This site is closed to new comments and posts.

Notice: This site uses cookies to function.
If you are not comfortable with cookies then please don't browse this website.

Arson on St. Marks — Brooklynian

Arson on St. Marks

From this morning's Daily News:

Playing with fire
Errol Louis

The fire that gutted the Crown Heights brownstone next to mine Saturday morning could easily have killed me and my family, had we been asleep or unlucky. But my wife and I caught an early whiff of the smoke that suddenly began billowing into our home shortly after 10 a.m.

We dashed into the street with little more than our 5-month-old son and overcoats thrown over our pajamas. By then, at least a dozen Fire Department rigs had swarmed onto the block, led by the heroes in our local firehouse, Ladder 132.

A few harrowing hours later, it was all over, with nobody killed, thank God. A Red Cross van passed by in search of the house's half-dozen or so newly homeless residents. A carpenter sawed wood to board the place up. A pediatrician did tests to confirm that we got my little boy off the block quickly enough to prevent damage from the thick smoke that has seeped into half the rooms in our house.

But more than just the smoke stinks. Yesterday, a Fire Department spokesman told me the burning of 600 St. Marks Ave. has been classified as arson. No arrests have been made. Investigators should be sure to check city property records, available online at www.nyc.gov, which show the house changed hands three times in less than two years, each time for considerably more than the place was plausibly worth. In February 2004, a longtime owner named Gloria Moore sold the house for $640,000 to a woman named Francillia Ryan, who in turn sold the house to Janet Howard in December 2004 for $790,000.

A few weeks ago, on Dec. 19, the house changed hands yet again, bought by someone named Crispin Booker for $850,000. None of the speculators who flipped the building ever actually lived in the place, a notorious eyesore inhabited by a group of five to 10 regulars. Some tenants collected bottles all day and stashed them in front of the building; others were involved in sketchy transactions that kept a stream of visitors passing in and out at all hours. The Sanitation Department issued more than $1,200 in fines for the bottles and other garbage in front of the house.

The fact that the place was a dump somehow didn't deter loan officers, appraisers and insurance agents from lending higher and higher amounts of money on each flip, until Citibank, according to city records, lent an astronomical $850,000 just weeks ago. No one on the block thought the building was worth anywhere near that much.

Neighbors tell me that an ominous warning was allegedly made to the building's residents the night before the fire to quit the place or else. The rumor gained strength when one of the tenants ran up and down the block as the fire burned, yelling that the blaze was set.

Many of us thanked the firefighters who saved our lives and property Saturday. We will be even more thankful when the fire marshals arrest whoever put so many lives in danger.

Originally published on January 10, 2006

Comments

  • Subject: Re: Arson on St. Marks

    The author seems to want to imply the landlord (ant citimortgage) had something to do with the arson which is just bad reporting, innocent till proven guilty and all that stuff.
  • I think he was just asking the question why banks would continue to lend larger sums of money to purchase a deteriorating eyesore of a property. Which leads to the question of how, even given an increase in property values, a deteriorating home can get appraised at higher and higher values. Isn't the appraisal supposed to take into account what condition the home is actually in, not just what the value could be if it were in pristine condition?

    I don't think its a stretch to imply that the landlord might be involved. When arson occurs the first question is who has something to gain? That clearly may be an owner who wanted to get rid of unwanted tenants and/or squatters. The other popular suspects are folks with a grudge or an ax to grind. It may be that business associates (all of those late night visitors) might have some reason to want to torch the place. Speculating that any of this is going on is IMO pretty standard.

    Besides, Errol Louis is an Op-Ed writer, which means he can be somewhat partial in his writing and take a more biased approach that your garden variety beat reporter. He's been doing a number of pieces on problems in CH.
  • this sounds way too eerily like the fire on park place.
    same situation with a new landlord, arson and a warning to get out or else.

    now i wonder if its the same landlord.
  • With regard to property value, there are a few things to consider. Yes, the value is based on the condition that the property is in, not on the potential that the property has (although there is a very rare exception to this), but even more important are the comparable sales. If 3-5 other people bought similar shitbuckets down the road for a similar price, it's likely that others will buy shitbuckets for a similar price. If someone bought a similar property in better condition, it can still be used as a comparable, but the value is adjusted down by a % of the sales price.

    Ultimately, banks DO NOT want to write a loan based on a value higher than what the property is actually worth. While it may help quotas short-term, it's bad business long-term, with that in mind, there are several things that banks do to protect themselves and their investors: hiring independent appraisers, having departments dedicated to reviewing appraisals, etc, etc. By no means is it perfect, but there's less cookin' of the books going on than if it were under a more direct influence of a bank exec that's lookin' to meet the monthly, quarterly, or annual numbers.
  • Subject: Re: Arson on St. Marks

    Captain M wrote: The author seems to want to imply the landlord (ant citimortgage) had something to do with the arson which is just bad reporting, innocent till proven guilty and all that stuff.
    How is it bad reporting when it's obviously not a piece of reporting? It's an op-ed piece, or maybe a letter to the editor. Just because it's in a newspaper doesn't mean it's reporting.
  • Subject: Re: Arson on St. Marks

    devincf wrote: [quote=Captain M]The author seems to want to imply the landlord (ant citimortgage) had something to do with the arson which is just bad reporting, innocent till proven guilty and all that stuff.
    How is it bad reporting when it's obviously not a piece of reporting? It's an op-ed piece, or maybe a letter to the editor. Just because it's in a newspaper doesn't mean it's reporting.

    So every news source should be like FOX news? Great
  • Huh? I don't think you understand what an editorial is.
  • Subject: Arson on St Marks

    Captain M, here is the rest of the story. It doesn't look like Errol was that far off.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/384948p-326716c.html
  • A third sale and mortgage completed on Dec. 19 by a buyer with the name Crispin Booker is under investigation by the DA's office.

    Nobody by that name has a listed or unlisted phone number in the metropolitan area, and there is no evidence that a Crispin Booker ever set foot in the building.
    Crispin?
  • devincf wrote: Huh? I don't think you understand what an editorial is.
    An editorial is an opinion, based on something not a place to accuse people of crap. Here is my editorial on the editorial.....It was crappy. Great he had to leave his house becasue of a fire next door, may as well have been another, "I live in a rough neighborhood..I'm so cool" pieces.
    homeowner wrote:
    Captain M, here is the rest of the story. It doesn't look like Errol was that far off.
    Thank You, that is reporting. Am I the only one that noticed that Tony Soprano was pulling this scam like 3 seasons ago.
  • Captain M wrote: [quote=devincf]Huh? I don't think you understand what an editorial is.
    An editorial is an opinion, based on something not a place to accuse people of crap. Here is my editorial on the editorial.....It was crappy. Great he had to leave his house becasue of a fire next door, may as well have been another, "I live in a rough neighborhood..I'm so cool" pieces.
    homeowner wrote:
    Captain M, here is the rest of the story. It doesn't look like Errol was that far off.
    Thank You, that is reporting. Am I the only one that noticed that Tony Soprano was pulling this scam like 3 seasons ago.

    Um, it seemed to be based on real information. He was, indeed, pushed out of his apartment early in the morning, but it didn't seem melodramatic to me. He did his research, scooped the police, and probably brought great visibility to what is a significant problem in the city. It sounded frightened, but also honest. It's not reporting, but it's better than the shitty daily sounding-off of the NYTimes Op-Ed team.
  • Subject: Re: Arson on St Marks

    homeowner wrote: Captain M, here is the rest of the story. It doesn't look like Errol was that far off.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/384948p-326716c.html
    wow! did you guys read this? this totally answers a lot of questions. you'd think it'd be simple to catch this scam, flipping buildings so quickly over such a short time. i guess the city can't pay attention to all the real estate deals going on all the time.
  • Subject: Re: Arson on St Marks

    jimmylegs wrote: wow! did you guys read this? this totally answers a lot of questions. you'd think it'd be simple to catch this scam, flipping buildings so quickly over such a short time. i guess the city can't pay attention to all the real estate deals going on all the time.
    Nor do I think that it's their responsibility. Yes, they do need to record deeds, liens and such, but I think that the banks are the ones that should have been on the lookout. Obviously there were quite a few inside guys in this case, handling every phase of the transaction, but I would think that it would be pretty tough to find the people able and willing to organize something like this.
  • Subject: One person's response to Errol Louis

    To: Voice of the People
    Date: January 23, 2006

    Errol Louis (“Gentrification brings arsonists,” January 23, 2006) rages against gentrification, yet supports Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards megablock project, which will price 88% of its apartments beyond the reach of Brooklyn’s low-income earners. Louis condemns the “menagerie of swindlers and predators” in his neighborhood, yet sides with Forest City Ratner and its politico pals whose Brooklyn luxury towers will cost taxpayers upwards of $2 billion for a purely private development. Louis rues the high-pressure flip tactics of realtors on his block but endorses Ratner’s “sell to me or lose your home through eminent domain” bullying. Louis celebrates his block’s 19th century brownstones, yet roots for those in Ratner’s way to be torn down post-haste.

    Louis attacks fiscal redlining in his community but won’t condemn Ratner’s refusal to sell any of his Atlantic Yards apartments to low-income Brooklynites. Louis applauds his block’s “self-defense” – selling brownstones only to neighbors – but rips Prospect Heights residents of all classes whose “self-defense” includes refusing to sell Ratner, a Clevelander who lives on the Upper East Side. Louis attacks the practice of “flipping” yet remains silent as Ratner flips the properties in his megablocks’ footprint. Louis has impugned those fighting the project as NIMBYs, yet he devotes repeated columns to an arson fire on his block, having waited ‘til his own street suffered before investigating this issue. Errol Louis asks for favors for his block that he has strenuously denied the people of Prospect Heights.
  • for anyone not familiar with the actual intersection, this property was at or near bedford.
  • Subject: Re: Arson on St Marks

    homeowner wrote: Captain M, here is the rest of the story. It doesn't look like Errol was that far off.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/384948p-326716c.html
    Wow, that is quite a tale. This is why I can't pursue a life of crime--I just couldn't come up with that kind of stuff.
  • This is why I can't pursue a life of crime--I just couldn't come up with that kind of stuff.
    Well, I think my twisted mind could come up with a scheme like this, I just couldn't convince other people to take part in it.

    "Yeah, Bob. All you have to do is sign your name to the $800,000 mortgage. No, you won't have to pay it. Yes, I'm sure. Really, I've done this before, trust me..."

    Nope, can't see anyone buying that...
  • Yeah, whoever agreed to that must be pretty effing dumb.
  • Subject: Re: Arson on St Marks

    nybt wrote: [quote=jimmylegs]wow! did you guys read this? this totally answers a lot of questions. you'd think it'd be simple to catch this scam, flipping buildings so quickly over such a short time. i guess the city can't pay attention to all the real estate deals going on all the time.
    Nor do I think that it's their responsibility. Yes, they do need to record deeds, liens and such, but I think that the banks are the ones that should have been on the lookout. Obviously there were quite a few inside guys in this case, handling every phase of the transaction, but I would think that it would be pretty tough to find the people able and willing to organize something like this.
    Its funny, because on the timeframe they are looking at, its very possible that each mortgage/purchase was done before the kings county even had a chance to record the transfer! They sure got their 40-50k in mortgage tax though...
Sign In or Register to comment.