Thursday, July 16, 2009

Can't afford to fix the place

From the NY Times:

As property owners run into trouble paying their mortgages, neighborhoods around New York City have been witnessing a disturbing consequence: Small and large apartment buildings are being abandoned in a state of disrepair, leaving tenants in limbo without basic services or even landlords.

Many of these landlords, particularly those who bought in recent years when the real estate market was at its peak, are struggling to make mortgage payments, let alone pump thousands of dollars into buildings for repairs. Elected officials and tenant advocates place much of the blame for the distress of multifamily apartment buildings not on landlords, but on the lenders who financed many of those now in default, saying the loans for the properties were based on shoddy lending practices and unrealistic projections of rising rents.


Anonymous said...

It the sixties all over again. Rent regulation, violations, John (Bloomberg) Lindsay and middle class flight. Don't anyone ever learn, nuttin?

Anonymous said...

But they still have loads of money to spend grabbing people's property and racing to create more unneeded and unoccupied apartments.

Time for some of that money that the city is planning to use to steal property be made available as low-interest loans for emergency property repairs.

Anonymous said...

Its the lenders fault - yeah right.

Taxpayer said...

Which politician(s) is demanding more and more "affordable" housing (whatever that is, because even Trump towers are affordable)?

We now have a nation full of politicians psychotically demanding that all banks lend to those known to not only be incapable of repaying, but to those who actually believe they are entitled to own what others pay for.

Why should ANY landlord risk even more of his own money to maintain a building he owns for tenants who believe that paying rent is optional?

Why should ANY sane person risk his own money or property for people who believe he is a criminal for owning property? These same people believe that THEY should own the property that others paid for.

But when these "entitled" people take someone's property as their own, ownership is no longer criminal.

In a free society, property rights are the fundamental glue to hold all the other rights together.

Anonymous said...

uh ah

Some lobby group is paying for a favorable spin.

Everyone knows the mayor and city council continued, and continues, to play a major role in creating a real estate feeding frenzy in this city.

You cannot stop real estate sharks from doing what they do - that is their nature.

But you can publically let your city council member know.

Share your efforts with queenscrap.

Anonymous said...

Then let the city seize those properties and create affordable housing there instead of using eminent domain to steal private land for the benefit of private developers.

I'll bet that tenant won't be voting for Bloomberg!

Lino said...

The basic proposition:

Prospective landlord arranges for bank to finance his(her) purchase of said building with other people's money.

Landlord then expects tenants to pay off loan.

That's the way this game works. No matter how much these "owners" bray about the difficulties they claim to face, the prospect of climbing on other people's backs will always attract a certain type of person: Leech.

If anyone still wonders -why- we are losing middle/working class, look to the loss of rent regulation and inadequate commitment to new Public Housing.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Lino. I agree. Not to mention that a lot of these "luxury" apartments that are standing empty and rotting replaced the tenement hovels that housed the workers of New York.

I often agree with Taxpayer, but on this particular issue I take umbrage. How is it unfair to demand that what is destroyed be replaced? Furthermore, how much rent are the rats running through the new unfinished construction paying?