BKReader40%

Brooklyn Management Company to Pay For Illegal Evictions 5%

By BK Reader Staff37%

7/24/2026, 8:11:05 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Unattributed Quote, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 10.1% saturation with 46 hits. Analysis detected 351 faulty-reasoning hits from 457 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 20.4% and a BS Rank of 5% (20,826 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 95.20% of the article peer group.

New York Attorney General Letitia James on Friday announced a settlement with Spigro Management, LLC and its lead property manager Saul Friedman for illegally evicting people from their Brooklyn and Bronx homes by changing the locks on their apartment doors while they were not home. 
An investigation by the Office of the Attorney General found Spigro unlawfully evicted individuals living in apartment buildings on at least four occasions. 
As a result of OAG’s intervention, Spigro will pay statutory and compensatory damages of $1,000 to $1,200 to the four unlawfully evicted victims in addition to $23,500 in penalties. 
“Spigro callously violated the trust, safety, and privacy of occupants by illegally changing their locks while they were not home,” James said in a statement. 
“Attempting to evict people from their homes by sneaking in and changing the locks is as sinister as it is shameful." 
Based in Brooklyn, Spigro manages more than 40 buildings including over 3,000 units throughout New York City. 
Many of these properties are cooperatives or condominiums with pre-conversion tenants remaining rent-stabilized. 
In New York City, all lawful occupants who have resided for 30 days or more in their home have the right to remain in their home unless they choose to leave or are lawfully evicted through a court process. 
Surprise lockouts or “self-help evictions” are illegal. 
In May 2025, OAG opened an investigation into Spigro after receiving complaints concerning illegal lockouts. 
The investigation revealed that on at least four occasions, Spigro had illegally evicted occupants from four different properties in Brooklyn and the Bronx between 2020 and 2025. 
In one case, an adopted son of the tenant who had lived in a Spigro building in Brooklyn for more than 22 years came back to his apartment after taking out the 
trash to find that his lock had been changed. 
The tenant’s mother had recently passed away, and Spigro claimed they believed his mother had lived alone in the 
unit. 
The very next day, the same tenant found out from a neighbor that the landlord had been removing his possessions from the unit without permission. 
In another case, a porter that resided in the basement of a building in Brooklyn was injured on the job and required surgery. 
He filed for workers’ compensation and when he returned home from surgery, he found that Spigro had changed his lock and terminated his employment. 
When the porter attempted to regain access to his unit, Spigro claimed he had never worked there, according to OAG. 
Spigro will be obligated to create an “internal lockout” policy to ensure tenants’ locks are not changed without their knowledge, which will be monitored by the OAG for the next three years to ensure compliance. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 1.3%BKReader: 1.3%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 2.0%BKReader: 2.0%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.6%BKReader: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 1.5%BK Reader Staff: 5.0%BKReader: 5.0%Framing Effect1.5%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 2.3%BKReader: 2.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 7.7%BK Reader Staff: 2.2%BKReader: 2.2%Optimism Bias7.7%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 3.3%BKReader: 3.3%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 10.1%BK Reader Staff: 15.8%BKReader: 15.8%Negativity Bias10.1%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 4.2%BK Reader Staff: 0.5%BKReader: 0.5%Actor-Observer Bias4.2%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.5%BKReader: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 1.1%BKReader: 1.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.6%BKReader: 0.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 2.2%BKReader: 2.2%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 3.4%BKReader: 3.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.9%BK Reader Staff: 2.6%BKReader: 2.6%Hasty Generalization5.9%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 10.1%BK Reader Staff: 15.1%BKReader: 15.1%Appeal to Emotion10.1%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 1.2%BKReader: 1.2%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 1.2%BKReader: 1.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 7.4%BK Reader Staff: 1.5%BKReader: 1.5%Anecdotal7.4%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.7%BKReader: 0.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.8%BK Reader Staff: 3.8%BKReader: 3.8%Unattributed Quote9.8%This article: 5.5%BK Reader Staff: 0.7%BKReader: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection5.5%This article: 10.1%BK Reader Staff: 2.0%BKReader: 2.0%Biased Writer Voice10.1%This article: 4.6%BK Reader Staff: 5.0%BKReader: 5.0%Indoctrination4.6%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 6.5%BKReader: 6.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.0%BKReader: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%BK Reader Staff: 0.5%BKReader: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

457 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker10%attributed speech411writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageLetitia James • 25 words • 100.0% coverageLetitia James • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Letitia James

100%flagged-word coverage
46 attributed words100% of attributed speech35% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Letitia James: 100.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+54.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Letitia James: 54.3%54.3%Unattributed Quote+49.5 ptsWriter: 4.9%Letitia James: 54.3%54.3%Indoctrination+45.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Letitia James: 45.7%45.7%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.