Greenpoint Couple Say Landlord Evicted Them Due to Their Pregnancy

“Most couples expecting their first child spend part of those nine months joyously prepping the new baby’s room. But one local couple hopes to have somewhere to call home after they say their landlord evicted them due to their pregnancy.”

This is untruth since the couple was not asked to move out due to their pregnancy but because they did not supply the landlord with previously promised documentation! The Landlord actually rent the apt to that couple and gave them the key with the knowledge of the pregnancy, but the couple lied on the application about the numbers of people which going to live in the apt omitting the women who moved in together with the couple! Instead of 2 people, they were occupying the apt with one more adult/female person so 3 people in total in a very tiny 500 sq ft apt.

“Ari Candelier tells Greenpointers that their landlord demanded that he and his partner (whose name we are withholding for privacy reasons) leave just a few days after signing a lease at 130 India Street because they didn’t disclose the pregnancy before signing. ”

It is untruth and without of any shred of evidence written article since Landlord never signed any lease with that 3 people! These 3 people did not have any lease with the Landlord!

“Candelier said the landlords also demanded a second security deposit and a guarantor after the couple moved in. The building’s landlords, Joe Bromson and his wife Alice, operating as India Street Properties LLC, claimed that the building was not insured to have kids. ”

Landlord never demanded a second security deposit. It’s another lie and without any evidence! Alice does not operate any LLC and she supposed to not be included in this article or her or the landlord’s name! If the landlord would not want to rent to them due to pregnancy, why would he let them inside to his apt? It’s totally untruth!

“Ask anyone who recently mounted an apartment search in Greenpoint and Williamsburg, and they’ll tell you that the rents are high, the inventory is low, and the competition to find a place is fierce. The couple hurried to find a place before the baby arrived, hoping to avoid some hassle and score a good deal by working directly with owners. They found 130 India Street online and set up a time to view it. Priced at $3,200 a month for a two-bedroom, the unit promised to be a steal compared to most market-rate units in the area. Candelier first met the Bromsons when he came to tour the unit. As a Williamsburg native, Candelier is no stranger to Joe Bromson’s old-school way of doing things. But those quirks, such as requiring the rent in cash, belied who Candelier felt like was a distrustful personality, and the relationship between the two quickly soured. ”

These people were very upset when they heard from the landlord (after they did not want to cooperate with the landlord to supply with a whole paperwork/guarantor needed) that the landlord do not want to continue anymore with them since the landlord did not have any lease with them and they were in the apt just a week long so they decided to go to local newspaper to just blame the landlord for their mistakes!

“He was very aggressive from the beginning. He was like, ‘Hey, this is my property. I’ve dealt with many troublesome tenants,’” Candelier tells Greenpointers.”

Landlord was never aggressive towards them, it’s untruth and he never said anything like that to them! Why is the reason to be aggressive in situation when Landlord wants to rent his apt?

“Bromson apparently demanded the money on the spot, even though Candelier explained that he didn’t have it, as he just wanted to see the place first. Candelier says he also persistently tried to get more information about his partner, telling him that he needed to confirm her existence. But after Candelier introduced her through FaceTime, Bromson reportedly stated, “Ok, she’s not Black,” and doggedly inquired about Candelier’s family background. In a phone call with Greenpointers, Bromson denied making the statement.
His partner later came to tour the place, and the couple decided to take it, officially moving in on January 18. ”

Landlord never demanded any money on the spot. It’s again untruth. Ari Candelier first time wrote and then saw the apt on December 30th, 2024 and then he asked about the farther process since he was asking about email to which he can send the financial documents, but Landlord wrote to him that he needs to come again to fill up the application. He came 2 weeks later, on January 14th explaining that he was traveling to Washington DC and that he wants to fill up the application and he wants to bring a down payment (in his text message he wrote: “For 130 India Street is it possible to fill out an application today. I will bring a down payment sir”).

“Bromson reportedly stated, “Ok, she’s not Black,” –

This constitutes defamation of character since Landlord never said anything like that!!!

“It was then that Bromson allegedly asked for an additional security deposit.”

Landlord has never asked them for an additional security deposit, it’s again untruth statement without any prove! There is even a one receipt photo included in this article on amount of one security deposit!

“The demand took the new tenants by surprise. They already agreed upon the terms of the lease and signed the papers (Bromson says that the couple never signed a lease agreement, but what they had signed previously was just the application). Under the law, a landlord can only ask for no more than one month’s rent as a security deposit. Bromson blamed it on previous tenants screwing him over. Candelier told him he’d take care of it after Martin Luther King Day on Monday.”

Even the receipt is showing that the Landlord took just one month of the deposit, not two!

“But Candelier says that the Bromsons showed up on Monday anyway and barged into their apartment while his partner was taking a shower. Bromson expressed dissatisfaction with Candelier’s father acting as a guarantor, allegedly telling Candelier: “Your savings account shows that you a good amount of money. Just send me the $3,200, we shake hands, or else you have to leave.” ”

It was not Monday but Tuesday – on January 21st , 2025 and Landlord came to see the couple after previously contacted Ari Candelier by calling him on the phone and later meeting him at the property. He asked them to move out due to not cooperate with him, do not replying to text messages and do not supplying with paperwork previously promised.

“Two days later, the Bromsons again showed up unannounced the next morning, this time addressing the pregnancy. Bromson felt like the couple had deceived him and demanded they leave immediately. (Bromson denies ever entering Candelier’s unit unannounced.) The couple asked for more time; in an email exchange seen by Greenpointers, Bromson gave them until 1 pm the following Saturday.”

It was just one meeting with the couple after the landlord decided to not continue to rent to them! Since the couple did not want to move out and begged the landlord for few more days to find another apt, the landlord agreed with them that they can stay till January 25th, 2025.

“Bromson tells Greenpointers that he and his wife never had a formal lease agreement with the couple, though he confirmed that Candelier paid him $3,200 as a security deposit. I asked why they would let them move in without a lease, and Alice Bromson said it was for a week-long trial period. Joe Bromson says he was “lied to” because, on the application, Candelier listed two people, whereas Bromson said they should have listed three. Under New York law, landlords cannot discriminate against tenants with children or “require that tenants remain childless during their tenancy.” A tenant has no legal obligation to disclose a pregnancy, and a landlord cannot evict a tenant because of a pregnancy. The Bromsons denied that the pregnancy was the reason they evicted the couple, but rather, the lack of documentation and guarantor.”

Landlord explained to Emma Davey (the reporter) while talking with her over the phone that on the application Ari Candelier filled out untruth information which he signed on 01/14/25 on which he filled up that:
“Occupancy will include a total of 2 persons. Adults: 2. Children: he left it blank. Pets: he left it blank”.
But as soon as he moved in – 01/18/25, landlord saw one more adult person/women living together with him and his girlfriend so when landlord said to Emma (newspaper’s reporter) that they should have listed 3 people, he meant another adult person occupied the apt together with the couple, not their not born yet baby! Again, it was not the reason Landlord decided to ask the couple plus 1 more adult to move out! Besides this Ari Candelier was never a tenant of the Landlord since the tenant is someone with a legal agreement, like a lease or rental contract, with the property owner or landlord or who has lawfully occupied the dwelling unit for thirty consecutive days or longer. Since the Landlord never signed with Ari Candelier any lease/agreement and he was occupied the apt from January 18th till January 26th, even when the Landlord asked him/them to move out earlier since Candelier did not provide him with all promised and needed documentation and he brought a third, adult person into the small apt while Candelier agreed with the landlord only on 2 people.

“Bromson said that he doesn’t always provide a lease, calling the legal system “biased” against landlords.”

From January 21st., 2025 when the landlord asked 3 adult people to move out, they were simply squatters!

“The building’s troubles go back decades. In 2001, two residents died after an arsonist set the building on fire (referred to in a New York Post article as an illegal single-room occupancy, as a tenant was living in the ground floor commercial space). The arson case remains officially unsolved. At the time, neighbors also told the outlet that more than 100 people had lived there in the past two to three years, due to Bromson’s predilection for evictions. The building still has an open violation for the illegal residential space, as Bromson has not provided the paperwork to close it out (though he did pay a penalty of $800 in 2001). A tenant successfully sued him in 2012 for withholding his security deposit (a civil court jury dismissed Bromson’s countersuit). Bromson says he withheld the deposit because the tenant had damaged the unit. ”

All these above information’s are irrelevant to this article who is mainly written to show the landlord in a very poor light! It is constitutes defamation of character!

“In 2014, a neighboring business even noted Bromson’s alleged proclivity to barge in uninvited. Early, a coffee shop whose courtyard abuts 130 India Street, brought the Bromsons to court for repeatedly using the courtyard as a shortcut to the back entrance, despite no agreement between the two of them to do so (in a legal filing, Early said they once noticed the padlock to the back gate had been cut off, which they suspected the Bromsons of doing). A judge ruled in Early’s favor, and Bromson was required to cease the trespassing. The Bromsons are still in the process of appealing the decision.”

This case should not be brought in this article since this case is still pending and reporter – Emma Davey for sure did not went through the whole case and she even does not know the reason of that case. The building is very narrow, there is no other way to get to the basement of that building from inside but only going by passing two adjusted lots since the City did not subdivided these lots properly between 3 adjusted buildings. Landlord is continuing fight over the easement by prescription to his only way to his basement! Again, this case is irrelevant to this article and the only one reason to bring it into this article is to show the Landlord in poor light! It is constitutes defamation of character!

“A construction violation from 2001 that remains open. Screenshot from NYC Buildings database.
130 India Street does not have a Certificate of Occupancy, which it is not required to have because it was built before 1938. Buildings with only one or two units are not required to register with the city’s Housing Preservation and Development as long as the property owner or family member lives on the premises. According to property records and Candelier, the Bromsons do not live at 130 India Street, meaning that the building should be registered. Asked whether or not they live there, the Bromsons demurred. The city’s Department of Buildings told Greenpointers that they knew the building had just two legal residential units. However, even after the 2001 fire, Bromson allegedly continued to rent out the ground-floor commercial space as an apartment. According to DOB records, complaints about the arrangement date as far back as 1989. Though he was fined in 2001, the agency was never able to substantiate further complaints, as they were apparently unable to gain access to check it out; they most recently attempted an investigation in 2019. ”

This is irrelevant to this article. It constitutes defamation of character!

“This year, HPD recorded six complaints about living conditions made within four days, from January 23 through 27. Four complaints concern lack of heating, and one concerns rodents; all but one have been closed.”

All those above complains came from Ari Candelier which were fake allegations and all of them were closed since he did that after the landlord asked him to move out from the apt. due to not providing the Landlord with previously promised and necessary documentation and by bringing additional adult/female person living together with the couple. In his anger, he decided to make one complain after another.

“Bromson purchased the property in 1987, under the name Joseph Zohar (he later changed his name to Joe Bromson). He later transferred the property to his company, India Street Properties LLC. He also owns the building at 122 India Street, whose registration with the HPD lapsed in 2021; that building has several open violations for failure to register. ”

This is irrelevant to this article. It constitutes defamation of character! The reporter – Emma Davey is using all my names (even previous one) which I asked not to use them since the building is own by LLC, not the Landlord!