had some interesting conversations this past weekend with some stuggling tenants! their stories were mind blowing to say the least!!
One rents a 3 room apt in a 4 unit building.....one of the tennant's electrical service is hooked up to the one we were talking to!! Tennant #1 is paying for their's plus tennant #2's electric!!! Landlord doesn't even live in this C-O-U-N-T-R-Y!!
Another struggling renter's entrance door is rotted and lock doesn't work!!!
Another struggling renter has mold dripping from their kitchen ceiling tiles...(tiles are falling)
Another has been without a working refrig for over 1 week!!
And yet another is a tennant in an apt where the wood windows are rotted out!!
These are ALL in the city of schenectady...........and NONE of these tenants are section 8!!
And yes they've called the code enforcer who's been there....but still waiting for a resolve!!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
"Approval ratings go up and down for various reasons... An example is the high post 911 support for GWB even though he could be said to be responsible for the event." --- Box A Rox '9/11 Truther'
Melania is a bimbo... she is there to look at, not to listen to. --- Box A Rox and his 'War on Women'
had some interesting conversations this past weekend with some stuggling tenants! their stories were mind blowing to say the least!!
One rents a 3 room apt in a 4 unit building.....one of the tennant's electrical service is hooked up to the one we were talking to!! Tennant #1 is paying for their's plus tennant #2's electric!!!
Tell the person to call National Grid. They'll send a tech over and shut the power to their apartment and check all the electrical outlets in #2's apartment. They can determine the estimated usage that they overpaid for and credit their account toward future bills, then National Grid will go after the landlord.
If they signed a lease before knowing about the electrical wiring, then they may be contractually bound to live there or pay the balance left on the lease. Or they will have to go to court and try to break the lease without penalty.
the person with the 'electrical problem' did shut off their meter for about 10 minutes. the next day, another tenant asked if there was a power outage?????
they did call nat'l grid and they opened an investigation.
the tenant told the landlord and the landlord said they knew about the wiring and that is why they gave them rent for $500 instead of $550!!!!!! (tenant was never told that)
I guess the house is real real old with real real old wiring and that the landlord would have to invest thousands to rectify it....awwwwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!!
And they are all looking to move but they say that one apt is just as bad as the next. Schdy is all they can afford and not all but some need to be on a bus line!!!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Oh, wait, code enforcement is more interested in going after the modestly nice homes with house numbers of the wrong "size," the democrat dictatorship size. Beyond that, there's no money for adequate code enforcement, McC is spending the taxpayers money on fancy looking lighting.
Did the landlord contact the city when changing tenants?
Did the tenants contact the city to inquire whether a certificate of occupancy was granted? And if it was granted, on what basis was such approved if there was so many problems? If it was not granted, why did they move in anyway? Or did they not bother to check.
It works both ways.
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
Did the tenants contact the city to inquire whether a certificate of occupancy was granted? And if it was granted, on what basis was such approved if there was so many problems? If it was not granted, why did they move in anyway? Or did they not bother to check.
It works both ways.
they moved in in april.....the person regarding the certificate of occupancy was there last month. No, the tenant didn't really know about a certificate of occupancy. Upon inspection, the guy only looked to make sure there was a smoke detector and a carbon monoxide detector...which there were none. The tenant has received the letter from nat'l grid stating that they will do an investigation which should be completed within 30 days.
i also talked with someone that is looking for an apt in the city.....every place they called, they said they are only accepting section 8........WHY?..........because some of these properties that are being given away or sold for cheap are doing so with the contingency that they rent to section 8. I don't know how true that is....just repeating.....
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
they moved in in april.....the person regarding the certificate of occupancy was there last month. No, the tenant didn't really know about a certificate of occupancy. Upon inspection, the guy only looked to make sure there was a smoke detector and a carbon monoxide detector...which there were none. The tenant has received the letter from nat'l grid stating that they will do an investigation which should be completed within 30 days.
i also talked with someone that is looking for an apt in the city.....every place they called, they said they are only accepting section 8........WHY?..........because some of these properties that are being given away or sold for cheap are doing so with the contingency that they rent to section 8. I don't know how true that is....just repeating.....
I think it might be because people with a decent, steady income tend not to rent in those areas. At least with section 8, the landlords know that they'll get the rent each month, on time, and paid in full with no excuses. There are more tenants than you would believe that pay the first month's rent and deposit, but don't pay a penny after that, just waiting to be evicted, which could take months.
I think it might be because people with a decent, steady income tend not to rent in those areas.
People with decent steady income don't live in the city. The only steady decent income is made by the politically connected modern day regional carpetbaggers that pilfer the city residents by opening tax exempt and Metroplex subsidized businesses, while the residents living on the margins make just enough to pay their rent to fund the city services these millionaires benefit from. A large part of the city residents are made up of uneducated working poor that make a slave wage working for the robber barons that are in bed with the politicians.
If Schenectady was a foreign nation, the Federal Government would condemn us for humanitarian atrocities. The county has systematically put a large class of people at a disadvantage by overburdening them with taxation for the benefit of the 1%. This local governments systematic theft of resources will prevent this class from ever acquiring enough capital to get out of the cycle of living paycheck to paycheck.
So how does the government correct this? They create more Section 8 housing to pay to house the robber barons wage slaves. And the wage slaves look at their subsidized housing as their benevolent masters taking care of them, when the reality is, their benevolent masters in government took so much of their money through taxation and gave that money to their millionaire donors and contributors through subsidies and exemptions, it makes it virtually impossible to afford housing for themselves.
It's an insidious system. People living in the City working 40+ hours a week should ask themselves why they have to work so hard and live in such squalor. The reason is because of the collusion between business and politicians. Government welfare has agreed to pay for the wage slaves food, clothing, and shelter, and the business in turn doesn't have to pay a wage to meet those needs, and in return for the government paying for the necessities, business contributes to the politicians and the party to perpetuate the insidious system of lies.
This was a system that once only affected the unskilled working class, but I see that it is progressing into the lower middle and middle classes. With this high unemployment and surplus in the labor market, wages are stagnating while taxes are going up and inflation is on the rise. Those that once thought they worked hard and climbed up the economic scale are beginning to see themselves backslide. And they to will find themselves being fed, clothed and sheltered by the government while corporate America increases profits. People will be prone to blame capitalism, when the real culprit is the corporate/government collusion that both benefit off the system.
So how does the government correct this? They create more Section 8 housing to pay to house the robber barons wage slaves. And the wage slaves look at their subsidized housing as their benevolent masters taking care of them, when the reality is, their benevolent masters in government took so much of their money through taxation and gave that money to their millionaire donors and contributors through subsidies and exemptions, it makes it virtually impossible to afford housing for themselves.
It's an insidious system. People living in the City working 40+ hours a week should ask themselves why they have to work so hard and live in such squalor. The reason is because of the collusion between business and politicians. Government welfare has agreed to pay for the wage slaves food, clothing, and shelter, and the business in turn doesn't have to pay a wage to meet those needs, and in return for the government paying for the necessities, business contributes to the politicians and the party to perpetuate the insidious system of lies.
SCHENECTADY Landlord expenses could surge City Council weighs higher annual cost for rental inspections BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter
Schenectady’s controversial rental inspections law would become far more expensive for some landlords in a new proposal that the City Council will consider today . Currently, landlords must pay $50 to have a unit inspected every time a tenant moves out. Under the new proposal, that could be hundreds of dollars more. The proposal came as a shock to organizers of Schenectady Landlords Influencing Change, a new landlord organization that has been lobbying for changes to that law. Landlords have been trying to get the city to inspect less often, charge less money and look only for safety issues. Council members said they liked some of the group’s ideas, and landlords thought their proposals would be included in a new ordinance. But when the proposed changes were published in summary form this weekend, landlords were appalled. Under the proposal, property manager Chris Morris would see her inspection costs rise from $50 a year — on the rare circumstance of a tenant moving out — to $800 a year whether or not anyone moved out. “People come here and we find they want to stay,” Morris said. “You could go several years without a turnover. So you don’t have a big expense.” The lack of turnover wouldn’t matter under the proposal. It calls for yearly inspections of all buildings with six or more units. Landlords must pay $250 per building, plus $25 per unit. Currently for all units in the city the inspection fee is $50 each time a tenant moves out. In the proposed change for larger buildings, the city would inspect all common areas and up to 10 percent of the units. In the two-building, 12-unit property that Morris maintains, that means she’ll pay $800 even if only one unit gets inspected, plus a couple staircases. She was not pleased. “What they’ve come up with is outrageous,” she said. “We’ve been looking for a lightening of the problem. This is moving in the opposite direction.” Schenectady Landlords Infl uencing Change had asked the city to inspect units on a calendar cycle rather than whenever a tenant moved out. In some buildings, units might be vacated several times a year. For those, the change would be an improvement — although the cost is still likely to be more than the $50 per unit that they pay now. But the landlords had clearly said they wanted inspections done much less frequently than once a year, and they raised public objections late last year when they heard there might be a yearly requirement. At the time, City Council members assured them publicly that there would be no such requirement. “Now we are looking at a dramatic change,” Morris said, adding that she could not understand how city officials could draft such a proposal. She had expected it to incorporate at least some of SLIC’s ideas. She said she thought it was an attempt to collect more money. “We know the city needs money. But it can’t all come from the landlords,” she said. Councilman Carl Erikson said that he, too, expected the proposal to include ideas from SLIC. He expects a presentation on the topic today to include more details than the three-paragraph summary published in the council’s agenda. The council’s committee meeting starts at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall. He added that he wants the proposal to include inspections, even though he knows many landlords object. “We feel there needs to be inspections because there are people living in apartments that should not be rented,” he said. “We have a lot of people living in dangerous situations.” Thus, he said, it’s the council’s job to monitor the industry. But he said the situation isn’t fair to the “good” landlords. “They get punished, a little bit,” he said, adding that if every landlord offered habitable, safe dwellings, the city would not need inspection laws. Morris and members of SLIC had proposed a compromise to that problem: granting “preferred property” status to buildings that passed a certain number of consecutive inspections. Their landlords might be rewarded by cheaper inspections, or some other incentive, she said. Erikson likes that idea. “It sounds like a good idea,” he said. “If you have a track record of passing every inspection for the last x amount of time, maybe you get inspected less frequently.” But overall, he said, the goal of the law should be to raise the housing standard in Schenectady. He said professionals who work in the city often rent apartments elsewhere because they have so much diffi - culty finding an acceptable apartment here.
Logged
