NYCHA evictions, RAD, Section 18 and a Linden Houses Tenant. This article has two goals. The first recaps the Rental Assistance Demonstration Program and Section 18.
The second shows them in operation, here and now. We can see this by looking back at the struggle of a tenant I introduced you to last year. His story was the catalyst for this series of articles. Now we have enough information to piece together the why of NYCHA’s push to evict tenants.
NYCHA evictions, RAD, Section 18 and a Linden Houses Tenant
Here are the important items to consider.
- Linden Houses has been in the RAD/Section 18 program for 3 years. That is how long the city has been “evaluating” the program. Read Did Mayor DeBlasio Sell Out NYCHA and All Public Housing In New York? This evaluation means that the developers have been using people as test subjects.
- The RAD program stipulates that 25% of the 75% of apartments be converted to Section 8 housing. What you need to know about The RAD Program and Section 18
- Developers receive payments through Section 8. Developers prefer this over other less reliable means of payment.
- HRA oversees Section 8 housing this includes the issuing of vouchers.
Vacant Apartments Under Section 18
Section 18 allows for the disposition or repair and upgrade to an apartment. An apartment is vacated if the disposition is warranted. This would then allow the developer to do what he/she wants to the unit. The result, public housing is open to rent manipulation by developers in the RAD program.
The Minnesota Battle shows us that the lack of oversite and accountability allows for abuse of the program. This leads to the loss of affordable public housing.
Excerpt: Disposition is the transfer of public housing properties to private developers and authorities. Disposition allows private developers and housing nonprofits to take ownership of public housing properties, allowing them to be converted into private, market-rate housing…
Source: SECTION 18 Demolition & Disposition: A Fact Sheet
The Linden Houses Tenant
I detailed this story in NYCHA To Evict Family Member Not On The Lease Pt 1. Mac’s problems started after his mother passed away. Not on the lease, he faces eviction. But he was not the only tenant facing this problem. And so the investigation into why NYCHA was pushing these evictions began. Now, more than a year later the answers are starting to reveal themselves.
Coincidence I think not
After more than a year of fighting eviction, Mac received a voucher for 1000.00 from HRA. He did not request it. He made no application for Section 8 assistance.
A few months later, he learned that his rent is going up to 1200.00. His present rent is less than 300.00. Without the voucher, he could not afford the rent. So why the voucher?
An Implied Agreement?
Let’s try the implied agreement rule. Mac will have to use the voucher so that he can pay his rent. Could this be viewed as an implied agreement to receive Section 8? Why yes it could. Let’s suppose the following.
The Calculated Risk
The developers have decided that eviction is taking too long. Disposition under Section 18 would be faster. But instead of dispossessing the tenant, convert the apartment to Section 8.
Converting the apartment to Section 8 under Section 18 would validate the distribution of the voucher. The developer loses nothing because they will get money from Section 8. While at the same time moving forward with their plans to convert the development. A nice and neat arrangement for the developers. And I’m sure Mac’s health plays a part in this calculated plan.
Watch What They Do
I have told Mac to watch what happens next. You see his apartment has not been repaired. There are no upgrades either. It is a requirement that the apartments be repaired and upgraded under the program. And to Mac’s knowledge, the apartment is not under Section 8. So, the developer will have to make repairs and upgrades before the apartment can go into Section 8. That’s if they follow the rules.
It is because of this I told my friend to watch what they do next. Remember, this whole thing has happened without transparency. And there is no reason to believe that this will change any time soon.
A New York Case Study?
Referring back to the article, NYCHA To Evict Family Member Not On The Lease Pt 1 we can see warning signs that something was happening to public housing. We now know that the developers have been using the Rental Assistance Demonstration and Section 18 program for 3 years.
During that time NYCHA has tried to evict family members, not on leases. Even though that person was a caregiver to the leaseholder. And moreover, that person made sure that the rent was paid on time every time. So why evict them?
Answer: It’s all about the mess NYCHA is in. This is not the fault of the tenant but the tenant is the one that will pay.
Plan A Fails Use Plan B
By using Section 18, the developer can use the 200 disposition part of RAD to vacate apartments. If that fails then on to plan B, convert the apartment to Section 8. The developer loses nothing. The developer will get paid through Section 8. This is assured by the voucher from HRA and the tenant’s portion of the rent.
If this is the case, then Mac’s fight with NYCHA is a case study in how the developers intend to privatize public housing. If they can’t get what they want one way they will try another approach.
Final Thought
The drastic increase in Mac’s rent prompted me to search how NYCHA computes rents. The search and the result can be seen here.
Disclaimer
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and nothing stated here is legal advice. This article applies to the five boroughs of New York. All information deemed accurate but not guaranteed. Always check the real estate laws in your part of the country
Comments, Questions, Suggestions?
Was this article helpful? Did you learn anything new? I would like to hear your comments on this and any other article on this site. Take a moment, leave a comment or suggestion. Let’s start a conversation today.
