As long as she is not compromising the privacy of any other tenants (and it doesn't appear that she is) then she has a perfect right to have the security cams in place.

Actually, she doesn't. She has the legal right to place the cameras inside the rooms she is renting, but the hallway still belongs to the agency that owns the building, and she can not install cameras to monitor it without their permission. You cannot put cameras up on parts of the building that you have no legal claim to, and since she is not renting the hallway, the right to have cameras up in it is reserved under the lease to the building owners. This is not an issue of privacy rights of the other tenants, this is an issue of who has the right to install cameras into the hallway that she was no legal claim of ownership to. If the owners of the hallway don't want her to have cameras up in it, their right to not have cameras installed by her on a part of their property trumps her "right" to place cameras outside of her home

Computers, stereo equipment, security camera system, bluetooth. She sure does have a lot of nice toys for someone living in taxpayer funded housing.

@David Mora, first, you sound like a broken record with your monotonous posts. We get it, and we got it, the first time...and the second time...and the third time...and the fourth time. Next time, save time, cut and paste.

Now, while you are right, technically, regarding the lease, and about her not having any right to install a fixture in a public area, she also has the right to live in a reasonably safe building, also BY LAW, and by the lease. She probably should have put her rent into an escrow account, stopped paying, and taken the Housing Authority to court for violating the livability clauses in the lease, but she didn't.

Also, since this is not a case where it is a private owner, but rather NYCHA, or in other words, the city, you would think that they would want to make their buildings safe, and maybe even have a greater duty to do so. In the end, the city can try to play hardball, but a judge may look at what they haven't done, and side with woman. Maybe it will be different in NYC from where I live, but housing court judges do have a tendency to sometimes do what is right (or whatever the heck they want to) when a case has gray areas or any mitigating factors, and the lack of safety in the buildings, and that they are owned by the city are pretty big ones.

You can also bet that if anyone gets hurt, they will, and should, file a lawsuit against the city for negligence.

On a different note, I am with the others: My first thought was "we have some pretty well-off poor people in this country."

Living high on the hog she is!!I wish I could afford a video severance system!

I work 6 days a week for LESS than she has!! This needs to end!

Safe yes, but using taxpayers money to have more security than me is not right. She wouldn't need so much security if she didn't have all these electronics. Government should be looking at this woman with a fine tooth comb. On the other hand at least she isn't spending it on drugs. Or is she...maybe that is where all this money actually came from and the camera's are to alert her when the police get there...lol

She could have been making minimum wage with a newborn when she was granted public housing, or even (more likely) obtained the apartment through succession rights. She's likely paying about 30% of her gross income (minus some deductions) toward rent. The average rent in NYC is over $2K a month for a single bedroom. Until I moved out of NY I was paying $1,200 a month for a one bedroom apartment with a shared kitchen in a half decent area in Brooklyn. And I was lucky to have found it! Anyone who lives in NYC knows that if you're not making over $65K the chances of you affording your own place in a decent area within 20 miles of the city are pretty damn slim. Forget even raising a family.

Having grown up in NYC I don't blame her for holding that place as long as possible and building up whatever savings she can. And if having a few luxuries makes her life a little more enjoyable then so be it. I knew many many who worked sh!t jobs and lived in the projects and where able to send their kids to college and eventually retire.

Guaranteed: NYCHA wants them out, until there is a major crime that happens on her cameras. Then they will want the tapes. Same thing happened here, I got cameras trained out my front door, the cops mistook them for me being sneaky, I explained I am alone all day. Then there was a crime in view of my cameras then they were all nicety nice wanting my footage to solve their crime. Suddenly surveillance cameras was a wonderful idea!

I can see everyone's hatred of the poor is in full force today. Its especially pathetic to see people compare their situation of "I work hard for so many days a week and she lives better than I do in public housing" to her situation. You don't know what her situation is, you don't know how much money she makes, how she spends her money, or how she even got the equipment. Just because such equipment cost X amount of dollars on amazon doesn't mean she paid that much for it, could have bought it off someone or got it used. And just because she bought that equipment doesn't means she's better off than you, it means she spends differently than you. I've never seen such judgemental and condescending people but I guess thats what happens when they think they're anonymous and say what they really feel. I call it cowardice, express who you really are out side of an anonymous comment thread.

@Eezyville

Well said!

@Eezyville

"I call it cowardice, express who you really are out side of an anonymous comment thread."

So your real name is Eezyville??? NOT LIKELY!

I happen to work at low income housing all the time! I see Mercedes and Lexus's and Caddies parked all over the place. Cars I can't afford... Maybe you can! I bet you are in the 48% paying NO TAXES.

The nice thing is EVERYONE is home all day so getting in to do my work is NEVER a problem

@AKRandy

I call BS on your statement. I've been to many projects in and around NYC and I've never seen anyone cruising around in new Benz's and Beamers. Your statement is the typical line of BS some people spew out who haven't a clue. In fact, most people in NYC don't own cars, because it's more of a hassle to even find parking. Every time I've gone into the city and paid a visit to friends who lives in the projects I've always used paid parking, because it's a hassle just trying to decipher the parking signs. nice try though.

It's interesting how the holier-than-thou group love to demonize the working poor.

Maybe be not in the city but get into the rural areas and it's amazing the cars people drive who claim to have only welfare as there income. Then top it off with iPhones, big screen TVs, smoke cigarettes, multiple computers etc. Call me a hater because it ticks me off that My husband and I work full time to provide for our family and pay taxes to support those who do nothing.

If Obama's elected it will only get worse. All he wants to do is make this country into a welfare country, rewarding those who don't want to work and support their families.

Please stop listening to your 8-track and welcome to the 21st century... these things are dirt cheap now.

It's not expensive, and if the landlord doesn't like it to bad!

I work for Fry's and you can buy camera for very cheap, the one's she has up is only $50 and the cable to run are $20-30.. I guess you forget that she could have gotten money from other people to pay for it...

Her setup didn't look cheap at all. I've seen that setup at BJ's for about $800. Now maybe that's cheap, but if she can afford that with no problems she don't belong in public housing. But then again I have friends in public housing that make more money than I do. The cameras are a good investment, though.

When all is said and done, bet we paid for the cameras.

That was a lot of equipment to be gotten for "cheap". Get out of subsidized public housing before you buy bluetooth anything.

There are a million ways she could have gotten the cams including having saved for them over a period of time or even from relatives in the business. And actually it's none of your business. Would you prefer to pay for the possible medicals bills she or her children might incur without the security?

"and if the landlord doesn't like it to bad!" Um . . . actually, since he's the landlord, by law he has the final say on what is installed in the parts of the building that are not granted to her in the lease, including the hallway. If she doesn't like that her lease doesn't allow her to post cameras in parts of the building that she has no legal right to modify, then she is the one who the courts will say "too bad" to, because doing so against the landlord's wishes is a violation of her lease, and termination of the lease will end in her being evicted, not the property owner.

King Obama bought them for her. She must remove them, the hallway is not part of her lease and is a violation of others rights. Sorry, what if everyone in the building had cameras mounted everywhere? Also ATD should have known better if they installed them.

BooHoo-1351197: Of course there is always the one b_tthead that makes everything a political event. Usually because they have very little else floating around in their head.

For all of you internet real property agents and internet attorneys, please read, and re-read David Mora's posts above.

He knows much, much more than you ever will about this subject, so please stop embarrassing yourselves with silly "opinions".

The only comment I would add to David's is that see may also be prohibited from mounting anything other than art needing light support. This would be very rare, but it is up to the landlord and the tenant as to what can be done to the unit, and the tenant does not have to live there if the tenant does not agree with the contract.

culheath

There are a million ways she could have gotten the cams including having saved for them over a period of time or even from relatives in the business. And actually it's none of your business. Would you prefer to pay for the possible medicals bills she or her children might incur without the security?

Anyone collecting handouts paid for with our tax dollars is most certanly my business. Who the hell are you to tell us we can't be concerned about how our money is being spent?

Boohoo if you're going to act the jerk, you could atleast get it right. Its ADT. In your case it stands for another dumb turd.

@Piglizard, I completely agree. No matter what the article is about, there is always some person that will try and make everything political.

Anyone collecting handouts paid for with our tax dollars is most certanly my business. Who the hell are you to tell us we can't be concerned about how our money is being spent?

My point is that you have no idea where or how she got the camera equipment or whether any public money was spent on it.

And being on any form of public assistance, whether it's food stamps, public housing, welfare, social security, disability, etc...does NOT give you or John Q Public the absolute right to know every detail of someone's private life. Who the hell do you think you are? If you are so worried about how YOUR money is being spent, question the military or the what the oil companies are doing with the billions in subsidies YOU give THEM annually and get off the backs of poor people.

We live in a first world society where electronic devices are constantly being upgraded and older models become cheaper. I highly doubt the camera, computer, and blue tooth were that expensive. Besides, it is much more difficult for someone to get job that can help them out of public housing if they do not have devices that allow them access to the means of that end.

I'm not saying she isn't subsidizing her life on public assistance, I'm just saying don't assume that she is not trying to do better. She obviously cares about her safety there so she might be on her way out anyways.

Just eyeballing what she has and doing an Amazon.com search. The headset is about $50, I used to have one and it was cheap and flimsy but clear. The cameras look to be about $50 each. The monitor looks small, like a small 15"-17" and they are pretty cheap. The laptop looks like an older model and it can go for about $150-$300 depending on where you buy it. Maybe off ebay or some cheap computer store. I don't know where people got the idea that this would cost up to $800 because you're full of sh*t. I can set all this up for less than $200 since I already have a computer and a desktop that can run this setup is pretty cheap to make. You can get a $60 motherboard/cpu/vga combo off newegg, a $40 hdd, a $50 monitor, $10 for keyboard and mouse, and a free OS called linux and yes they have a version of linux for home security called LinuxMCE. So how much did all that cost? $360. After she puts it all together she just needs a day or two to learn how to set it up in linux or just get windows xp and install software. I have like 3 versions of XP from my school and its not really hard to find. So $800 for this is bullsh*t, do your research and come back when you have facts.

Landlords don't go to those areas and you rarely know their name. If its government housing then that is who gets paid and most you never see the money.

BashfulRabbit....the hall way is a PUBLIC domain....as you just stated...when you are in PUBLIC you have no right to privacy.....and, if she is keeping thugs away, whats the big deal? If her neighbors want to do their drug deals they better go inside.

Actually, Allen, the hallway belongs to the building owner with whom she signed her lease. If her lease doesn't specifically grant her permission to install cameras or other fixtures in the hallway, she has no right to do so, because she does not have any legal ownership of the hallway granted by her lease. This is not legal for her to do without the building owner's permission, as all the rights to modify that hallways (such as installing devices to monitor it) are reserved by the owner of the complex unless otherwise granted to her in the lease. Thus installing them is a violation of her lease, and refusal to comply with the owner's demands that she follow the lease, the owner is fully authorized to evict her.

OK so she pulls them out of the hallway she gets broken into robbed, raped or the child gets kidnapped. Then she should sue the owners of the building and the housing authority for not keeping the living quarters safe that they are in charge of. If this ever went to a court of law and a jury she would win hands down. Also due to the fact that it is leased out by the state as a place to provide low income folks housing the hallway then becomes public property as it is under the guidelines of the state.

But I have a surveillance system attached to my house (about $1400 depending on no of cameras, with/without sound, lines of resolution, color black and white date time stamping to hold up in court etc.) as well and signs posted as well to notify all that enter my property that they are being recorded both video and sound. And yes check with authorities to ensure your within your legal right to do both.

The point is that a renter cannot install equipment like this without the permission of the landlord. Renters do not own the property! The lease may further restrict what one may have inside the apartment as well, e.g., pets not allowed. There are plenty of permissible ways that the renter could have made her apartment safe without installing cameras in the hallway. She just didn't bother to find out or ask.

I once installed a garage door opener in a house I was renting. I did ask the landlord for permission. In fact, the landlord agreed to buy me a nice power drill in exchange for my labor in putting the opener in. But I never would have gone ahead and done that without asking and receiving permission.

Putting the cameras in the hallway doesn't infringe on others privacy, the problem is that the hallway is solely the landlords property and she has no right to put the cameras there without landlord permission.

To add to the situation, imagine if she had her door open 24/7 and was always watching the hallway. Would it be invasion of privacy then? Some people might still say yes, but I would say that the hallway is an open walkway.

I once installed 2 cameras at the apartment complex where I lived. One viewing the parking lot (where cars were frequently broken into), and the other one showing the breezeway. Several of my neighbors like the idea and applauded the idea. the idea flew for about a month. Suddenly, I get a letter fromt he apartment complex stating that this was in violation of my lease. WHAT???? The apartment complex manager KNEW i had the cameras up, and nothing was said. Full story soon surfaced. One of the tenants who was a problem tenant (noise late at night), complained about the camera being there. I guess she thought it violated her privacy, although the camera view did not show any of here walkway or her coming in and out of her apartment. Although I don't think the apartment complex manager really cared, she later said "it would be in the best interest to remove the breezeway camera". Nothing was ever said about the parking lot camera. In fact, the complex had recently installed about 8 cameras in the parking lot and entrances and at the mailbox, and in the clubhouse....So, the lady that complained about MY camera, was obviously not aware of the other places she was on video as well. it all depends on the complex where you live. But I believe the incident in the story had to be the complaint of another tenant where this lady lived.

What if this was a man who installed cameras. We would be saying that he could be using them to stalk his female neighbors or case his neighbor's apartments. It would look a lot different than just somebody trying to protect themselves.

I think it was a good move to get some people's attention and hopefully start a dialogue to fix the problem but they need to come down.

LOL.

sounds like you have experience. You said it once now go and play your video games before mommy puts you to bed.

svdave

repeating your comment doesn't make it sound better or smarter than it did the first time you posted it.

There is no law I know of preventing filming people in the hallway in New York state. As far as I know, you can film all you want. About the drilling of holes, yes you're right - it is probably illegal.

Agreed. I don't think you are allowed to mount things to walls/ceilings outside of the aprtment. But the reason stated is "unauthorized surveillance equipment". Pretty specific.

The reason stated is "unauthorized surveillance equipment" because the rights of ownership to the hallway is not granted to her in the lease, meaning it is reserved to the owners of the building. Thus, setting up any equipment in the hallway, in this case surveillance equipment, without the authorization of the building's owners is a violation of the lease agreement, because the rights to install equipment in that part of the building was never granted to her. Setting up surveillance equipment without authorization to do so is thus the issue listed on the notice sent to her.

In many cases, you are not allowed to drill holes even INSIDE the apartment. You have to look at what's specified in the lease. I lived in an apartment building where you could not mount pictures on the walls except with stick-on hangers--no drilling allowed because the walls were cinder block. If you went ahead and did it anyway, you faced eviction, or when you moved out, you faced having part of your deposit retained to repair the damage. So even when you are doing things inside your apartment, you are restrained legally by the terms of the lease.

Look at it another way. Supposed she installed an alarm system that would go off anytime someone walked up to her door...

This isn't an issue of privacy or safety, it's an issue of whether someone can install equipment on property they don't own. Maybe you think you could set up a webcam outside someone's residence, but my guess is you would be violating laws other than privacy to do so.

Ah, mud ie mike, you sound like a pervert to me, offering them a place to live in your home. Are you old and lonely or just a middle age pervert. Concerned about her little girl, ................ Watch out.

Bluetooths are not that expensive, and how do you know how much she paid for the surveillance system, have you seen her receipts?

"that most of us cannot afford"

Old computers and vid cams can be found on Craigslist for dirt cheap ... $100 - $200 would probably do it.

(though I understand that a couple hundred is too much for some, there is perfectly good $50 computers on Craigslist)