Another Rent-Stabilized Notch in Dermot's Belt
After we put up a post last week about tenant complaints regarding the Dermot Company, a reader wrote in to say that Dermot had just assumed management of her rent-stabilized building, 301 Cumberland Street (below). As shown in the map above, Dermot now owns, manages, has developed, or plans to develop quite a lot of…
After we put up a post last week about tenant complaints regarding the Dermot Company, a reader wrote in to say that Dermot had just assumed management of her rent-stabilized building, 301 Cumberland Street (below). As shown in the map above, Dermot now owns, manages, has developed, or plans to develop quite a lot of properties in or near Fort Greene and Clinton Hill. (It’s worth noting that Dermot’s purchase of 301 Cumberland hasn’t been recorded in city records, and it’s possible the firm is simply managing the building.) Dermot’s most high-profile project to date has been taking the Williamsburgh Savings Bank Tower condo, but the company is also involved with two other big redevelopment projects: the conversion of the Queens Family Courthouse in Jamaica into a mixed-use development and the rehabilitation of the Battery Maritime Building. Aside from development, however, the firm is now concentrating a lot of energy on buying rent-stabilized buildings. In 2006, Dermot entered into a joint venture with Principal Real Estate Investors; the JV’s goal is to spend $300 million buying rent-stabilized apartments in New York City, and that seems to include quite a number of buildings in Fort Greene and Clinton Hill.
Rent-stabilized tenants in Fort Greene/Clinton Hill have been complaining about Dermot’s actions as a landlord since last fall, and there have been other negative reports about Dermot’s conduct. Consumerist had a series of posts about how the company’s mismanagement of an Inwood building has included not fixing serious maintenance issues—like, say, getting the heat to work on the coldest day of the year. Dermot told us, however, that it’s in no way a slumlord—quite the opposite, in fact. There were more than 650 HPD violations on six of the Brooklyn properties it bought over the past 14 months, and HPD has removed around 435 of those violations since Dermot took charge. Dermot’s goals in acquiring these buildings were to correct these conditions and provide quality housing, the firm said in a statement. To achieve these goals, Dermot has spent over $1,500,000 and is scheduled to spend an additional $500,000 in common area improvements (elevators, roofs, boilers, entry doors, intercoms, lighting, landscaping). In addition to the projects carried out in the common areas, Dermot also completed over 1,100 work orders in apartments and expended over $200,000 for repairs. We suspect we have not heard the last of this conflict.
Tenants Charge Dermot Company With Harassment [Brownstoner]
To the West to Make a Fortune and Back to Make Another [The Sun]
Boroughs Battle it Out [TRD]
Brooklyn Tenants Band Together To Keep Housing Affordable [NY1]
$300 Million Joint Venture Focused on New York City Real Estate Market [Principal]
Stuck With Dermot Management, A Modern-Day Slumlord [Consumerist]
Photo by Scott Bintner for PropertyShark
can this Dermot character stay away from Park Slope please?
Kick the trash out, then come to Bed-Stuy and clean things up around here.
“If this is balanced reporting – you must have gone to the Fox News School of Journalism.”
Actually, I graduated as a journalism major (Long Island University) and have made a very good living at it for about 25 years. And I stand by my comments.
Irate Guest at 5.03 – I read this post as an endorsement of Dermot and somewhat dismissive of the complaints. This is not a dispassionate news sight in any event. For the record, I think this is a great development as it will hopefully ensure the maintenance of some lovely buildings and represents, hopefully, a long term investment in those buildings – and higher property values long term.
No Brownstoner boldfaced Dermots CLAIM to have removed the violations – but Brownstoner failed to confirm if it was true (which would go along way to demonstrating what is really going on here)
Brownstoner also included the accusations of “slumlord” – which really is just name calling and slanderous (if unsubstantiated) – put in commentary such as – “—like, say, getting the heat to work on the coldest day of the year.” and included it under a snarky headline that leaves no doubt what the slant of the article is.
If this is balanced reporting – you must have gone to the Fox News School of Journalism.
Look Brownstoner can editorialize however he wants – freedom of speech and all – but I am certainly going to point out the hypocrisy of attacking (even if in a subtle “news” piece) a LL who may very well be preserving and improving the housing stock and living conditions in some great old buildings – while claiming that he is someone who is committed to this goal.
In fairness to Brownstoner, the post does not make a value judgement about McDermot, but simply reports the company’s recent actions. In fact, the post makes it a point to boldface the fact that McDermot has removed the majority of HPD violations. I think it’s a balanced post overall.
Personally I’d take the comparison to “NY Times school [of journalism]” as high praise indeed.
“Gabby placed a call to Dermot yesterday for further comment but they didn’t get back to her…”
is this supposed to constitute research?
Gabby placed a call to Dermot yesterday for further comment but they didn’t get back to her…