TenantNet Forum

Where tenants can seek help and help others



Camera?

Issues unrelated to specific categories below

Moderator: TenantNet

Re: Camera?

Postby joliett » Thu Apr 03, 2003 1:51 pm

Just wondering...was this camera installed according to all NYC Building and Electrical Codes? I bet it just might not be installed properly.
Joel Teicher, P.E.
www.TenantEngineer.com
joliett
 
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 2:01 am

Re: Camera?

Postby nuisance » Tue Apr 08, 2003 6:01 pm

How do I find out if it is properly installed w/o calling the management office?

<small>[ April 08, 2003, 06:02 PM: Message edited by: nuisance ]</small>
nuisance
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Camera?

Postby nuisance » Tue Apr 08, 2003 10:22 pm

Well I moved in w/o any and then I got one 2 years later. She was abandoned as a puppy (7 weeks old) and then I mated her and kept one of her offspring. Gave the other 7 puppies to good homes. American Staffordshire Terriers aka "Pit Bulls" just get a bad rep. They are highly intelligent dogs and lovable with children. If you train them right then there should be no problem.
nuisance
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Camera?

Postby nuisance » Tue Apr 08, 2003 10:47 pm

What posts?
nuisance
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue May 28, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Camera?

Postby Cranky Tenant » Tue Apr 08, 2003 11:38 pm

Originally posted by nuisance:
American Staffshire Terriers
Actually American Staffordshire Terriers are not the same as Pit Bulls. They're two very separate breeds with different sizees and weights.

Even so, what breed these dogs might be shouldn't matter. What's important is that the tenant abide by the rules and not cause a disturbance.
I'm a cranky tenant NOT a cranky lawyer.
Cranky Tenant
 
Posts: 1791
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Manhattan

Re: Camera?

Postby Cranky Tenant » Wed Apr 09, 2003 6:02 pm

me again
While I'm not familiar with various insurance policies landlords may be required to have, I doubt they're required to list every dog in their building by breed. And even if they are, Pit Bulls, per se, aren't a recognized breed but rather a generic term for a number of breeds.

The California case I presume you're referring to actually concerned Presso Canarios, not "Pit Bulls", which is quite a bit larger than American Staffordshires, American Pit Bull Terriers, or any of the more common breeds this term normally refers to. So calling these dogs in California "Pit Bulls" is like calling an a Pug a Pit Bull.

Beyond that, I've yet to see anything in laws regarding Rent Stabilization, the Pet Law, or the Disability Act that allows landlords to discriminate according to breed.You certainly couldn't ban a Seeing Eye or other service dog simply because it's a German Shepherd even though the breed has also been considered agressive.
I'm a cranky tenant NOT a cranky lawyer.
Cranky Tenant
 
Posts: 1791
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Manhattan

Re: Camera?

Postby Cranky Tenant » Wed Apr 09, 2003 7:08 pm

Actually there was a story on Fox 5 sometime back about a blind man, living in public housing, who claimed his Pit Bull was a seeing eye dog. From what I remember, the City gave in and allowed him to keep the dog after the segment was aired on tv.

I have to agree with me again's last comment though. As long as you follow the stipulation the camera shouldn't matter one way or the other. Finding an apartment with two dogs does get harder each day and, regardless of what the law may say, plenty of landlords aren't going to want any dogs that vaguely resemble "pit bulls" in their buildings.
I'm a cranky tenant NOT a cranky lawyer.
Cranky Tenant
 
Posts: 1791
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 2:01 am
Location: Manhattan

PreviousNext

Return to NYC General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests