Oh hey, look at that, we talk about what debt collectors can’t do while collecting a debt and a real-life example just pops up in front of us, thanks to Pardon Me for Asking. Unfortunately for the tenants of the California Taqueria, this carvertisement is legal as far as we know, although it probably makes people side more with the Taqueria since who the hell even does this?
PMFA theorizes that the car is owned by the landlord, and that would be a shame really, because it means someone is missing out on an opportunity to finally find a use for their car, instead of just sitting in traffic with it and running out in the middle of the night to move it because of alternate-side parking. Is the car telling the truth? No one seems to know, although the fact that you can see the “$312” part of the sign is removable makes us think this has been a long-running dispute, or that the landlord is digging in for a fight.
We have a soft-spot for the California Taqueria, because back when some of us were working at Trader Joe’s, it was a great place to go for lunch. At least until you finished their enormous, head-sized burritos and just wanted to take a nap. So hopefully this gets resolved maturely and reasonably, and without anymore sign-based shaming.
View Comments (3)
It actually seems like advertising for California Taqueria, who owe rent. The people that own the building where California Taqueria is probably aren't thrilled that California Taqueria hasn't paid the rent that California Taqueria owes, but putting the business name (California Taqueria) on their vehicle and driving it around Cobble Hill as a protest against California Taqueria probably isn't hurting business at the aforementioned California Taqueria.
came across an interesting article on commercial observer.com by Karsten Strauss which offers some interesting nformation regarding the history of this complaint. It should be read.
We are so proud of our dad and landlord. I know it sounds like an impossible thing to have happened. Especially in the USA where we have laws. But apparently we don't have laws in NYC against ex attorney using and abusing the system to try to steal what an old man worked all his life to put together for his retirement, after arriving here from Puerto Rico as a young man. The present owner of the California Taqueria is an ex attorney who knows how to play the system and has been gettng away with it since 2008. Believe it-- he pays no rent, my dad pays all the expenses to run the business, which include the water, taxes and insurance, adding up to over $300,000.00 since 2008. (Sometimes even violating City ordinances in order to have my dad fined) The Taqueria continues to file unmerited motions. even after the Supreme Court ruled that he had no right of first refusal when lease expired in 2008. Tenant has presently filed a motion to try to dismiss the case in the Land Lord Tenant Court -- where he fears his day of reconing will finally come.