No Water for Two Months in Bed-Stuy Building

Umm - I'll guarantee you - that NONE of the tenants in the building are paying their DEAD landlord ANY rent (and probably many/most werent paying b/4 either)- so for a free place to live - it might not be so bad...

Posted by: fsrg at September 11, 2009 12:44 PM

MM- I dont know what you consider lower-end; but Craigslist is filled with many sub $1000mo apartments; and speaking from experience, no one cares what you look like and you only need 1mo security -

but YES you will have to show adequate income and good credit and rental payment history....and many of the LL/agents carry Blackberries, and have websites showing pictures of the aaialbe apartments.

I am not saying that people who have issues (unemployment, bad credit, drug abuse, mental illness, etc...) arent sometimes forced into substandard housing - they are - and it is disgusting.....but the idea that some regular working class person is forced to live under these type of conditions due to a lack of options is just ill informed.

Posted by: fsrg at September 11, 2009 12:50 PM

MM - maybe the reason I missunderstand you is because you arent clear???

YOU said "The rental practices of lower end properties is not like dealing with Blackberry and I-Phone wielding Corcoran and Halstead agents."

To which I replied that you are wrong - many low end (lets say below $350 a room) buildings are EXACTLY like dealing with a "corcoran/halstead" type professional.

Now you change your point to say - well many of these type of renters cant access that level of sophistication. which is a different point to which I say.....

In my experience (pretty extensive) in this area, you are only partially correct - the (hlepless) people you describe are not simply "poor" ( most working poor people are well aware of and have some access to computers, craigslist, other information, etc.....)

This other world you describe is EXACTLY what I described - which is generally people who have problems well beyond just not having alot of money. And if those people are living here it is a shame and the city should be held to task (especially those agencies that are suppossed to be looking after the welfare of these tyoe of people)...

But there is another world - one that you apparently dont know about - where people have the capacity to move but chose not to because they figure that a free (or nearly free apartment) with no services (although usually water) is better than paying full price.
I do not know what is going on here - but based on what I know - I have my suspicions that the majority of tenants arent as helpless as you would have us believe. BTW it doesnt make it ok - but it also doesnt mean that the tenants here all have no choice but to live in an absolute slum

Posted by: fsrg at September 11, 2009 2:14 PM

Bxgrl - "How many landlords would rent to someone without soc sec #'s, credit checks, references"

=NONE

but how many working people legitimately dont have a SS#?????

As for credit checks - I said that if you have bad credit/LL/Tenant court problems you are not going to be able to get one of these "nice" low rent apartments - but hate to say - that is somewhat within the prospective tenants control.

as to references - no intelligent LL cares about references - especially from a prior LL - if a problem tenant wants to leave a building, most LL would write anything to assist them - thereby making their reference useless or worse.

Posted by: fsrg at September 11, 2009 2:25 PM

Bxgrl - most LL can run a credit check with your DOB, past addresses. And if you were calm in explaining your reluctance to give out your SS# you probably could get by without it (or at least the last 4 #s) but I acknowledge that if I was looking at a prospective tenant who refused to provide a SS# like you state - I might be reluctant to rent to them since it appears that you are somewhat hostile to LLs (in general) and may prove to be a problem tenant (for me and the other residents - to whom I owe an obligation of quiet enjoyment)
Regardless of the law stating that SS#s are only suppossed to be used for SS (is that even still the law???) - the law (if it is even valid) is no longer enforceable - since virtually EVERY company, and municipality require it (or at least part of it) to verify identity - and none of those uses have ever been prosecuted.

I seriously doubt you took such a (no) SS# stance at your bank (who needs to KYC in order to satisfy Federal Law), your utility company, your credit card company, your school of higher education, etc, etc, etc.

I do not assume that everyone has $ or that ones credit, health, etc are all within ones control (some of it is, and some of it aint) ALL I said is that it is incorrect to assume that everyone living in buildings like this (effectivly abandoned) - are helpless souls who can't do anything about their situation - many people make calculated decisions and could (if they choose) find more suitable housing - not that housing like this should be tolerated anyway - it shouldnt. And not that the alternative is a penthouse apartment on the park - it isnt.

But very few working people in the city are 'forced' to accept housing like this...and BTW - I dont think non-working people should have to live in housing like this either - no one should

Posted by: fsrg at September 11, 2009 3:02 PM