An East Harlem landlord says she spent two years and tens of thousands of dollars fighting in court to evict a tenant she alleges severely damaged her apartment. The dispute is now at the center of a wider debate over New York City’s housing system.
The New York Post obtained the account from East Harlem landlords Amy Simek and her son, Kevin, of a four-story building they own.
The duo claims their tenant caused extensive damage to a studio apartment while continuing to pay rent through a city voucher program. According to the landlords and court records cited by The New York Post, Falade Aderidigbe allegedly smashed walls, ripped sheetrock from the apartment, and caused significant damage to a bathroom, resulting in an estimated $30,000 in repair costs.
When Aderidigbe moved in in March 2024, he was reportedly paying $2,350 per month in city-funded rent. Simek said accepting the tenant was not entirely optional.
“Because the [area median income] for the area met the [CityFHEPS rental assistance program] criteria, we were forced to accept a tenant who was previously in the shelter system,” she said. The claim reflects Simek’s interpretation of the city’s housing rules. The article does not indicate that landlords are legally required to accept a specific tenant.
“You walk a delicate line. If you don’t accept a city applicant, you fall into the discrimination category. We had to go along not knowing this guy was just a horror,” Amy told the publication.
Beyond the physical destruction of the unit, the court records described a series of upsetting incidents that were not confined to the apartment itself.
According to court records referenced by The New York Post, Aderidigbe was accused of leaving burners running unattended, screaming throughout the night, and intimidating neighboring residents.
Court records also reportedly describe an incident in which he was accused of banging on a neighbor’s door and lingering outside the apartment late at night. Kevin Simek says that the situation became so alarming that he had to call the police on several occasions.
The family, after months of legal back-and-forth, finally had a judge order an eviction in May 2026. The Simeks also claim that several residents chose to move out during the dispute because they feared for their safety. While a judge ultimately ordered the eviction in May 2026, the allegations described in the case largely originate from the landlords’ account and court filings cited by The New York Post.
Internet Reacts To New York City Landlord’s Two-Year Voucher Tenant Nightmare
The allegations sparked debate online, with some users sympathizing with the landlords while others questioned their decision to participate in the voucher program. Some were outraged by the system’s failure to protect landlords, and some were skeptical of the landlord’s motivations in accepting a voucher tenant in the first place.
The loudest voices were those who saw the case as proof that the city’s tenant protection framework had gone too far. “The system works against landlords every time,” one user wrote. “Tenants have more rights than the person who owns the property and loses money when tenants destroy property or refuse to move. Even suing for damages doesn’t mean you will get the money back.”
Another put it even more directly: “Tenant protections in NYC are so unbalanced it’s criminal. They have literally legalized massive theft and abuse of NYers who rent out their homes,” one comment read.
But others pushed back on the idea of the Simeks as straightforward victims. “DON’T feel sorry for these Landlords bc they’re greedy for money!” one person wrote. Some commenters argued that landlords knowingly accept voucher tenants because rental payments are guaranteed through government programs.
One comment targeted Amy Simek directly: “Amy says ‘I just wanted to help the homeless.’ Okay, girl. Amy wanted that voucher money, she received that voucher tenant,” a user commented. While another added, “She put the guy in there with ZERO regard for her neighbors. It was all about the money.”
The case comes amid ongoing debates over New York City’s housing assistance programs and the challenges landlords and tenants face navigating the system. The New York Post reported that some advocates believe similar disputes have occurred elsewhere, though the scale of the issue remains unclear.
