Based on recently published statistics, it has been determined that Shalom Drizin, a landlord operating in the Crown Heights area, was recognized as being one of the most prolific evictors in Brooklyn for the year 2018.Â
You can help us put a stop to online scams before they grow too big and end-up ruining thousands of lives. A scam is a scam, doesn’t matter if it’s big or small. Now that this is out of the way, let’s get started with the review.
Mr. Shalom Drizin, the individual responsible for overseeing the Ebbets Field construction situated on Bedford Avenue, has been positioned as the second-ranking evictor according to prominent renter rights groups, namely The RTCNYC Coalition & JustFix. NYC.
The aforementioned organizations initiated the creation of the Worst Evictors NYC maps with the objective of disseminating information to residents of New York City regarding the landlords they have and the legal protections afforded to them as renters.
A recently launched webpage provided a compilation of the 5 most egregious evictors in the borough of Brooklyn. According to The New York Times, Shalom Drizin came in second, trailing behind The Pinnacle Group, which submitted 5,000 notices of eviction within a span of just over two years. Shalom Drizin carried out the eviction of 16 families residing in the Ebbets Field Residential Development.
These tenants have consistently complained about the existence of unsafe living circumstances, which have not been adequately handled. Additionally, there have also been recurring incidents of fires along with possible breaches of rental laws through unjustified rate hikes.
Based on the provided map, it can be observed that Pinnacle emerged as the prevailing entity, overseeing the eviction of a total of 27 households within the localities of Flatbush, Prospect-Lefferts Gardens, & Crown Heights.
According to an article published by the Times, the utilization of their techniques resulted in an inquiry conducted by the Attorney General in 2006, followed by the enactment of a municipal statute in 2008.
This legislation grants renters the legal entitlement to initiate legal proceedings against the landlords on grounds of harassment.
A number of tenants, namely Shalom Drizin, Jacob, Naftali Hager, & Moshe Piller, had collectively carried out the eviction of 19 households across the boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and the Bronx.
A total of three households had to move from a singular home situated at 100 East 21st St. in the Flatbush area.
Additionally, Moshe Piller was responsible for the eviction of eight households during the same year. Piller is the proprietor of several real estate properties situated in Brooklyn, one of which included the establishment where two newborns tragically lost their lives in 2016 as a result of a malfunctioning heater. The data is visually represented in a cartographic representation.
We look at 34 different data points when analyzing and rating online money-earning opportunities. Once the research on these data points is submitted, expert contributors reach out to the company’s customers and associates to get more insight into their operation. Finally, all the collected information is presented in the form of this expert review.
All the data is extracted from publicly available information and the sources are given in the transparency section at the bottom of every report.
These reports are made possible by the collective efforts of contributors like you. If you would like to become a contributor then contact us here.
In the words of proponents, Michael Niamonitakis, a landlord residing in Flatbush who had the seventh position on the 2016 roster of New York City’s most problematic landlords, took on the eviction of eight households.
Meridian Properties, a real estate corporation, faced a lawsuit following the unfortunate demise of a 58-year-old individual due to hypothermia in his residence located in Crown Heights. Prior to this incident, tenants had consistently voiced concerns regarding inadequate heating conditions in the building.
The Anti-Eviction Mapping Project organized a public rally outside Brooklyn Housing Court, with Pillar as the central figure of attention. Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, who is in addition to the aforementioned individuals, expressed his disapproval towards individuals who partake in mass evictions with the intention of capitalizing on the escalating value of houses in Brooklyn.
Williams has demonstrated a firm commitment to supporting the just-enacted Right to Counsel legislation. The aforementioned legislation mandates that landlords are obligated to furnish tenants with legal representation in housing court proceedings.
Williams contends that this measure has the potential to mitigate the growing prevalence of eviction cases. He also asserts that the present moment presents an opportune occasion to not only enhance the efficacy of rent regulation but also to broaden its scope in order to afford safeguards to a significant portion of those who are currently devoid of such protections.
As per Williams’ assertion, individuals are displaying a strong inclination towards the anticipation of prompt action being taken on this matter.
The Who Really Owns What tool is able to be utilized by residents of New York City who wish to gain further insight into eviction procedures employed by landlords. This tool enables the tracking of foreclosure occurrences across various properties held by a single owner.
Shalom Drizin: Ebbets Field Tenants Call on Landlord for Urgent Repairs
During the initial day of the hearing pertaining to their landlord, residents of Ebbets Field Apartments convened to express their discontent with the persistent operational issues of the building’s elevators.
A total of seven grievances have been officially lodged in the Brooklyn Housing Court regarding landlords Shalom Drizin, Benjamin Baum, & Fieldbridge Associates due to their alleged failure to expeditiously address the maintenance issues pertaining to the elevators.
According to Michele Waterman, an ongoing resident of the complex, the erratic state of the elevators poses challenges for elderly individuals, such as her 82-year-old mother, in terms of punctual departures & returns to their residences.
Furthermore, Waterman expounded upon the fact that the regular breakdowns of the elevators caused her significant difficulties in sustaining jobs, as tardiness can have adverse consequences on her professional prospects. The individuals impacted characterize the situation as exceedingly distressing.
On the initial day of the inquiry pertaining to their landlord, the occupants of Ebbets Field Apartments convened to articulate their discontent with the persistent operational issues plaguing the building’s elevator.
The Brooklyn Housing Court accepted a total of 7 claims regarding the failure of landlords Shalom Drizin, Benjamin Baum, & Fieldbridge Associates to act on elevator maintenance issues.
The issue of elevator malfunctioning has been brought to attention by Michele Waterman, an owner of the complex. Waterman has emphasized the challenges she and her 82-year-old mother have in terms of punctual departures from and returns to their residence.
Furthermore, Waterman has elucidated the manner in which the recurrent dysfunctions of the elevator became a formidable obstacle to her job retention, as lateness can exert an adverse influence on her occupational status.
In summation, the current state of affairs has been characterized as a substantial concern for the residents within Ebbets Field Apartments.
Shalom Drizin: Case Study
Salabakis V. Shalom Drizin
OPINION
The appellants are seeking to challenge the decision that refused their request for testimony from a nonparty witness. This decision was made based on the determination that there were no significant unusual facts presented that would justify the questioning.
The lawsuit involved an agent who was seeking to collect an agency commission. The Salabakis claimed that they had hired each of the Shalom Drizin to find a buyer for a specific property in New York.
The individual asserts that they successfully secured a buyer who demonstrated readiness, willingness, and capacity to acquire the specified item at the agreed-upon price. Consequently, they argue that they have a right to get a percentage of the sale.
Shalom Drizin filed a motion seeking authorization to depose Bernard Tannenbaum as a witness who is not a party to the case. Tannenbaum served as legal counsel for the prospective buyer.
Before the commencement of the motion, efforts were made to obtain informed consent from Tannenbaum, which he declined to provide.
The motion for assistance contended that Tannenbaum, in their capacity as legal counsel, would have had access to significant and pertinent data regarding the readiness, willingness, and ability of the potential buyer to complete the buying, as well as the reasons behind the failure to finalize the sale.
This data is crucial in determining the plaintiff’s eligibility for a fee for brokerage. The Supreme Court, in a majority decision, overturned the lower court’s ruling on both legal grounds and factual analysis.
The court exercised its discretion and granted the motion, allowing Shalom Drizin to question Tannenbaum as a nonparty witness, in accordance with the particular conditions and conditions outlined in the ruling issued by the court. The complainant is entitled to receive $50 in costs and expenses from the respondent in relation to this case.
About Shalom Drizin
Shalom Drizin is a widely recognized and esteemed figure in the field of real estate investment, presently residing in the neighborhood of Crown Heights, located in Brooklyn.
The individual currently has the role of Head Officer at Fieldbridge Associates LLC, a company located within a tall residential building complex positioned between the neighborhoods of Crown Heights & Prospect Lefferts Gardens in Brooklyn.
Shalom Drizin is a prominent individual within the property industry, possessing a substantial portfolio of assets under his hands. Consequently, his status as an exceptionally poor landlord supersedes his educational background and respectable demeanor. To acquire further knowledge on the subject, one may access the provided link: Shalom Drizin
Final Thoughts
In summary, the Salabakis contested the dismissal of their appeal to interrogate a third party in a legal issue pertaining to an agency panel. The individuals put out a case advocating for a share of the proceeds derived from the sale of property facilitated by Shalom Drizin, asserting that the buyer had shown both readiness and willingness to engage in the deal.
Shalom Drizin sought to interrogate Bernard Tannenbaum, the attorney representing the buyer, in order to obtain crucial insights into their purchasing intentions and ascertain the reasons behind the unsuccessful transaction. Despite the initial efforts made to obtain consent, Tannenbaum declined.
The Supreme Court, on the basis of legal and factual grounds, reversed the ruling of the lower court. Moreover, the person being sued received a reimbursement of $50 for expenditures associated with the aforementioned legal matter.
