Is this "news" for the Post? Sounds as though this is a rehash of a NYTimes article 2 years ago, which included this Corcoran quote:

"In addition to seminars for brokers, Corcoran’s efforts include a computer program that automatically screens property listings for unacceptable language. 'Some words get completely blocked, and others flash a warning on your screen,' Ms. Liebman said. 'It’s a huge list of words, but we have zero tolerance for violations.'" http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/24/realestate/24cov.html?_r=1&ex=1184212800&en=fc986027001ee54f&ei=5070

That article generated a letter to the editor the following week from an HUD assistant secretary that specifically debunked the Family Friendly problem: "Housing providers who advertise that their buildings are “family friendly” aren’t violating the law". See the True Gotham blog for the whole letter, http://www.truegotham.com/archives/a-brokers-job-fair-housing-laws-too-strictly-interpreted.html.

I wonder if the NY Post just got hold of a 2 year old email in which "Corcoran officially banned more than 200 potentially "offensive" words and even installed new software that makes it impossible for brokers to type them into their ads". Or maybe Corcoran just reiterated the policy. Whatever, if Family Friendly is still on the list, the HUD disagrees.

Many of these terms are probably not Fair Housing violations, though they may be unnecessary (why not say "5 blocks" instead of "walking distance"?). But these scrubbing exercises *do* prevent agents from providing useful (legal) information while not (materially) reducing a firm's risk of being sued.

As I recall, Corcoran's Fair Housing problem at that time alleged active steering, taking white couples to see some rentals and (otherwise matching) non-white couples to see others. That was not a language problem, but a behavior problem.

Posted by: Sandy Mattingly at March 13, 2009 12:16 PM in response to Word Ban at Corco

Definitely call the DEP. A couple of years ago they called *us* to arrange for *them* to run a wire from our basement water meter outside, where ConEd can read it regularly. Maybe the regime has changed, but DEP treated it more like their problem then, than mine.

Posted by: Sandy Mattingly at February 19, 2009 11:49 AM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

Looking forward to hearing from someone who attends the 14 Fort Greene Place open house to report in on Monday, after asking the agent whether there are any legal proceedings pending over the mortgage.

The agent has the fiduciary obligation to the seller not to provide information against the seller’s interest without permission, but also the legal obligation not to lie. So the agent can legally say (1) “I can’t answer that either way”, (2) “yes”, (3) “no”, or (4) “not to my knowledge”. If the seller really wants to sell and if the real answer is “no”, I assume the agent would (eventually) get permission to say that out loud if the rumor depresses the market.

If the truth is “yes” and buyers searching lis pendens find out, the seller will have to deal with it. I go with the A Blog Not A Newspaper line here … Brownstoner reported the FACT that a “very good source” (11:31 AM) gave him the information. He believes it is a very good source, and says “*if* that is indeed the case …”.

I assume this thread will get to the agent’s attention today, and that he will be prepared for the questions after talking to the owner before Sunday. That should eliminate #4 above (“not to my knowledge”). He may even weigh in here (if the truth is “no” or if he gets permission from the seller to address this publicly).

I recall many threads here in which anonymous posters weigh in with “information” about the particular circumstances of a building or a seller that bears on value or motivation; I assume all readers take that with the proverbial grain of salt.

At this point it may be in the seller's interest to publicly say the source is wrong if that is the truth. Seller's choices are more dicey if the source is correct.
source is wrong,

Posted by: Sandy Mattingly at January 25, 2008 12:55 PM in response to Foreclosure Pressure at 14 Fort Greene Place?

The full REBNY report is at http://www.rebny.com/pdf_files/NYCResidential3q07.pdf but I don’ think it is very helpful. Unlike the Manhattan reports that Miller Samuel does, REBNY does not report sales volume or provide raw numbers. Without methodology revealed, I have little confidence that they have nay idea what is going on outside of Manhattan and within Manhattan their numbers don’t have the credibility of Miller Samuel.

11:21 asks a very good question, to which I don’t have an answer for Brooklyn. Bu tin Manhattan, the number of sales is WAY up in 2007 (literally a record year for transactions, through only 3 quarters). But the liquidity issues that started to hit in August (and the subsequent sub-prime ‘meltdown’) had only minimal impact on closings by Sept 30.

No real-time data is available (to my knowledge) so it is anyone’s guess what the Q4 numbers will look like. (I blogged about the Manhattan transaction data on Oct 3, with the quarterly numbers the last two years and annual numbers back to 1998; I don’t know of anyone who has good Brooklyn data.) That's what the bloggers are for....

Posted by: Sandy Mattingly at November 8, 2007 5:01 PM in response to REBNY 3Q Market Report: Prices Still Rising

REBNY blew this one big time, as it seems the participating firms will be Halstead, Brown Harris and a (small) bunch of (small) others.

Excluse the plug here, but I have blogged about this about five times in the year since REBNY made its premature announcement, most recently today.

http://www.realtown.com/sandymattingly/blog/manhattan-real-estate-business/rebnys-paltry-portal-launches-friday-yawn

Short story is that this will not have enough of the market to be especially relevant, which is a huge missed opportunity for REBNY and a shame for buyers who are sick of phony listings on NY Times . com.

Ego? Money? All of the above...

Posted by: Sandy Mattingly at September 25, 2007 4:03 PM in response to 21st Century, Ahoy: REBNY Rolling Out Web Listings

Not true. Most water meters are inside the house, however many, many water meters are outside. (Usually in a deep pit in the sidewalk directly in front of the property. They are below the freeze line.) Your violation is curious. If you can't discern the exact reason from the summons, go to Dept of Buildings website and enter your address and navigate to the violation. Here's the link. Good luck.

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/bispi00.jsp

Posted by: Hank at February 19, 2009 11:53 AM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

Additional info: Your violation is "probably" because they can't get your readings on a regular basis (done by the Con Ed meter reader every 3 months) along with the Con Ed reading. The Con Ed reader won't bend down to the meter to physically read it and certainly won't lift any plate covering it in the basement. That's if they can even get into the basement in the first place. They want you to have a remote contraption wired from the meter to a position outside the front entrance so that the reader can quickly obtain an electronic reading. Not a bid deal. They will come out and do it for you. It's only a thin wire. Call he DEP number on your water bill.

Posted by: Hank at February 19, 2009 12:03 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

Does anyone know why ConED cannot have remote reading devices like Keyspan does? It's annoying to get an estimated reading much of the time because I wasn't there to let them in.

Posted by: cmu at February 19, 2009 12:19 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

My understanding is that you can relocate the gas meter to the outside of the building, but at your own expense...

Posted by: SJ at February 19, 2009 12:26 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

Even worse with ConEd is when you *are* there to let them in, but they flee 1 millisecond after ringing the bill, and you end up with an estimated reading anyway

Posted by: NorthHeights at February 19, 2009 12:54 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

Con ed is just experimenting with remote readers. There are two counties in NY that they are trying them out and Brooklyn isn't one. BUG(Keyspan-National Grid) is not yet installing them on old meters. You can have it done by them at YOUR expense.

Posted by: smeyer418 at February 19, 2009 12:54 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

one additional point. In no case are they putting the meter outside. The water meter is still in my basement with a remote reader attachment(that looks like a black sink stopper on the outside of the house)

My Gas meters have blue tooth type local wireless readers attached to the basement meter that can be read outside the house.

Posted by: smeyer418 at February 19, 2009 12:57 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

wait up, you can pay to get a wireless Con Ed meter?

How much? I'd do it, I am always missing the reader.

Posted by: vanburenproud at February 19, 2009 3:27 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

I phone the gas & electric readings in every few months. It's pretty effortless actually.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 19, 2009 3:36 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?

Yeah, DIBS, perhaps you're more put together than I. I have a major blind spot when it comes to anticipating the brief window during which Con Ed accepts a reading in relationship to the bill.

It would free up much-needed brainspace if I could just automate the whole chore.

Posted by: vanburenproud at February 19, 2009 3:52 PM in response to DEP Fine for Meter in Basement?