CW gets tougher with guest key-card policy

By Sabina Mollot

Recently, a Stuyvesant Town resident, who often has a friend from out of town stay with him, learned that guest key-card status for the woman would be rejected — that is, unless she agreed to register with the owner as an occupant. However, the resident, who didn’t want his name published, told Town & Village she doesn’t live in the apartment, and therefore has so far refused to register as an occupant. Along with friendship, she also fills an occasional role of caretaker for some of his health issues, he said. Management, meanwhile, said the tenant, hasn’t budged and has refused to issue a guest card.

A spokesperson for CWCapital did not respond to a comment on this issue, but Council Member Dan Garodnick told Town & Village that he has heard from “a handful” of residents who said CW has become more selective about issuing guest cards lately. Garodnick said this practice seems to run contrary to the key-card policy.

“The rule is that there is no limit to the number of key-cards a tenant can get,” said Garodnick. “Guests should be provided with permanent key-cards and guests include friends who come to visit on a regular basis or as needed to care for a tenant or their apartment. That’s the rule.”

After a tenant acquires four guest cards, additional ones come with a fee of eight dollars, but, stressed Garodnick, “you can get an unlimited number.”

He believes management’s reason for the recent denials has to do with weeding out illegal, short-term rental activity.

“My impression is that they’re trying to deal with the Airbnb problem in our community, but that doesn’t mean they can act in a way that’s inconsistent with the DHCR (Division of Housing and Community Renewal) order. That’s what management should follow and those are the rules governing tenants.”

Garodnick recommended that any tenant who gets denied ask for an explanation.

“The key here is that people should not just accept a denial if they get one. They may have rights and they need to understand the law.”

Short-term rentals or other illegal behavior on the part of some tenants was also responsible for a recent change in policy in which management has been charging residents $150 for adding occupants to the apartment. Last spring, Garodnick and the Tenants Association had argued that this was inconsistent with the Real Property Law, but recently, after consulting with the attorneys, they are no longer disputing the legitimacy of the fee when it’s imposed on second or third occupants.

“They believe that it is a fee that can be imposed,” Garodnick said.

The $150 has been getting charged for second and third occupants, with CW having previously explained to T&V in April that this is to recoup costs that include background checks. Garodnick and the TA have also questioned, back in April, the validity of a policy in which guest keycards have been issued on a temporary, rather than permanent basis.

In a letter to the TA and Garodnick that was also sent to T&V at the time, CWCapital Managing Director Andrew MacArthur explained the changes in policy.

On the occupant charge, MacArthur said that as long as the tenant wishes to have a roommate within the limits of the law there is no charge and as far as he knew there had never been a charge. It is only when a resident wants an occupant added “in excess of the number of roommates required by the law, we do so at our sole discretion,” said MacArthur.

On the topic of guest key-cards, MacArthur said permanent guests cards are issued to close friends and family members expected to visit on a regular basis, especially if they’re needed to care for a resident.

But, he added, “We do not believe the DHCR ever intended to create a permanent guest status for anyone who ever visits PCVST.”

He went on to say if a guest needs continuous access to an apartment for more than three months, “then that guest is clearly an occupant… Restricting the duration of our visitor cards ensures that we won’t have thousands of ‘blank keys’ circulating around the city.”

4 thoughts on “CW gets tougher with guest key-card policy

  1. Who needs key cards anyway? The doors are almost always pinned open because people are moving in and moving out all the time and some people just pin the doors open for their own convenience. The rolling luggage weekender crew just follow people who are going in and out of the building if the doors aren’t pinned open. I never challenge them because I’m not paid to be a security guard and most of those characters are big and scruffy and don’t speak English. I won’t even ride in the elevators with them because they look so unwholesome. We’re paying for security cameras that are not watched and intercoms that don’t work and there comes a point (which I have reached) when you just don’t give a flying you-know-what anymore. If Management and PS can’t do their job then we just have to put up with it. STPCV is no longer a safe and stable (or even clean) place to live and that is just the unvarnished truth of the matter.


      One more comment: Included in each rent statement envelope is an offer to recommend other suckers to rent apartments so we can get up to $2,500. Ergo, they are having difficulty in making PCV/ST monetarily viable.

      So, management du jour should leave these two development which were made for the middle class and use their uber greedy methods elsewhere. I know that they tried very hard and they ought to acknowledge that they’ve failed.

      • They have failed in many ways because they are inept, incompetent and greed-driven. They have a plethora of property managers to do the job that one man (Bill Potter) used to do and, unlike them, did it right and they are constantly short-staffed on plumbers, handymen, porters, etc. Failure is their hallmark and on this once-lovely property it is a pockmark. I think they would be hard-put to run a gas station without putting it into the toilet.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.