June 4, 2008
Tenement to 11,000 Square-Foot Mansion: Court Rules Owners Can Evict Rent-Stabilized Tenants
The long-running dispute between the owners of 47 East 3rd Street and their rent-stabilized tenants seems over, as the Court of the Appeals ruled the owners can evict tenants from the 60-room building in order to create a single super-duper residence.
Alistair and Catherine Economakis took over the 15 apartment building a few years ago, after buying it for $1 million (and knowing it had rent-stabilized tenants). They told tenants, who pay $600-1200/month, they would need to vacate because of conversion plans to turn it into a "five-bedroom, six-bathroom home for themselves and their child - with a gym, a two-story living room with a walkway overhanging it, and a bedroom suite for a nanny." However, some tenants were suspicious that they were being kicked out for the building to be converted and sold as condos and took the couple to court.
Last year, a Manhattan appeals court decided the Economakises could take over the building, and the State appeals court upheld the decision, but added that the family prove to Housing Court that they will live in it. The Economakises lawyer told the Post they have already converted 40% of the 11,000+ square foot building into a "super-apartment" for themselves and their two kids, but "They want to expand the home they already have in the building."
The lawyer representing the tenants, Stephen Dobkin (disclosure: father of Jake Dobkin), said, "At a time of a really grave housing shortage, it's a matter of serious concern that an owner can be permitted to obtain 15 apartments for his own use." In the past, Dobkin has said the conversion is "the kind of thing that spoiled brats would do."
The Economakises even created a website to explain their side of the story (some of the tenants' response here -- Alistair is the son of a Greek shipping magnate, Catherine is daughter of a Columbia dean). And the stock of rent-stabilized apartments has gone down 4% while complaints of landlord harassing tenants has gone up 31%, according to the Rent Guidelines Board.
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
[ report this ]
Pathetic, avaricious twanks.
[ report this ]
While they have the right to do with their property as they wish, most New Yorkers and Americans will rightfully find their behavior vain and repugnant. The Economakises are the epitome of what happens when great wealth falls to those with poor character.
[ report this ]
Seems pretty simple to me.
If you want property rights, buy property.
If you want to insulate yourself from rent increases, buy property.
If you can't afford to buy in the neighborhood you're in, move.
The people who argue that only the rich will be able to afford to live in Manhattan -- so what?
The rich will still need people to do things for them, and those folks will need to be within a commuting radius. Wages will go up, as the privileged will be forced to pay more for services to make the hassle of commute and higher costs of living worth it.
I suppose whatever few people there are who are retired and living on a fixed income might be priced out of their rent control/rent subsidized apartments, but they could and should have protected themselves by buying in the 1950s - 1980s. If they failed to do so, they can move. I don't see the sense of subsidizing the "right" of old people to live in Manhattan as a reward for their bad planning.
It's the story of the ant and the grasshopper, except in NYC, the grasshopper managed to pass laws and used the political system to force the ant to pay for his bad planning.
[ report this ]
Rent control should have been abolished decades ago.
[ report this ]
Those tenants need to understand that in a faltering economy, the super-wealthy must reassure themselves that they are still able to wield financial power and disrupt lives. Have a heart, selfish tenants; they NEED this. What do you need that's so important?
What's that? A place to live? Oh.
Well, I'm sure something will turn up.
In some other borough.
Or city.
[ report this ]
@By eyekantspel[3] | 06/04/08 10:25AM
True points eye, but maybe a little harsh? None of these "affordable" apartments were available to buy in the 50s-80s. These retired and fixed income people who are being pushed out were/are I bet all working class. Except for high price 5th Ave apartments, NYC was a renters paradise.
I know I would hate to have to start looking for affordable housing when I'm in my 70s.
[ report this ]
Sixty rooms for themselves, their kid, and their nanny?
Dude, when the revolution comes, they better hope that gym's gotten them in shape to run fast.
[ report this ]
Its a sticky wicket to say the least if you buy a building you should be able to do what you want with it. In saying that if you buy a rent controlled building you are just dumb if you think you can convert it with the economy they way it is and make more people homeless. I live in the LES were studios go for 1695.which is pricing me out of my neighborhood. So if the tentants really want to keep their apts a little crime goes a long way.
[ report this ]
i wanna live there
[ report this ]
If everyone was so concerned about a grave housing shortage, perhaps its time to stop downzoning every square inch of the island.
[ report this ]
first against the wall.
[ report this ]
In saying that if you buy a rent controlled building you are just dumb if you think you can convert it with the economy they way it is and make more people homeless.
I can agree with that. The new owners certainly aren't sympathetic figures. They bought knowing this existed. Still, as other housing battles have shown, even owners who do nothing more than try to verify who lives in rent control/rent subsidized places to make sure the law is being followed face continued litigation and complaints from tenants; plus the annoying annual rent control board protests when rent increases are approved.
The whole system is stupid. We'd all be better off if NYC made a plan to phase it out, say over a period of 5 years or something, to give the people who depend on rent control/stabilization time to make the adjustment.
[ report this ]
In the past, Dobkin has said the conversion is "the kind of thing that spoiled brats would do."
Dobkin v. hipsters
[ report this ]
If they want all those apartments they should have to buy out all those tenants. Anyone who thinks they should have a mansion should have to pay for it, and not just the costs of the physical building, there are costs to community and rental market and the lives of those who may have been living there before the Economists came along.
[ report this ]
They will pay for it though when the building's tax assessment spikes do to its new value without rent controlled tenants, right?
[ report this ]
"At a time of a really grave housing shortage, it's a matter of serious concern that an owner can be permitted to obtain 15 apartments for his own use."
Listen Hillary, you can't keep changing the rules just to suit your own present circumstances. Yes this is a harsh situation, but fairness is all relative; legality is a different story.
It could be worse, they could have chosen to invest their money, and pay their taxes elsewhere.
[ report this ]
it's their property. they can do with it as they wish. the tenants knew they were renting, they sign yearly/bi-yearly leases... that means they only have a leg to stand on for the extent of the lease. this is within the law, and the laws in NYC are the most pro-tenant in the nation (to the point of insanity) so there is no reason for courts to step in or for them to pay people, etc. You know, at the end of the day there needs to be people wealthy enough to pay the taxes to subsidize the millions of people who really shouldn't be living in Manhattan.
[ report this ]
They'll pay more taxes, no doubt, but those costs will no doubt be offset by the fact they aren't subsidizing the costs of carrying rent stablized tenants.
there are costs to community and rental market and the lives of those who may have been living there before the Economists came along.
like what? the assumption is that the tenants are elderly and/or artists and that they will become homeless, but we ALL know that mnay of the people living in these situations are NOT poor, they own property elsewhere and use these outdated laws to subsidize their lifestyle.
Our Governor is a case in point.
I'll never forget arguing with a friend about the merits of rent control. She was a lawyer making $200k+ a year who lived in a rent controlled apartment, and was, no surprise, in favor of rent control. Her neighbors were paying $4,000 a month in rent, and she was paying $600. She was NOT poor, and would spend thousands of dollars a month on expensive clothes and shoes. For every poor grandma that rent-control advocates use as a poster child, there are a bunch of people who DO have options but take advantage of this corrupt system.
I say scrap it completely. At the very least, there should be means-testing to get rid of millionaires who benefit from subsidized housing.
[ report this ]
"At a time of a really grave housing shortage, it's a matter of serious concern that an owner can be permitted to obtain 15 apartments for his own use."
Yeah, what a shitty country we live in where you can buy shit and use it as you deem it appropriate. You don't have a right to live in Manhattan. Life sucks. Get a Metrocard.
[ report this ]
NYC isnt some soviet bloc. if you buy property, you should be able to do what you want with it to some extent. if you're gonna rent that place out then sure, tenants have rights but if not, too bad.
rent stabilized apartments should definitely be abolished! #18, i mean, i too know a lawyer who pulls in 200k a year and lives in a large rent stabilized apartment and pays $1000 a year to house his cats. the system is definitely messed up.
anyway, it seems that everyone wants something for nothing. if you cant afford to live here then too bad! make more money! if you cant - too bad! maybe that anthropology degree isnt looking so attractive anymore. whine whine whine. i wish people would stop complaining and do something about it. sheeeit, get all che guevera you hate it so much. meanwhile, im gonna continue SAVING so i can buy a place of my own.
[ report this ]
I have an accquaintance who is a partner at an architectural firm who pays $600/month for her rent controlled apartment in the East Village that she's been in since the early 80s. Lucky? Some might say, but it just doesn't seem to be fair to me.
Alternativily, the thing that kills me a bit inside about NYC is that young professionals were able to buy apartments some 20 years ago...its just so frustrating.
I laugh everytime my British employers and coworkers ask me why I don't have a car and own a home as a young person starting out in the city. They really don't get the reality of NYC.
[ report this ]
The previous owner of the building should sue the Economakises for illegal flipping.
[ report this ]
Are they adopting any grown kids?
[ report this ]
These days, young professionals are lucky to afford a place within an easy commute to Manhattan. 1 bedrooms on the 7 line in Queens are selling for $300,000 (with newly constructed condos for $400-500k). Even on the less-expensive places, you're looking at $2,500 a month out of pocket for mortgage/maintenance costs. Which is basically too expensive for anyone making under $70,000 a year.
[ report this ]
It's legal. The end.
[ report this ]
Old and lower income people should leave the city eh?
The East Village is an example of a neighborhood with a variety of residents. This diversity is what makes NYC attractive compared to other U.S. cities.
What you're getting is called homogenization -- resulting in a less interesting place to live in.
I very much doubt the Ekonomikases understand or care about the consequences of their actions.
[ report this ]
Rent stabilization is not the worse idea in the world - there is something to be said to mixed income stability in neighborhoods, and to having people on fixed incomes protected. But in NYC, you can own a 3 million dollar house next door, and still live in a rent stabilized apartment. You can scream harassment if a landlord asks you get your shit out of the hall, and some "advocate" will take up your case for you. You can pass your lease rights on to your unemployed addict son, and a landlord can't do anything to prevent this. You can pay your rent every two months, and not get evicted. And you can make $200,000 a year and pay less than a third of market value for your apartment.
[ report this ]
i have a rent stabilized apartment in midtown just off Central Park. If I told you how little i pay u would shit. My life is amazing. I am an artist and I float through my day not concerned about making as much money as possible like all the other robots.I dont give a crap about 401k's and retirement. Who knows if I'll even be alive then. Right now is all that matters.
[ report this ]
Every man has a right to live in the property they own.
Its as simple as that.
I have a right to farm my land, to eat my crops, to live in my house.
If you rent my land and I want to farm more, I will ask you to leave. The same principle here applies.
Every man has a right to live in the property they own.
[ report this ]
They're icky and piggish, and no one needs 11,00 sq. ft. for anything short of a business, but there you go. They have that right and I'm sure they'll live there for a month and then flip the building. Either way, a fast Euro beats a slow dollar every time.
[ report this ]
A mansion in the East Village????
now I know where to pee.
thankfully Pb is still cheap.
[ report this ]
$1 million??? That is a bargain, even if it was brought years ago. After its converted into a mansion or whatever they can sell it later on for god knows how much.
There are plenty of listings of apartments that are being sold for dirt cheap with tenants still occupying the space. Whats stopping me from buying one, then evicting them to move in myself?
[ report this ]
The commenters here do not understand the full circumstances of the case very well. The Economakis family acquired this building for next to nothing as it owed back taxes.
Giuliani policies prohibited the renters from attempting to purchase their own building. So the "property rights" argument is invalid and unfair.
So for all you RSA trolls on this comment board, go fuck yourself.
The Economakis family will not be welcomed, trusted, or accepted in our community. They may have won their petty battle, but they will be hated pariahs in their own neighborhood.
[ report this ]
Sometimes the selfishness of a few individuals just astonishes me no end, just like those $150 hamburgers and $2000 desserts, not to mention Hummer drivers.
[ report this ]
@eyekantspel
If you want property rights, buy property.
a little harsh...especially considering your own later comment:
These days, young professionals are lucky to afford a place within an easy commute to Manhattan. 1 bedrooms on the 7 line in Queens are selling for $300,000 (with newly constructed condos for $400-500k). Even on the less-expensive places, you're looking at $2,500 a month out of pocket for mortgage/maintenance costs. Which is basically too expensive for anyone making under $70,000 a year.
so, i guess no one making under $70,000 a year is entitled to stable, long-term housing options?
[ report this ]
35- vsure they are.... somewhere else. there are plenty of affordable places allover the state. i would love to live in the village, but I dont expect someone else to cover my tab. they should do away with these subsidies as soon as possible. That would open up over a million apartments, most of which are not suitable for wall street types meaning prices will come down or they wouldn't be occupied. it would also reduce the burden on the rest of us ny'ers who aren't trying to game the system and have to pay more in maintenance, rent and taxes to cover these people.
[ report this ]
Actually we need stronger rental laws for renting tenants. Well remember what used to be called
"Jewish Lighting" ah! your too young I guess.
I guess if we get rid of renters no one will need
to work in here anymore all bosses and no workers does not a profit nor bussiness make..cool!
[ report this ]
Moog go back down South with your NRA plaque.
Your private property rights idea is good so long
as I also have a roof over my head ,if you move
folks out ,you might pay the consequences as in
if my kids are hungry ,I may have to take your food.
[ report this ]
Is this the guy that owns a few fast food restaurants one being
on the corner of
23rd street and Park Avenue South NYC
called "PAX"...... pardon the pun.
[ report this ]
Go" Ribaldry",live on.
You will be the most hated person in this forum as the jerks that will never get
out of debt say you are evil as a rent controlled tenant.
Did one ever find anybody working in NYC real estate
that did not look like a smiling ugly shark?
Sickest looking people ever,I'll take used car dealers over em
anyday,even undertakers.
Apologies to sharks who are really wondeful,natcherly.
[ report this ]
The current system of rent control/stabilization/ect. is a lottery system.
It's not based any merit. Just the luck of being at the right place at the right time or knowing the right people.
[ report this ]
Several hundred thousand apartments have been rent
decontrolled in the last 5 years sounds like the
LL's won the lotteryin Manhattan.
Now which is better renters or bank loan mortgage
re-possession?
[ report this ]
who says man has a right to own property? especially egregious amounts of it?
[ report this ]
I have heard this guy (who is evicting his
tenants) in the East Village is the man
that owns the "PAX" fast food store on 23rd street and Park Avenue south.I think they have a couple of fast food places run by who knows what exploited Mexicans?.Boycott them corner of 23rd street and
Park Avenue south,let yo' money do yo talking.
[ report this ]
wow what's most shocking is that they bought the entire building for 1 million? How did that happen?
[ report this ]
There should be more rent stabilization, not less. NYC doesn't need more luxury apartments. We don't need more greedy rich foreigners usurping regular New Yorkers for their own desires. Rent stabilization laws allow an owner to take over an apartment for their own use, but it is absolutely ridiculous that they can be allowed to take over an entire 15-unit building for their own use. How arrogant and disgusting they are - and the judge for okaying it. That family will probably spend most of their time elsewhere and just use this place for brief visits to the city. They don't give a shit about New York.