a thread on this story at brownstoner. looks like they could convert their sro to a 3 family instead of a 4 family and avoid much of the tax hike. this comment was interesting:
"Well, reducing your C of O to three families doesn't necessarily mean a drop in income. Take the couple in Harlem featured in the Times story. They were only planning on renting two apartments. They changed the c of o to 4 fams rather than 3 so they could tell the bank they'd have three rentals, so that they could qualify for a mortgage. In other words, they were scamming the bank for a mortgage they could not actually afford (at least by the bank's qualifications). So I have a little less sympathy for them -- tho that doesn't make the system any more fair."
|
"Well, reducing your C of O to three families doesn't necessarily mean a drop in income. Take the couple in Harlem featured in the Times story. They were only planning on renting two apartments. They changed the c of o to 4 fams rather than 3 so they could tell the bank they'd have three rentals, so that they could qualify for a mortgage. In other words, they were scamming the bank for a mortgage they could not actually afford (at least by the bank's qualifications). So I have a little less sympathy for them -- tho that doesn't make the system any more fair."
- bill 2-25-2005 4:04 pm