Why would the tenant have to put the trash out on the sidewalk, anyway? Do you provide outdoor trash receptacles for tenants to use, which you then empty and put the bagged trash on the sidewalk at the appropriate time? If so, then the tenant should have put the trash in the receptacles; if not, and a tenant with overflowing garbage cans inside his/her unit had no choice but to put the trash on the sidwalk, then I think you need to rethink your system.

In any event, I think you pay it this time, but you explain the rules to the tenant and make clear that if it happens again, the tenant pays.

Posted by: BklynCynic at August 11, 2009 11:12 AM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

I dunno, it all looks pretty to me. It's green, and it's growing. Why not just let it be?

Posted by: BklynCynic at August 10, 2009 3:48 PM in response to Weed Identification

I haven't been laid off, but I accepted a substantial cut in my base salary. Would this still qualify as hardship for purposes of a loan modification?

Posted by: BklynCynic at March 6, 2009 1:53 PM in response to Housing Loan Modification?

My thoughts exactly, GHB! Be careful, sunspot19 - methinks you're in danger of being banned from this blog!

Posted by: BklynCynic at March 2, 2009 6:15 PM in response to Recessed Lighting (Low Voltage)

Some of the commenters seem to be suggesting that if the sun is bad, people shouldn't be driving. Give me a break! Mind you, I don't own a car -- I think owning a car in NYC is insane -- but c'mon: for those who do drive, are they just supposed to stay home on sunny winter days when the sun might get in their eyes? Let's get real.

Posted by: BklynCynic at February 2, 2009 7:49 PM in response to Developing: Pedestrian Struck at 8th and Carroll

And what about women putting on make-up in the train in the morning? What's up with that?

Posted by: BklynCynic at January 26, 2009 12:27 PM in response to Open Thread

So here's an issue for discussion: I originally did not sign up for STAR, on the theory that our schools need the funding we get from property taxes and I wanted to pay my share. Then, when I didn't get a rebate check last year, I looked into and was also told that the reason was that the city's records didn't show that my home is my primary residence. So how does one record that one's home is one's primary residence? Turns out there's only one way: to apply for STAR relief! Call me cynical, but I think that's just crazy!

Posted by: BklynCynic at January 22, 2009 1:56 PM in response to Haven't Received Rebate Check

I still say that a house that was mortgaged in the amount of $489,500 in 2003 and potentially selling for $1,750,000 in 2008 is sick. A profit of approximately $1.25 million profit in five years? Or if you look at the original selling price of what seems to have been $304,000 in 1990 according to Property Shark ... a nearly $1.45 million profit in nearly 20 years? OK, 20 years is a long time, but aren't we talking about precisely the period of economic madness that got us into the mess we're in today? These kinds of profits are unsustainable, and possibly even evil. Too bad for these folks, who should have sold a couple of years ago, but while this is a pretty house, it's not prime (either in location, or in internal amenities: central air on top two floors only, kitchen and presumably bathrooms that require upgrades, possible issues with two-family configuration and C of O, no landscaping in garden, painted woodwork, no working fireplaces, laundry room oddly placed on top floor, etc. And that's before an engineer gets a look at it - these houses often have serious flooding and mold problems in the basements). I still think they should price it at $999,000. They'd either sell it immediately at that price (and still make a tidy profit), or set off a bidding war, which would be refreshing and unusual in this market. Or, they can just sit on this empty house (didn't someone above say they'd already moved out?) for another 10 years until the market bounces back (assuming it does).

Posted by: BklynCynic at January 6, 2009 11:37 AM in response to House of the Day: 69 St. James Place

Good point about the woodwork, 1842.

And okay, maybe calling this neighborhood "fringe" is subjective and overstating it a bit. But I still think $1.75 million is fairly outrageous for this property, compared to what you can get for $2 million or under in Park Slope, just as an example - not that I'm advocating Park Slope as the best neighborhood, but it's certainly better in terms of amenities, I don't care how great a market Choice is.

Posted by: BklynCynic at January 5, 2009 3:49 PM in response to House of the Day: 69 St. James Place

Clinton Hill does, indeed, have beautiful architecture ... but I'm not sure why everyone is swooning over this one. All the woodwork has been painted over. "Functional" country kitchen probably means it needs to be ripped out. Lack of bathroom pix is also a bad sign. Mostly it seems to look good because there are pretty photos and the owners have done some nice decorating.

Property Shark shows multiple re-financings, currently in amount of $489,500. (Purchased by current owners in 1990 with mortgage of $244,000, so probably bought for $304,000 if they put 20% down, or less if they put 10% down). Does the current state of this property warrant such a mark-up? I don't think so, especially in what really is a fringe area, where crime is going up and will probably get worse as the economy continues to deteriorate.

OK, call me cynical (that's my name, after all! seems like this site is made for the likes of me!), but I think this might eventually sell for $999,000 (avoiding mansion tax), though even that means the owners clear over $500,000. But owners these days are still living in la-la land, thinking they can ask ruinous prices and actually get them.

Posted by: BklynCynic at January 5, 2009 3:03 PM in response to House of the Day: 69 St. James Place

Check the lease - all the leases I've ever seen require tenants to comply with all city laws and regulations, sanitation regulations included. Any fine against the property is passed through to the tenant responsible.

That said, you should give the tenant the option of contesting the summons or paying the fine. If they choose to contest it, support them as much as you can. If they choose to pay it, that's okay too.

Posted by: nmg1 at August 11, 2009 12:23 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

The law(and the rules) allows the rubbish/recycling to put out the night before the pickup(after 5 pm the day before) so if the pickup is today it would be ok to put them out at 5pm on Monday.
The landlord is responsible for the fine and should dispute it. Most of these are reduced. It would be very unusual to be fined $300 the first time although they may be showing you the Maximum fine.
You can point out that it was put out by someone not authorized to do so and that you have explained the rules.
but as others pointed out that the tenant may be obligated to reimburse you. You can give the tenant the right to appeal on your behalf but you should be aware its you the landlord that is obligated to pay no matter what happens and sometimes a tenant fighting this is no good because you have to sign an authorization and a power of attorney(which I prefer not to do myself- I prefer to fight them myself when I get them and so far in 30 years I have paid ONE $25.00 fine)....

Posted by: smeyer418 at August 11, 2009 1:33 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

$300?! DSNY tickets cap out at 100 bucks as far as I know. You must have gotten three tickets. What's the rest of the story?

Posted by: pattunia at August 11, 2009 1:54 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dsny/downloads/pdf/rules/digest/digestprint.pdf

has all the info for most items the minimum fine is $100 and the maximum $300 but it can be more...

Posted by: smeyer418 at August 11, 2009 2:12 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

I would talk to the tenant nicely and explain to them what happened. Hopefully, they will take responsibility. Get it reduced and maybe split the cost? It is best to be diplomatic in order to maintain a good relationship.

You guys are idiots if you think he should pay for it. If I throw a brick from inside my house, is it the landlords fault?
That was a personal action taken by the tenant. Unless he was instructed, employed or coerced, he is responsible for his own actions.

*rob* - your postings in this thread is absolutely horrendous and useless.

Posted by: crimsonson at August 11, 2009 3:02 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

"*rob* - your postings in this thread is absolutely horrendous and useless."

This thread?

Posted by: denton at August 11, 2009 3:38 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

crimonson. NY law makes the landlord absolutely liable when it becomes to properly handling the garbage.

If you are the super and you throw the brick- the landlord is liable. If you are merely a tenant-it depends- did the landlord have knowledge that you throw bricks and did nothing about it?

but the garbage thing is absolute.

You can of course collect it back from the tenant if the lease so provides...

and yes that makes it difficult for the landlord welcome to the NY world of impossible tasks for a landlord... garbage being just one of them.

While the tenant may have responsibility back to the landlord its still the landlords fine(which he can get reduced and sometimes even dismissed)

Posted by: smeyer418 at August 11, 2009 4:01 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

Here is what you do, post a note in the lobby stating that only 5-6pm on trash days only. In addition, goto 66 john st and explain to the judge it was a new tenant or next door so they can reduced the fine to 75. I did it and it worked!

Posted by: bblamchops at August 11, 2009 6:16 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

I don't get it. It appears the tenant thought they were doing a nice thing by putting out the trash. I don't understand how they put the trash out 12 hours too early if you woke up to find it there. Did they put it out in the morning when the next pick up wasn't until the following morning? If so, I would explain the rules to them and then ask for half of the fine or permit them to challenge it. I'm just not clear on the facts here.

Posted by: orestes at August 11, 2009 6:44 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?

I forget the wording but it's part of my lease that the tenant is responsible to reimburse the landlord for any fines caused by the tenant's act or neglect. Even without that rider, I believe it is implied as the tenant is responsible for damages.

Posted by: jfss at August 11, 2009 7:04 PM in response to Ticket for Trash - Who Pays?