Probably not, at least not on this web site.Originally Posted by 4UWS
I dont care who you are, we have a slum lord in charge and WS kids are suffering. Does someone care?Originally Posted by Manuel
Probably not, at least not on this web site.Originally Posted by 4UWS
Thank you Manuel or should I say Markie Manuely, Just got back from dinner at 735 and the entire place was a buss with slum lord conversation. The TB should do something about slum lords, even if it is one of their own.Originally Posted by Manuel
Originally Posted by WNYresident
One of my family members owns apartments. I beleive the person has to be convicted of the crime and then the person can be evicted from the property. Question would then be, the person on the lease, is it the same person that was arrested??
I do not have an opinion one way or the other on what type of landlord Mr. Piotrowski is, however given this situation it will be interesting to see how he proceeds because it is now a matter of public record that an occupant of one of his buildings has been arrested on drug charges and this activity is customarily taking place. He has several options available to him:
- In the absence of a lease he can give the tenant a 30 day notice to quit
- Whether or not there is a lease he can give the tenant a notice of termination under RPAPL 715(1)/RPL 231(1)
- In the absence of the landlord giving notice under RPAPL 715(1)/RPL 231(1) a neighbor or other tenant of the subject property can serve the landlord a notice to commence eviction proceeding and if the land lord fails to do commence the eviction proceedings themselves.
A prior conviction of the tenant is not required but is very helpful. The petitioner in an eviction proceeding based on illegal or immoral conduct need only to establish the immoral or illegal conduct by a preponderance of the evidence and not by the beyond reasonable doubt required in a criminal proceeding.
Last edited by dtwarren; April 26th, 2008 at 10:57 AM.
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
Knock it off with this feigned attempt of non committal BS. You and your town minions are reveling in this. It is a mostly pathetic bunch, who will never get over Wally beating the one who's altar they worship at blindly.Originally Posted by dtwarren
A remark should only hurt within it's proportion of what is true.
I do not have an opinion one way or the other on what type of landlord he is because I have never rented from him, I do not know any of his current or former tenants, and I have never had any conversations with Mr. Piotrowski on this issue. Have you? What do you base your opinion on?Originally Posted by Spirit of Ebenezer
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
Not on this issueOriginally Posted by dtwarrenOn you or this issue ?Originally Posted by dtwarrenOoohhh, Dan you're so cyptic. In other words:Originally Posted by dtwarren
"I do have an opinion on what type of Supervisor Mr. Piotrowski is."
A remark should only hurt within it's proportion of what is true.
On any issue, what do you base your opinion on any issue on? It appears that your opinion is rarely based on fact but rather based in large part on surmise, innuendo and hearsay.
My posts are cryptic only to those who try to read into them to suit their own preconceived notions, to others they are clear and unambiguous.
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
Dan, why can't you admit that you are aligned with those who, like you, are partial to some on the town council. I can.
A remark should only hurt within it's proportion of what is true.
Because I am not so aligned as you use that term. I support certain issues and to draw an inference that I am aligned with certain board members who also support these issues is not the same as blindly advocating a position based on political alignment rather than factual predicate.Originally Posted by Spirit of Ebenezer
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
There are other options: He could work with his tenant to see to it that the young man is getting help. He said that he has rented to the boy's father for 5 years. I don't see where it is necessary to be harsh, considering the age of the suspect and the long term relationship with the tenant. If Wally had been such a bad landlord all of these years, I am sure it would have come out in the campaigns last year. I look at it this way, if he has 5 properties in Town, then he has motivation to improve the Town to maintain his property values. He would have the burden of local taxes and urban blight just like the rest of us. If the Town improves, his financial interests improve. I think this issue is being used for political reasons.Originally Posted by dtwarren
True, and the options I outlined is for when such activity is customarily occuring. An isolated one time incident is insufficient for such action in the absence of a lease provision providing for strict enforcement like those contained in the leases for public housing.Originally Posted by Pumpkinhead
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
Of course it is being used for political reasons. When in politics, you live in a fishbowl. This is an interesting event, because there is a knowledge component, a legal component, a safety component, a childs welfare component, a compassion component, and it just happens to involve someone who is actively making decisions about others. Because he is doing that, and he wants to do that, he should be himself be put under the microscope. IE Who is this man making these decisions. Perhaps a flawed one. Perhaps one who exhibits a lack of judgement in his private life.Originally Posted by Pumpkinhead
Why are there so many diversions from the valid concerns that the Town Supervisor is placing West Seneca children in danger!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)