and ignore the market - to all those who staunchly defend it, i wonder how they'd feel if they came to work tomorrow to find their salary cut so the state could regulate the price of the product they produce. Do you ever wonder why we only hear about these types of stories in downtown manhattan? it's because white people don't won't to move uptown or to the boros with all those people of color - that's what this is all about - a few square miles of downtown and hoards of white people who feel entitled to live in "cool" neighborhoods at prices that defy the market. This is not about keeping a poor guy off the street - the landlord has offered him a place to live, this is about entitlement and racism...

• Larry Tauber purchased a property whose price was determined by the fact that it was regulated through the Rent Stabalization Law. Such properties also include a variety of tax breaks and other subsidies. And now Larry Tauber along with many landlords are taking advantage of a loophole enabling them to evict rent-regulated tenants based on the premise that they are demolishing the building in its entirety but in truth are only performing a gut renovation. I can understand how many people want to eliminate rent stablization. And to fuel their argument they'll mention every millionaire they know with a rent-stabalized apartment paying only $65 a month. However, believe it or not there are people who are quite vulnerable to becoming homeless if they were to lose their rent-stabalized apartment. And if the Rent Stabalization laws are to be completely elimanated wouldn't it be a little more humane to at least honour the law for just those remaining lease holders. I can only imagine if I were something like 88 years old. Perhaps a police offfer who had put my life on the line for this City each and every day. And in the distant past someone had created this Rent Stabilization thing and I was fortunate enough with my meager little salary to have an apartement protected by such a law. And then one day a Larry Tauber offers me $75K and a similar apartment whose rent will remain the same for only 7.5 years. Which is the ORIGINAL offer that all the tenants in Daniel Peckham's building received. I think I would feel somewhat betrayed by my City. On another note I would not be surprised if Daniel Peckman and Kristen Lombardi are operatives working for the Larry Tauber's of our City. It makes sense. Why not publicise this crazy selfish tenant who refuses any offer and plant the image in the City's psyche inorder to sway our feelings and use the resulting legal case to pick at the elimantion of Rent Stabilzation.

• I guess some of you who are siding with this tenant didn't really read the article. As I read it this tenant was never in danger of becoming homeless, in fact he was offered numerous relocation options all over the city, even some on his own block, not for 7 1/2 years but for a life time of stabilization rights, plus moving expenses and a generous stipend, and the right to move back to his original apartment now newly renovated at his old rent. So to all those tenant advocates PLEASE stop whining, this guy is a jerk, he is neither elderly nor crippled and has just tried to take advantage of this Landlord by using the system you all created.

• Peter, you're right. Multiply this greedy tenant by many thousands who are reaping windfalls under this crazy system. A friend knows a young woman who is paying $68 a month, that's right $68!, for a rent-controlled apartment. Her grandparents moved in 65 years ago. Some day she hopes to pass it on. The taxpayers of the state and city have been paying for a massive administrative and legal bureacracy to keep this monster going for over six decades. The few places in the country that had this system dropped it long ago. The only reason it's here is purely political. There is a very loud and threatening lobby of tenants with obscenely low rents. They strike fear into the hearts of NY city politicians. It will be overcome only when we all wake up and realize how much the rent regulation system hurts the general state and city population.

• The tenant is greedy beyond compare: Replace Door with full size door with glass panes from salvage Through the wall AC at least "8 ft high Crown molding 24" Viking Stove Stack W/D Cabinets to the Ceiling Granite counter tops New deep tub" W T F? He is the demon to all people living under rent stabilization. His abuses bring landlords closer to having their way every time Rent Stabilization renewal gets voted on. I lived in a stabilized apartment for 12 years. When my personal economics took a turn for the better, I did the right thing and purchased an apartment in an area where I wanted to live, and delivered my stabilized unit back to the unit broom cleaned the way I got it. It would appear this is just another New Yorker with a huge sense of entitlement. His particular disability is something that workers with full time jobs live with on a daily basis.' This will soon blow up in his face and he'll be left with nothing. Greed, greed, greed. Yeah, landlords are not the only greedy ones.

• Peckham is a prime example of the sick rent regulation laws which effect the entire city population. Tenants sitting on their apartments for decades, sometimes till death, because of the ridiculously low rent is one big reason for the low vacancy rate and apartment shortage. (Maybe even after death. They can pass the apartment on to someone else if they know the RR rules). The only people benefiting from this system are these low-rent tenants. Everyone else in the city and state - non-regulated tenants, taxpayers, even regulated tenants who are at market rent - is negatively impacted. The solution is to eliminate the motivation, which is the very low rent, for this behavior. These people will naturally kick and scream at this possibility. The only way to overcome the political obstacle in the way of achieving this is to wake up the rest of the population, the majority, to the fact that they are paying for this unfair and inefficient system.

• I am thoroughly disheartened after reading this rather biased an ill-informed article by Kristen Lombardi in The Village Voice as well as many of the preceding comments. I felt as if it were a dumbed downed article sponsored by the Manhattan Institute rather than something I would expect from a supposedly alternative newsweekly. Here's my question: For those of you who feel that a landlord who knowingly purchased a property with rent-stabalized tenents should be able to simply offer those tenants a relatively minor financial compensation without a new rent-stabalized apartment as was the original Tauber deal I ask you have you ever read Death of Salesman? There are people very much "unlike" Daniel Peckham who have given their entire lives to this City. People who were firefighters, police officers, and veterans of war. People who swept our streets, cooked and served us our food, who helped provide us with our water and our electricity. Some of these people are in their 70's, 80's, 90's now living their remaining years out in what they felt were their relatively stable rent-stabalized homes. Can you just imagine offering the crippled elderly a mere 75,000 and another apartment that will in 7 and a half years return to whatever the market rent is at that time??? Just think about a a senile old arthritic woman whose nearly deaf and blind still trying to come to grips with all those who she has lost in her lifetime. She contributed her youth her life doing whatever she did. Maybe she was a secretary, a pharmacist, a lawer, a school teacher. And now she has to uproot herself and move to another apartment where in 7 and half years her rent could easily be 5,000 a month. Is that the type of society you want to support? Democracy or not thats not the time of world I want to live in. Where first they come up with something like Rent-Stabilization and then pull it out right from under you when your frail, vulnerable, and old. Thats just despicable.

• I have resided in Chelsea for over 20 years and I'm so damn glad someone is finally making some changes. This area has gone to the dogs for too long and some restoration would be nice. Owners should continue to have the right to make these necessary improvements as long as they "fairly" compensate their tenants. This tenant was offered far and beyond what any sane person would consider "fair" and is using the system for his own personal gain.

• A Tenant?s Guide to Renting The first challenge every tenant faces is finding an apartment for rent that suits their individual needs. For today?s tenant, the most effective apartment search can be done using an online apartment finder. Tenants should decide what they require in an apartment or house rental before beginning their search. For example: the number of bedrooms, location or distance from public transportation and how much the tenant can afford to pay in rent, furnished or unfurnished apartment, etc. By making these important decisions first, tenants can avoid renting an apartment or house only to regret it later. Many tenants today are taking advantage of the convenience of the internet to locate apartments for rent as opposed to the traditional print publications. Once a possible apartment or home has been found, it is the tenant's duty to thoroughly inspect the premises making a commitment in the form of a security deposit. A tenant should not rely on the landlord or the landlord's agent to tell the tenant if anything is wrong with the property. The tenant must inspect the property carefully and ask questions about it. Inspecting the condition and functionality of the following areas/features of the apartment before committing yourself as a tenant is highly recommended. 1. Kitchen appliances in working order. 2. Water pressure strong, plumbing without leaks. 3. Electrical outlets and wiring working. 4. Walls and ceiling painted or papered without cracks 5. Ventilation or air conditioning accessible. 6. Floors, railings and bathrooms in good repair. 7. Fire escape easy to use. 8. Stairs safe and well-lighted. 9. No rodents or insects. 10. Heating system in working order. 11. If furnished, check and write down condition of all furniture. 12. Windows and doors operable and weather-tight; screens provided. The tenant should also check the security of the building to find out if there is a dead-bolt lock, security chain, or through-the-door viewer. BEWARE OF EXISTING DAMAGES: In order to avoid being blamed for damages that already exist in the rental unit, the cautious tenant should take every step for self-protection. Before moving in (or as soon as possible thereafter), the tenant should make a list of all existing damages and repairs that need to be made. A copy of the list should he presented to the landlord and attached to the lease This way the landlord cannot blame the tenant for damages caused by others and the tenant will know what the landlord intends to repair. If the tenant keeps good records the landlord will not be able to keep the tenant?s security deposit for damages that were actually caused by others. Taking pictures before moving in is also strongly recommended. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Paul Rossano, associated with www.AllSpaces.com who ?Conveniently Connects All People with All Spaces in All Places? has been dedicated to the Real Estate rental market for over 8 years. He has assisted over 25,000 tenants with their renting needs. Any questions about renting apartments, houses or other rentals, feel free to visit www.AllSpaces.com or email him at Paul@AllSpaces.com.

• In reading your article and the posted comments I found it interesting that this has again turned into Landlord vs. Tenant. Instead I see it as a business arrangement gone bad. A landlord trying to get what he wants (the building empty), and a tenant using the courts to try and extort a higer payout. Of course your going to have all tenants and their advocates pulling for him, but this is not about his right to stay, just about how much he believes he should get. I've researched the DHCR law and as it stands the landlord is in the right. So to all those tenant supporters of which their are many...if you don't like the rules, don't blame the owners but tell the legislators to change the law.

• I'm soooo tired of hearing about tenants rights, how about the rights of the landlord...why is it that the rest of our great nation do not have these rent control laws. Perhaps it's because of the fact that we live in a democracy based upon free enterprise. Should we turn New York into a city of only the poor and middle-class. I know that all those left wing tenant advocate groups who fight for tenant rights really would prefer we change the name of our city to perhaps....Moscow

• Seems to me that if this tenant and his supporters were interested in saving his home, they should make an offer to the landlord to purchase it, and then they could fill it up with all the low income tenants they could find and then we the taxpayers would get the bill as usual.

• Sounds like this Landlord has been stuck with a tenant like having an alabama tick. It won't let go, sucks your blood but in the end it's removed. Why can't some tenant's understand that real estate is a business and that your lease is not a "deed". Old properties need to be demolished or renovated and that costs lots of money. Where is the landlord suppose to make that up? with rent control? The cities answer to affordable housing is the projects and we know how well they are run...Where was the mayor when he increased property taxes by 18.5%, insurance that is through the roof, oil& gas prices, and general maintenace costs. This landlord made a very generous offer, more then most. Too bad for this knucle head, he deserves what he gets, hopefully nothing.

• Take the money???? Believe it or not, some people find the right to remain secure in their homes and neighborhoods far more important than a pile of dirty money. I take my hat off to this man! If more of us stood up to the power of wealth and greed like he is doing, this city might again become a decent place in which to live. By the way, isn't it illegal to take action against a rent stabilized tenant for the sole purpose of driving him/her from her home? These landlords should be punished not rewarded!!!!

• Typical article, greedy Landlord trying to take advantage of his poor tormented tenant, but with a new twist. Seems as though this time it's the other-way-around. Seems that Mr. Peckham's mantra should go like this: Get as much as I can, Get as much as I can and then even more. Mr. Peckham is one of those types that don?t mind progress as long as it doesn?t interfere with their lives or in this case unless it enriches $$$ their lives. By the way, why is it that a man who suffers from all his aliments wants to continue living on the top floor of a walk-up....curious?

• I heard about this matter recently in the news when one ultra liberal Senator Tom Duane for his own political gain and a photo op set upon this landlord without knowing any of the true facts involved. This article illuminates the facts as I believe they are. A tenant out to extort an unreasonable gain from his Landlord. Development is not a dirty word and I remember area's of this city that were horrible and life threatening to walk in until developers changed them, this great city of New York needs to grow. Shame on you Senator Duane and shame on you Mr.Peckham.

• An unbiased article, how refreshing. Mr. Peckham what were you thinking? Most New Yorkers would kill for an opportunity such as yours. If I were you I would beg the Landlord to reconsider some of those prior options, but you overplayed your hand and he called your bluff, you lose. I bet you had something to do with those tenants next door, didn't you...fess up

• Great job to the Voice. Although we are use to reading about the horrible behavior of some Landlords, you have finally exposed the extortionate behavior of some tenants in this city.They use the liberal courts to delay rental payments and are encouraged by these card carrying "commies" who hold themselves out as tenant advocates. Mr. Peckham through either bad advice or just plain obstince and greed should learn a hard lesson that if he wants to get ahead in life he should do it the old fashion way...work.

• Although I have no great love of most Landlords, this one seems at least to have tried very hard to accommodate his tenant. Mr.Peckham on the other hand believes that as a tenant he has become a partner with the Landlord and should profit from his stabilized lease. Most people don't know or choose not to acknowledge that Landlords are business people and that most of them are not "Trump" types. Owning property in this city is a very expensive and tedious undertaking. Heaven forbid a Landlord should make a fair return on a very expensive investment.

• Those of us in the rest of the country have a hard time understanding how a certain chosen few in New York are given the right to upend all the laws of supply and demand. It's not equitable; it's not fair. I don't have much empathy for real estate developers but this renter does not own the unit and I don't see how he has permanent rights to a unit. The rest of us don't.

• Peckham, you chump..you snooze, you lose.

• I find it refreshing that the Voice would actually see both sides of a story. It is obvious that Peckham is using the system to shake down his landlord who it seems made some very generous offers. No doubt the bad advice came from his "free" attorney.

• Seems as though this Landlord has bent over backwards in trying to accomidate this smuck,who has no principles and believes not in perhaps the loss of affordable housing but only in his own greed and that his rent stabilized apartment should be his lottery ticket to retirement. Never mind the agenda of tenant advocate groups who preach socialism. Perhaps if he ever worked for a living like most of us, he would have appreciated the offers proposed.

• Sigh. I pay 1350 a month (and it is a DEAL in this real estate market) to live in Brooklyn and walk over an overpass that crosses the Belt Parkway in order to get to and from the subway. And don't get me wrong, I consider myself very lucky (the apartment is a 2 bedroom in a great neighborhood). What this douche is asking for is ridiculous. A sad little man who has probably made sad little excuses his whole life. I never thought I would root for a landlord before, but GO TAUBER. PS: Doucheham's lawyer should be taken out and shot, too.

• What is the worst that could happen if the landlord just put this guy out? What would they do, fine him? Put him out, pay the fine, renovate and pass the cost on to the new tenant.

• GTFOOHWTBS. I would LOVE for a landlord to buy my apartment out for $75,000. Ungrateful prick. What sense does it make for a guy on disability and food stamps to refuse such an opportunity? I guess he has the "right" to cut his nose to spite his face.

• Would have been nice to have a real piece of journalism instead of an alleged reporter who has her lips firmly planted on the landlord's ass in hopes of getting an apartment herself. Maybe she could have bothered herself to actually learn something about NYC housing law, the DHCR or the several other "demolition" cases Belkin has going on. Or actually interviewed someone other than the landlord. But then again, this is the new Voice, Fox news in a "Che" tshirt.

• It seems like the article is saying that if you're in a rent controlled apartment, you have to be willing to give up what you have at the whim of the landlord. I thought the idea of rent control was to protect the tenant from just that. The article is supporting landlords that find loopholes to get around the rent control. Did the landlord swoop in and buy up buildings to force tenants out of their rent controlled apartments so he could double and triple the rents? Doesn't it bother you that these rent controlled apartments are vanishing for the sake of the landlord making a killing in real estate? Mr. Peckham should be regaled as a hero for standing up for a system that is turning it's back on the same individuals it was set up to protect. Put yourself in his place. What if it were you that was being thrown out of your home of 12 years and being asked to take a lesser substitute? It's difficult enough, moving of your own volition. But to be forced out and then to be expected to take a place of someone else's choosing; is that a position that you would like to be placed in? Or are we saying that he doens't deserve the same deference we expect for ourselves because he is in rent control?

• The deal is great considering the cost of an apt on 69th St. He is getting greedy and in the end it will come back to bite him in the ass.

TotalComments: 43