joe_the_bummer's Profile
Author's Posts
September 11, 2009
Soundproofing Cost
anyone have an idea how much it would cost to build a soundproof room for my band to practice in? my choices are A: convert a bedroom in a condo building, B: convert a room in a brownstone garden apartment. I think in (B) most of the work is already done since no one is underneath and the walls are stone. any tips?
April 1, 2009
Getting Mugged in Park Slope
I mentioned this incident on one of the threads, and promised to tell the whole story – so here it is:
My wife and I had just finished dinner at a friend’s place on 1st and 8th, and were on our way back to our home on 7th and Garfield, just two blocks away. We were pretty buzzed up – definitely not doing the “don’t-F-with-me” walk that we’ve all perfected, just strolling home in our safe neighborhood. Well, we were walking down the hill on Garfield when two young guys came along in the other direction, one sort of hanging on the other one, just monkeying around, maybe telling a joke. We didn’t pay any attention to them. They just looked like regular kids, maybe about 20 years old. My wife has been in Brooklyn since she was six, and I’ve been in NYC for 11 years, and we’ve trained our selves that even if you are scared of scary looking people, you probably do worse for yourself by showing it. So there was every reason to ignore them like you ignore everyone else on the sidewalk.
Right when they were passing us, one of them just said something like “what’s up”, and I turned around to see him standing about a stride away, pointing a gun at me – he didn’t have a very aggressive look on his face – more like a raised-eyebrow look, as if to say, “clearly, I’m the one who gets the money in this situation, so do what you need to do”
I’m not totally clear what was going on with my wife. She ran up the hill a few strides, and ended up wrestling with the other guy for her bag and screaming. I was obviously powerless to help, and I just focused on making the thing end as soon as possible. I figured that all they wanted to do was run to the park with our stuff, and the guy didn’t really look like he was going to shoot us.
So I told the guy “I guess you’re gonna need this”, and handed over my wallet, and then started shouting at my wife to give up her bag, which she did…but only after I shouted three times. I was mostly worried that the guy was going to slug her to get her to shut up, but luckily, she did on her own and the guys took off up the hill.
We dusted ourselves off, and looked up to see someone in the second story window of a brownstone right above us, and we yelled to him to call 911. Oddly, (there is always at least one totally surreal thing in this kind of story) the guy just stood there staring at us, like he was watching TV. We had to yell at him three or four times to call before he finally disappeared into his apartment.
Then we walked about halfway down the block, and wouldn’t you know it, a police cruiser was right there. We ran up to it, and the cop had her radio out before we even got to the door (they’re trained to look for freaked-out people running at them). She goes, “get in”, and blasts out our description of the two guys, pops a u-turn, and starts flying up Garfield, asking us for any other details we could remember. In less then a minute, we had already passed a few other cruisers swarming around looking for these guys. Within about two minutes, they had a guy with his hands on a wall, surrounded by about 10 police officers on foot. One of the cops had my wallet, and asked me to identify it, which I did.
We actually refused to ID the guy, which disappointed the cops a little. The reason was that – well, they say in that situation, the victims usually do a great job identifying the gun, because that’s what they are looking at the whole time. That is spot on. When the cops took us to the bushes where they found a gun, I had no problem identifying it. I do have to say there was some pressure to ID the guy, and we just couldn’t be 100% sure and didn’t want to guess. A lot of people would match the description we gave, and we didn’t want any innocent people to get locked up.
As it turned out, they arrested they guy on the following: 1) he matched our basic description, 2) they found my wallet and the gun within a couple of blocks of him, 3) he couldn’t explain why he was in the neighborhood, 4) someone of the same description had run from another cruiser just a minute or so earlier, and 5) his heart was racing. When pressed, he said he had been jogging, and he was wearing street clothes.
The cops took us back to the station, where they took every last detail of our story and again asked us to try to ID the “perp”. Again we refused, and we refused to look at mug shots, because we are aware of what it can do to a victim’s memory when one of the mugshots matches the suspect. We were there until about 3:30, and they drove us home. Aside from a little bit of pressure to get a positive id on their perp, they were totally professional, and really nice to us. They offered us coffee, drove us home, and answered all of our questions, even the ones unrelated to the case (how common is this, is crime increasing, etc.)
Here are a few take-aways: This crime was not that common, and busting one was a pretty good score for the precinct (honestly I have to say it was very impressive how fast they acted, and they deserve major kudos). The gun was a loaded semi-automatic with five rounds in it, so if you think guys are doing this with fake guns, it’s not wise to gamble on it. The crime that they see a lot of in the area that you might not expect is burglary, right in the middle of the day while people are at work. And (maybe this is common sense to some): The blocks close to the park are an ideal place to mug someone, because the mugger can run into the park – so at the margin, 6th ave is safer than 8th.
The following Saturday, two of the cops involved came and served us with subpoenas, just basically requiring us to come and give our story in court. Even though we didn’t visually ID the “perps”, we did press charges Thursday night on the logic that if the cops had enough evidence for the case to stand up on its own, we felt a duty to get a criminal off the streets. It turned out to be the right move, because as we found out Saturday, the guy confessed to the whole thing, and even turned in his friend. He was 19, and from Jamaica (explaining his economy of words during the incident). His friend was 16, from Brooklyn, and endowed with the good sense to deny being anywhere near the crime scene.
So, long story short, the 16 year old is back in high school, and the 19 year old broke down and confessed again to the ADA in Brooklyn Superior Court. We were there the following Wednesday to give a recorded statement in front of a grand jury, in case the plea bargain fell through. The charge was first degree armed robbery, which carries a mandatory minimum of five years for the first offense. He was overstaying his visa, and he’ll probably bargain for two years and deportation. Notably, the DA’s paperwork indicated that we had visually identified the suspect, and when we corrected it we were given a lecture about how a lot of people flake out under pressure and change their story. So we had to insist again that we could not ID the guy, and never did, and the ADA had to change the case to base it on the confession instead of the ID. To me, the scary lesson in that was that a visual ID would have been very powerful evidence, powerful enough so that they were not even going to need the confession to move the case on (I think that’s the “indictment”). Of course you hope that a good lawyer would hack away at our ID, but you never know. We’ve all seen “dateline” type shows about wrongful convictions, but it was really shocking to realize first hand how easy it would have been to send an innocent person to jail if we had wanted to.
Anyway, we’re ok, and we’re over it, other than being just a little more spooked by random people lurking around the park.
Author's Comments
I'll tell you what's "super unfair": That Miles Davis' "Kind of Blue" is now forever #2 on the all time best selling Jazz album list.
There are some real problems in those recordings. I'll bet the real-musician part of the band would admit it. Now that I think of it, it was the piano part that made my ear hurt, and sometimes the vocals. Sorry for projecting on the rest of the rhythm section, which was apparently legit (it's hard to tell on pop music, because anyone can play it). Listen to the high note in the chorus of "don't know why" -- I believe she's singing the word "heart" -- she's about a quarter tone flat. once you key in on that your toes will curl every time you hear it, I promise. Try it. In a studio recording, aren't you supposed to do another take? Listen to the "fills" that the piano makes in the transitions of that song. They are akward moments of "I think I'm supposed to play because I'm not singing".
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 19, 2009 3:41 PM in response to LPC Will Not Reconsider Norah Jones Decision
she's got above average talent, but on her first album the band and the production quality were crap. The musicians must have been friends, not professionals. You could go to the village any night and find a jazz combo that could have supported that music much better. There were gaps in energy, intonation problems, people sounding like they didn't know what to play next, form/chord changes that didn't belong, etc... when you go through pop music channels to release music that's supposed to be the "new ella", it kind of insults real jazz people, who do it a lot better and work at it for decades, but don't have famous dads.
I'm ok with the windows.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 19, 2009 11:02 AM in response to LPC Will Not Reconsider Norah Jones Decision
translation:
Sorry bros, I don't have time for complete sentences, I'm too busy living the dream in COM-RE. But real quick while I get into my Miata in its private spot here between Dumbo and Ashland place (DUMBASS): Um, investment banks are so evil, dude. Have you brownstoner readers noticed all this new construction? Shit! OK, back to my sweet life. For more info, make an appointment with my assistant at my office Down Behind Atlantic and Gold st. (D-BAG)
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 19, 2009 10:15 AM in response to Commercial Klutch: November Edition
jackass
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 19, 2009 9:56 AM in response to Commercial Klutch: November Edition
I've been to this guy's other bar in bushwick. if it's anything like that it should be good. I'll be at the opening friday with mrs bummer.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 17, 2009 12:15 PM in response to New Bar Opening in Prospect Heights
even though no one challenged it, I just read an article that the US will probably lose money on the TARP program. so....retraction.
I don't think anyone is reading this anyway, because I've insulted almost everyone and didn't even get a peep.
D-snark -- I drove by 500 4th yesterday. big banner saying "ASPIRE HIGHER""
thought you might like that one too.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 12, 2009 3:56 PM in response to Standing Room Only at The Locale Condo Auction
I think the real reason that brownstones are so popular is that brooklyn, when you consider all of it, is probably the ugliest residential 100 square mile area in the whole country. brownstone areas are the only relief from the sprawling, grimy, angry, ugliness, so people pay a little more to live there.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 12, 2009 1:26 PM in response to Standing Room Only at The Locale Condo Auction
Seriously BHO. It has really been a shock to me to see how many people get OFF on original woodwork. Isn't that a little wierd? For a while I thought it was a gay thing, because I read that victorians were a big part of the draw of san francisco -- so I figured that like victorians, brownstones were that perfect blend of masculinity (construction projects) and femininity (ornate period detail), as well as a lifelong project in lieu of children.
But not so. There are heteros in there too. I remain mystified.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 12, 2009 12:52 PM in response to Standing Room Only at The Locale Condo Auction
stevieb the TARP program has made a $14Bn profit for the taxpayers. you should thank the bankers for creating this condo glut so you can afford a place. what's so great about brownstones anyway?
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 12, 2009 12:15 PM in response to Standing Room Only at The Locale Condo Auction
This is what they get for including the word "Biatch" in the name.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 12, 2009 11:22 AM in response to Second Life For Be@Schermerhorn
300 and 430 a square foot. now we're talking. makes sense to get folks like me off the sidelines and into that hotel conference room with our wallets out. wonder if future auctions will bring the same level of interest.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 12, 2009 10:15 AM in response to Standing Room Only at The Locale Condo Auction
those 1BBP are two-year-old sales.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 10, 2009 11:50 AM in response to Last Week's Biggest Sales
I have lived with and without cars in brooklyn and it is totally not worth it. you could rent cars and take car service basically at will before reaching the same cost, and wait til start getting parking tickets.
You'll also spend plenty of time in traffic knowing that you could have been on the subway.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 5, 2009 12:22 PM in response to Subway Service on Weekends Is F@#%ed
*rob* sounds like you would do the same to your friends?
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 4, 2009 3:30 PM in response to Sublet/Share Legal Issue
carroll go back and read the posts. he denied overcharging the rent. he probably just got a little lazy.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 4, 2009 3:09 PM in response to Sublet/Share Legal Issue
all of you people who think it's totally ok to make a few bucks behind the backs of your friends, you are hateful bastards and you make this city suck. greedy pigs.
mightierthanwords, go get'im. he has your hard earned money and you deserve it back.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 4, 2009 2:37 PM in response to Sublet/Share Legal Issue
11:51 "it's sad because we were all friends". This guy ripped off people who trusted him, and they deserve to get their money back.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 4, 2009 1:46 PM in response to Sublet/Share Legal Issue
antidope, nice nuclear approach. nasty! I love it. He absolutely should have been reporting income and the tenants have cancelled checks to prove the case.
OP at least you'll have that as a threat if it gets nasty.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 4, 2009 1:37 PM in response to Sublet/Share Legal Issue
he screwed you. there is an unwritten rule that when friends move in together, they split the rent equally. everybody's so focused on what's legal. He tried to take advantage of his friends, and what he did was sh!tty -- it sounds like a lot of people here think it's totally justified. I hope I am never friends with them. You should skip paying rent for at least a month to cover your security deposit, and then move out and leave him holding the bag. don't forget to take out those valuables.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 4, 2009 1:16 PM in response to Sublet/Share Legal Issue
screw him. he screwed you. stop paying rent until you're equal. it would take him a long time to evict you anyway, and since you can prove you've been paying rent, I'm sure you could make up a hardship excuse to stay on the right side of the law. he deserves it. I hope you weren't friends before you signed the lease -- I knew a group of people in the same sitch and it broke up their friendships...what a mess. don't forget to take your valuables out of the apartment.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 4, 2009 11:25 AM in response to Sublet/Share Legal Issue
The Grammar Police hereby withdraw their support for Joe Nardiello.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 2, 2009 4:50 PM in response to Closing Bell: Windshield Spam Backfires
If he knew how, to use, a comma I'd consider VOTING for, him. IN YOUR FACE.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 2, 2009 4:17 PM in response to Closing Bell: Windshield Spam Backfires
I thought the article was good, but there wasn't a lot of new information and it was a pretty transparent bash against bloomberg, as bstoner points out. so that was lame. One thing that jumped out at me: I had always considered the construction boom to be more a product of lower level city corruption than any real top-level initiative (politically speaking, I mean. obviously there was an economic force behind it). Now I would call it equal.
I lived in w-burg when that east river park was a wasteland -- people used to sneak under a fence and around little homeless warrens and out onto the rocks to check out the view. I was always wondering why no one developed that area, and I just assumed that some kind of impenetrable city politics held it back. Kudos to Bloomberg for cutting through it and getting it done.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 29, 2009 10:06 AM in response to Evaluating the Mayor's Development Legacy
As a guitar player, I am offended at the number of apartments staged with a guitar in the corner. Its always a piece of crap. Why do they all do this? When I see a Gibson in one of these crap holes maybe I'll finally buy.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 3:43 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 200 Congress Street, #1A
don't they have get-togethers for everyone? we could just hoard some tables. I've been afraid of two things -- first, obviously, getting my ass kicked by enraged homeowners. Second, well...I think there are some gentlemen using this site as a kind of social network that...um, I'm not part of. so, yeah, if you promise to call the cops if it gets out of hand let's all go to the next b-stoner thing. It must be hilarious to see what people actually look like.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 3:01 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
wasder -- have you checked out "insideschools.org"? I've been pulling up some schools in there. Almost all of them seem to have 4 or 5 stars in reading or math, so I tend to ignore that. There are some other statistics on each school that can help you focus on what's right for your kid. Plus, very helpful: you can click on a zone map.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 2:44 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
no stevie it hasn't happened yet. Little B is due in Becember. But I'm afraid to pay a premium to buy in 321 and then get shunted into another zone. I think if your kid is already in the school you get a variance, but I would take 5 years of risk.
and yes I'm definitely a net payer in the tax picture. come hang out the next time the subject of affordable housing comes up!!
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 2:30 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
miss muffet, I'm in the same boat. I've got a little bummer on the way. I am worried about a related problem - having my school zone yanked out from under me after I purchase.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 2:07 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
snark, yeah it's going to be partly deferred but I think the takeaway is that this year is proving that the bastards are going to find a way to get paid no matter what..
stevieb my business was arranging credit derivative trades. I understand if you want to withdraw your sympathy. As you can imagine, there's not a lot of new business in that area. you know...a few bad apples...
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 1:54 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
"Workers at 23 top investment banks, hedge funds, asset managers.... "
stevieb maybe a broader swath of people is getting paid than I thought. my business is still crushed, so I may be a little biased. That raw number is high, I can't argue that -- but I would still point out that hedge funds don't have very many employees, i-banks only made so much because they had less compitition, and a lot of the pay is going to be in shares and deferred comp. Still, you're right, it will support park slope.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 1:26 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
"Workers at 23 top investment banks, hedge funds, asset managers.... "
stevieb maybe a broader swath of people is getting paid than I thought. my business is still crushed, so I may be a little biased. That raw number is high, I can't argue that -- but I would still point out that hedge funds don't have very many employees, i-banks only made so much because they had less compitition, and a lot of the pay is going to be in shares and deferred comp. Still, you're right, it will support park slope.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 1:26 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
BHO -- numbers on newly issued debt don't matter. for China, new issues are small drops in a big bucket. if they want to marginally change their holdings, say from 700Bn to 600Bn, it's more efficient to turn the spigot off than to dump out of the bucket (sell bonds) why? because the older, "off-the-run" treasury bonds that they own are less liquid than new ones, so they'll pay a transaction cost if they sell. It's cheaper to adjust their position if they just let bonds mature. You can't read that spigot-shutting as a total rejection of the US treasury market; it's just not so. People are using that new-issue data to mislead the public.
The relevant number concerning new issue debt is what the treasury has to pay in interest to borrow. It's historically low, which means that investors, wherever they are in the world, are happily stepping in to invest in the US.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 1:15 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
on the bonus thing: you have to rememeber that the number of people getting those checks is way smaller, even though the checks are big, and they are mostly repeat-check-getters. There are not a lot of new millionaires being minted. So you are getting folks with 5MM in the bank moving up to 6MM. That's going to affect the high-end market, and at the same time you still have a massive destruction of wealth crippling the trust-fund set, so who knows what the net impact is.
The 1-2MM pad has been incredibly firm in my view, but it's because a lot of people are long time owners, and people didn't go crazy with financing. Look at the OTHER three hundred thousand financial workers, the "banking middle class" who are still working at half their 2006 compensation, for the brooklyn story. It's going to be an agonizingly slow drift, and it will be driven more by relocations than foreclosures -- I'm on board with the bottom coming 5 yrs from now 25% below where we are now.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 12:44 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
bklyn14 -- argentina was a bond default in a collapsing economic bubble at the end of an unsustainable currency regime.
an asset price bubble happens when people think there is no end to the upside in prices, like in dot-com stocks or housing, or tulips. Bonds can't go much past their par value, because they're anchored to it.
OK, I agree people were too relaxed about lending to argentina, so if you want to call that a bubble, fine, but when I think ASSET bubble I think speculative mania.
As for the US, yes, the dollar is going to be weaker in the long term. But the US is one of the only countries that borrows in the same currency it spends its money in. Argentina had to issue dollar debt to fund Peso obligations. It's a totally different story, and we don't have that problem.
I mean -- are you worried that your swiss franc bank account is going to take a hit when you redeem your US treasury bonds and have to sell the dollars? I don't see the reason to panic.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 12:25 PM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
OK, not toll bros -- then I take back my comments. It'll end up at the bottom of the east river with the rest of them. they're seriously smoking crack.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 12:03 PM in response to The Edge Is Making a List, Checking It Twice
oh you beat me to it.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 11:46 AM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
BHO no doubt. besides, credit ratings are such a joke. you can mail in your keys and start borrowing again with a clean slate in 7 years. great country.
one thing to add -- those "head fakes" have another name --- "seasonality". they're all between may and august.
I'm on loan for team Bull. Like when you show up for a little league game and the other team only has 7 players, so they forfeit the game and a couple of your guys switch so you can still play.
The prices have basically bottomed.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 11:43 AM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
mopar -- I know, I was stretching a little to squeeze in a rant that I haven't found a home for. forgive me. But most of the US treasury debt in the US is owned by pensions and other similar long term investors -- it's not as circular as you make it sound.
I agree that there is a limit to how much mortgage debt can be bought by the treasury (this program has kept the spread down), and there is a limit to how many mortgages can essentially be written (via fannie mae etc) by the government. The private mortgage market is still dead, and the de facto lender is uncle sam itself. but I don't think the current programs are in any imminent danger of collapse. The US still borrows very very cheaply.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 11:36 AM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
this one is Toll Brothers, right? They are actually in reasonable financial shape given the circumstances, and you can expect them to act differently than the small guys. I don't know how they financed this building, but probably the debt-holder is a big investor (big pension, insurance co or bank) and is wearing the pants now and has made the call to ride this out. It could take a long time to reverse that, so I wouldn't hold your breath.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 11:16 AM in response to The Edge Is Making a List, Checking It Twice
also, there's no such thing as "artificially low interest rates". government interest rates are set by policy, so either they're all "artificial" or none of them are. Japan has had near zero interest rates for almost 20 years.
The popularity of the US treasury armageddon scenario is way way out of proportion. Did you know that China only owns 7% of our debt, and that fully two thirds of it is owned by americans themselves? And China fully admits that there is really not much else out there to buy with 700Bn of surplus. Further, to buy US treasuries you have to first buy dollars and sell Yuan -- that keeps China's currency down, supporting their exports. They need that. Don't listen to Lou Dobbs. "Communist China" is not bringing our economy down by dumping treasuries. (and speaking of anti-china press, how many of you knew that Japan owns the same amount of our government debt that China does -- but do you hear about it in the news?)
Next. There is no such thing as a "treasury bubble". Bond markets can't have bubbles, because every bond matures at 100c on the dollar. Our "bubble" long bond is at 119, meaning it will lose a little over 20% between now and its 2040 maturity. not really a big deal.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 10:37 AM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
I wouldn't make that much of the expiry of the new homebuyer tax credit. it's not that expensive and it's good bang-for-the-buck for the government, since it moves a lot of low-priced homes. today they reported 400K annual pace for new homes. If a third of that qualified for the 8000 credit, it would only cost 1 Billion. They need to threaten to take the program away to get people to use it. It's an empty threat -- this is one of their better tools, and they'll keep using it to prop up the market.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 28, 2009 10:19 AM in response to NYT: Housing Not Out of the Woods Yet
does this mean they want to put in a garage?
How can you find out if someone has the right to put up a no parking sign? I am suspicious of a spot on 6th avenue between sterling and st marks, where the curb is not cut, and a "gallery" has big no parking sign up in the window.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 27, 2009 9:20 AM in response to 97 St. Marks Avenue Update
adam..that link was so worth it. my faves:
1. "Its posts like yours that make me think the whole idea of posting should not be allowed on this website."
2. "Good thing Brach davens with a nice big tallis zekel. His tefilos are botul..."
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 26, 2009 3:44 PM in response to Mendel Brach Barred from Condo Business
I just did some google research. Here's the trap: Inspection does not cover common areas and common elements like the roof and exterior walls. For that you rely on the engineer's report. If there is a construction defect, most insurance policies only cover damage that results from the defect, but not the defect itself. So if the roof has a hole, they'll cover the water damage but not the hole repair. that was my read, at least. You don't have any control over this insurance policy when you buy the place; you only control your insurance for what's inside your own walls.
so for some of these repairs I think you're SOL, like antidope.
I think the Times has a strong bias in support of the real estate market -- just follow the money -- so I'm inclined to read carefully when the negative articles show up...at least until there are more law firm ads than realtor ads -- then I'll switch.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 26, 2009 1:48 PM in response to Faulty Towers: Complaints About Condos on the Rise
that is criminal. I thought part of condo maintenance went for insurance. I guess construction defects are not covered in the policy? Sounds like benson's "water cannon" was covered, but that was not a construction defect.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 26, 2009 12:39 PM in response to Faulty Towers: Complaints About Condos on the Rise
oh. I goofed, they didn't double their money. 45% upside. anyway....
antidope - really? 15% of purchase price for repairs? that's the amount you sue for I assume. Does your insurance company take that developer-bankruptcy risk or do the condo owners?
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 26, 2009 12:00 PM in response to Faulty Towers: Complaints About Condos on the Rise
B -- yikes. "water cannon". Do I understand you right that for 5K per Million dollar condo, you could have everything all wrapped up, and even after almost doubling their money, the owners would rather spend about the same amount to sue a bankrupt developer? BTW what's holding back the C of O?
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 26, 2009 11:45 AM in response to Faulty Towers: Complaints About Condos on the Rise
antidope which building was that?
benson -- what happened, did the new development break a wall or a pipe or something? I could totally see those basements flooding. the outdoor space is shaped like a giant drain for the courtyard. It sounds like you are totally reasonable. People are insane.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 26, 2009 11:26 AM in response to Faulty Towers: Complaints About Condos on the Rise
Guys, you had an OP ask a fair question, and you had someone come on and give a broker's sales pitch as an answer, without disclosing that she was a broker. It deserved to be called out.
I don't care if you all use Bernie Madoff as your buyer broker. I call BS when I see it. Good luck.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at October 23, 2009 2:18 PM in response to Using a Buyers Agent?
Bklnite - you know, it was wrong of me to criticize someone's music. Any music that someone wants to listen to or play is good music. Who cares who sells what, or what label people give it. If people like it, so be it. I was having a bad day. She's got a beautiful voice and there's nothing wrong with her music or her windows.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at November 20, 2009 9:49 AM in response to LPC Will Not Reconsider Norah Jones Decision