New York's Cooperative and Condominium Community

Habitat Magazine Insider Guide

HABITAT

Subscribe for Daily Updates!
Insurance claims for mold, water damage and Subletter's Policy Limits - Jess Aug 05, 2012

In our 300 unit co-op conversion, one of the units owned by former sponsor had a heat pipe break and flood his renter's unit. Mold and asbestos was then discovered and remediated by the Board, who paid the costs, and now we have issues related to the shoddy repairs done by the contractor who put back the insulation, walls, sheetrock, and somehow, did not put the walls back plumb in one of the rooms. The result is that room grows narrower to the east wall, and anything put against it is crooked. How could this happen? Who is responsible to repair this defect? Also, there are damages to the tenant's personal property and improvements that cost above his policy limits to repair such as replacing his carpet, which we had to pull up after the floors got destroyed by the flood, cleaning his lighting fixtures from the dust and paint caused by the repairs after remediation. Are we responsible for this or is the owner of the unit?
Thanks for advice!

> Join the conversation
Big mortgage - Billy Joe Aug 02, 2012

A 48 unit co-op in Queens has a mortgage of $1.73 million. At an annual meeting the accountant stated that the sponsor in order to attract banks added $350,000 to the existing loan. I don't understand this. Can someone explain to me why would a bank lend money to prespective byers with such a large underline mortgage.

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

This is playing out across the city, smaller co-ops with large underlying mortgages. In each situation the mortgage may be granted due to a particular circumstance, such as need to for capital improvements, large footprint etc.
What are the details of the mortgage – 30, 40, 50 or interest only amortization schedule? What is the rate? What were the funds used for?
What I have found in 15 years of involvement with various co-ops is there is impression that maintenance can always be raised so the mortgage should not be an issue. The sponsor mindset and many but not all shareholders are defer as much as possible – keep the maintenance payments small, pay the mortgage down just enough to roll into the next refinance. Eventually the co-op will be in precarious situation of a large underlying mortgage with a higher rate and payment amount.
Evaluate your next moves. Is refinance period coming up, has maintenance been raised enough to cover the mortgage and are you contributing routinely to the reserve fund?
I applaud the co-ops that have taken steps to pay down mortgages and maintain finances in a conservative manner.
For those with a large sponsor presence – such as my building – we have an uphill battle to the responsible thing for all shareholders even if it costs a little bit more.

By the way –we are having this very debate right now, as our mortgage is due in December, 30 vs 40 is all the rage.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

One reason I can see that the sponsor wants to take an additional $350K of equity out of the building is to increase the capital reserve fund. If Billy Joe heard somewhere that the sponsor was doing this to make the units more attractive to buyers, having a healthy reserve fund is an important factor. Co-op mortgage lenders look closely at building finances before committing. An anemic capital reserve fund makes it much more difficult for a perspective buyer to get a mortgage.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation
Our strict No-pet policy, right.... - Patricia Aug 01, 2012

My coop is in NJ. When I moved in 5 yrs ago it was made VERY clear in my admissions interview of the strict "no-pet" policy. I was thrilled, having just left an apartment building where my neighbors cat played in a hallway nxt to my bedroom, usually around 2am!

Unfortunately I have since seen someone on the first floor who sneaks his small 12-15 lb dog out the service elevator & side of building, where there are cameras. He used to put it in the baby carriage,then go for a walk. The building manager told him he was in violation, several SH having complained, but the owner threatened a lawsuit as he said we are allowing other pets and the building manager backed down. I was uncertain of another dog, which came onto the elevator with a young girl, and these suspicions have been confirmed as well. I do know that people have walked away from buying, having been told about our policy.

Now, I'm on the board and we have a possible new sale of a PH unit that has been on the market for some time. The new buyer says he has an old golden retriever that is probably in it's last year. I"m sorry, but we have a policy in place and like others before him, he should make arrangements for the final days of his beloved pet to live with other family. Needless to say, as a former pet owner, older dogs in their final days, tend to have accidents.

We polled the maintenance staff and they say they know of 12 cats in our 150 unit building. This is going to be a conversation in the next board meeting, but I'm 100% against this new buyer with the pet and feel we should take action against the other owners now. There are at least two SH, who gave up pets to live in our building and it isn't fair to them and that is why we have rules.

Anyone know if that 90 day rule exits in NJ if pets are known and not addressed? It is apparent that our building has been lax.

How would you handle this? I'm not afraid of sending letters to each SH and reminding them of the strict policy and then penalizing them if we can, ie instituting a fine for each month they do nothing about the pet.

> Join the conversation Comments (2)

The 90 day rule does exist. Also, if there are cats in the building then it is not a No-Pet building. It's unfair to allow cats and say No-Pets. This can be fought but if the pet is there over 90 days it becomes quite difficult. I myself am a Pet Lover and feel they do add to ones life. Good luck with this issue.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (2)

It IS NOT only the 90 day rule that you MUST adhere to. Before TRYING to institute any action against a pet owner make certain that the dogs ARE PETS. UNDER FEDERAL LAW ALL SERVICE DOGS and SOME EMOTIONAL SUPPORT ANIMALS ARE NOT PETS. They are NECESSARY for the persons livelihood. I faced this issue when I lived in NJ and moreso living in NY. I have a small dog that IS TRAINED as a DIABETIC ALERT SERVICE DOG. I presently live in a condo with my mother & in November I was sent a letter by the building manager stating that ALL DOG OWNERS would have to pay $100 A YEAR to keep their dogs & also provide DOCUMENTATION. Again according to the Americans with Disabilities Act THE BUILDING CANNOT CHARGE ME TO KEEP MY SERVICE DOG HERE. I also DO NOT have to provide documentation. FYI: There is NO SUCH THING as CERTIFICATION for Service Dogs in NY or NJ & many other states. Under the ADA Service Dogs DO NOT even have to wear vests or anything identifying them. If there is a question regarding whether or not a dog is a Service Dog BY LAW you can only ask 2 questions:

1) Is the dog necessary to assist you with a medical or psychiatric condition?

2) What duties is the dog trained to perform?

In response to the second question in the case of someone that has a Diabetic Alert Service dog an answer of "the dog alerts me to a medical conditon" is a sufficent answer. A Service Dog handler is protected from revealing ANYTHING that would reveal the exact nature of their medical or psychiatric problem.

Before taking ANY ACTION against ANYONE it would behoove you to go to Google (or use another search engine) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT SERVICE DOGS. You will find a wealth of information & learn what you can & cannot do. This VALUABLE INFORMATION can protect you from possibly being sued later.

Peg Meerkatz
Disability Advocate, President
EsperanzaEnterprises

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (2)

I agree with Peg Meerkatz. Also please note, that if this is a Senior, many have pets not only for Emotional Support, but Companion Support, courts generally rule with that in mind. Kudos to you Peg for bringing this up. Pets do become a family member. One of your concerns were dogs having accidents, understandable, you wouldn't give a human up because they were old and frail. There should be a little more compassion, these pets are as important as a child to many people.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

If one is feeling no compassion, and one is in a no-pets building, perhaps one should move somewhere else. Insisting on having a companion animal -- i.e. a pet -- in a no-pet building is unconscionably selfish. It completely discounts the reasons why people want to live in a no-pet (or no-dog) building, and says to them, "My reason is better than yours." You have a psychological condition you think requires a companion dog? Others have a psychological or health conditions that precludes being around dogs that could jump up or snap at them, create allergy and dander issues, create disgusting smells, etc. Your psychological condition doesn't trump anyone else's. No one's disputing seeing-eye dogs. But now everyone who wants a pet is abusing a legal loophole and saying, "Oh, I want a dog, I'll claim I'm depressed and just have my doctor write a note saying whatever I tell him to." Thanks a lot.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (2)

What Exactly does the policy state? Many times verbal policies are passed down like the telephone game . They often are not what the written policy states. Our policy is in the house rules. It is nothing like the verbal policy that people and board members,management company state.
Most people in my building do not know how to read. Written policy rules.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

This is the most ignorant thing I have ever heard...ever.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

No, YOURS is the most ignorant comment. Habitat did a whole article on this very subject, of selfish scammers who use fake "certifications" and otherwise corrupt the system so they can have pets in no-pet buildings.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

The Americans with Disabilities Act does not apply to private residences. It applies to public and semipublic (hotels, restaurants) spaces. The Fair Housing Law applies. But not ADA.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

Thank you everyone for the great info. So NJ does indeed have the 90 day rule. Can anyone give me the specific law # so that I can reference it. I have not had luck finding it online, but will continue my search. I see the NY law was clearly mentioned in a few other postings.

Yes, there is at least one therapy/medically advised pet for a woman with cancer and I've advise the board she should just provide us with a letter from her doctor that he recommended her getting a pet.

Thank you, we will look into the emotional support animals as well as some of the very elderly in my building may have them for that reason. The other pets are mostly cats and the kitty litter down the trash shoot is really a problem.

We are not trying to prevent service dogs.

We still plan on maintaining our "pet free" status.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

All the comments and advise in response to your concerns are spot on, but that does not allow ESA and service animals to become nuisances or destroy other neighbors peaceful and quiet enjoyment of their homes. If any of these animals bark incessantly, have accidents that are left in the public spaces, pose a threat to residents and guests, or cause an apartment to smell so bad it the odors migrate into the public spaces or adjacent apartments, Boards have the right to pursue remedies for removal of animals because they are breaking other house rules on issues of quality of life and, in some cases, health department issues. Train your service dogs and ESAs so they are not disturbing your neighbors!

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation
Absentee owners - Michele Jul 31, 2012

Hi all...I received some very helpful responses when I first asked about absentee owners...and our board is considering some of the suggestions.

I have another question. We have four owners who rent their units. One owner lives in the area, another lives in Washington, D.C, and two others are some distance away. None of these owners comes to their units to check on them regularly, nor are they physically present at annual meetings (but they do phone in). The board is thinking about requiring the owners come into town at least once a year (maybe even for the annual meeting) to take stock of their units, building issues and repairs, and essentially be involved to a greater extent. Otherwise, they essentially have no role other than paying their monthly maintenance fees. I wonder whether this is something a board can mandate, of course, probably with a shareholder vote? Thanks.

> Join the conversation Comments (2)

people would need to know if it is coop or condo.
If co-op, subleasing IMO is against the very reason people buy co-ops. Short term to get a buyer is one thing .
condo's is a whole different situation

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

In agreement with efy. Subleasing is against the very reason people buy co-ops. Why not rent? Co-op living should be exclusive not to rent / sublease.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

Sorry...this is a condo...thx.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

The board really should not legislate a unit-owner's participation in the co-op's or condo's governance. There might be very good reasons why a unitowner cannot return for the annual meeting, military committment being one. If you start carving out exceptions, you'll wind up with something that resembles the federal tax code. :-)

What the board should mandate is that all unitowners who know they will be away from their units for longer than a specified time (2 weeks, month, etc) pay some nominal fee to have the super or whoever maintains the common structures enter the apartment and perform a general safety review. Simple things like making sure the electricity and gas are turned off or aren't leaking, no water problems with leaks or overflows, no signs of damage like from an upstairs leak, things like that. The board's first concern should be the safety and security of the building. If a unit owner is not going to be present for an extended period of time, I don't think a nominal fee to have a surrogate like the super perform simple safety and security checks is inappropriate

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

even coop owners have protection against someone entering their apartment unless it is an emergency. Opening the building up to charges of theft, etc.
It has to be an bonafide emergency to enter the apartment , like a leak downstairs and the apartment above the empty apartment has no leak. i am sure once a leak above was repaired , and it was obvious that the middle apartment must have water damage , after trying to contact the owner to let them know what was going on, the building could enter for mold mitigation measures and structural checks.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

I suggested a fee to (1) force the apartment owner and the board to come to an agreement on entry conditions, and (2) to reimburse the board for the time the super (or whoever) has to spend performing an out-of-band chore for this one particular shareholer.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation
ants-hundreds of them - MK Jul 31, 2012

I have had a problem with ants for 2 years. The super instructs some shareholders to purchase ant traps, while he panders to others (like board members). At our annual board meeting I asked a board member if he was experiencing the same thing. He informed me that he had in the past. I then asked him how he resolved it, and he informed me the exterminator took care of it and he has no more problems. Prior to this I had run into a board member in the lobby and asked if he was experiencing the same thing. He told me that he was not and it would be taken care of if necessary. He then said “Well they are not harmful are they?”. I replied “I do not like it when they crawl on me”. Finally the exterminator was called to take care of the problem (I am not the only with this issue) and I waited all day for them to show, unfortunately they did not. I called the exterminating service only to find that my apartment was not on the list. I do not allow the super access to my apartment because of problems I have encountered with him. Today I called the service again and they told me they would be here today again my apartment was not on the list. The woman who answered the phone added my name to the list so I may finally be getting some relief.
I am not very well liked in the building because I reported the super to the managing agent in regard to damage in my apartment and subsequent refusal to correct the problem. These issues include:

• Losing the key to my door and then breaking my lock in attempt to get in. I was going to call a locksmith but he insisted he could do it and I allowed him. After giving him 4 or 5 months to correct the problem (2 attempts) I called a locksmith. The board denied my request for reimbursement saying “I hired him”. Eventually I did get some reimbursement from them, but it did not even cover half of what it cost me because of his negligence.

• I have also seen him remove equipment from the building, loading it into one of his associate’s trucks for side jobs outside of the building.

• When I first moved in my tub was not draining properly and he told me to purchase a liquid drain opener and that he did not know what happened to the snake (it disappeared). He also read me the riot act regarding placing peels in the kitchen sink. I assured him it was not something I did and could see that he was seething over tenants who did this. I poured 3 bottles of the stuff down the tub drain to no avail. Finally (I year later) I got the plumber who serves the building to take care of the problem. I don’t put peels down my kitchen sink and I certainly have never placed them in my bathtub.

I could go on about the treatment I am receiving from him and other tenants in the building because of this and at some other point in time I will. I have been documenting these events with emails to the managing agent and my own personal log. The situation is very hostile and I hate living here because of it. What is most frustrating is that when I told him I was going to inform others of what he has done he said “they won’t believe you I have been here too long”. He was right and in fact 2 board members have accused me of dishonesty. I find their devotion to him bizarre especially since prior to this fallout he had many derogatory things to say about them.
Of course I have never repeated this information and if I did I know that they would just call me a liar. I have one more year here before I can sell, but I am very distraught and would like to leave today.
How would you handle this type of situation.?

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

we need a new set of laws or co-op state board to ensure that shareholders are treated properly and within the boundaries of the law.
The AG is useless and anyone that runs into the uselessness of the AG office on co-ops should write letters to their state senators and the AG himself.
Put everything in writing, fax and get the receipt, better certified mail, but that is such a pain in in the butt for me. to the co-op board, in my case they refuse to give me the co-op BOD contact info, and some say they live in the building, yet have not in 7 years,, and one has never occupied the apartment his son lives in, yet he states he lives here. Fraud and i am reporting it along with mortgage fraud to the DA.
I also hate the amount of time i have to spend researching everything and typing up letters, yet the other shareholders prefer to believe the fraudulent details given to them by the board,since they want to sell and move. I don't blame them, but that just keeps the problems happening, until a buyer with a set , realized they have been scammed and has the spine to take action and sue.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation
What constitutes a repair that can be invoiced to a shareholder? - Patricia Jul 29, 2012

My building is now trying to bill repairs to shareholders and keep our maintenance staff from doing work on the side, ie their lunch break etc. I'm asking my fellow board members to come up with a list of billable repairs vs those we would not bill for, ie furniture moving, cleaning of balconies, changing light bulbs etc. What can be billed vs what is customary for the building to just do for a shareholder, maybe unclogging a drain? There also appears to be no consistent scale for what is charged and who is charged. Any ideas??? Being new to the board I've been asked to see where we can improve and I think this needs addressing.

> Join the conversation Comments (3)

1) Ask some longtime residents what has been traditionally repaired by the coop.

2) Make a list: Usually: washers for drips in sinks, showers and toilets, changing plugs and light-switches, plaster and prime coat paint when there has been an in-the-wall leak, window problems, radiator leaks, snaking drains, etc.

3) If staff does any work beyond the traditional repairs it could be that, legally, the staff member is a independent contracctor without workmans comp and the coop could be laible. Be careful. Put your policy in writing.

4) Find a good licenced handyman (outside the bldg) or two that the building can recommend for minor work by residents and give out his/her name and number.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

i wouldn't want the super moving furniture, even if it was billable,unless small items, with everything cleared off. To much risk of injury , and if furniture is expensive , claims to co-op. I worked for a public utility and we had to do installs inside the house, we were told never to move furniture, that is the customers responsibility. even changing bulbs, is more of a favor, but not a requirement to a resident. Tough to draw a line, since when in the apartment to work on a covered item, before they leave they could change a light bulb. Since tips are given to the super at the holidays, the light bulb changing fee is kinda included in them. The co-op i live in also tips the super and to my total opposition, the managing agent. Who doesn't even do the basic work required of him. We had fire dept fines for fire door rusted shut and unable to be opened, yet they tip and give raises, it's the prez in cahoots with the managing company with a puppet board.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

If you really think about it - it is just a bad idea to allow staff to do side jobs. You open the coop to hundreds of dollars being used in building supplies (plaster, etc) to say nothing of liability issues and conflicts of interest regarding priorities towards regular building maintenance. Many buildings are told otherwise - usually by the managing agents or the board members hwo gett treated favoribly by staff. Beware.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

As far as what people say has been the historical supers duties in the building, People pass down what they want you to believe or what someone told them , but not what the house rules state. Our house rules state that the super is not allowed to do any personal work or errands for the residents.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation
Unsold shares and what trigger their change to shareholder units - Escape from Yonkers Jul 28, 2012

Is every non-eviction plan different or is there a general rule on the changing of unsold shares to shareholder shares,which have to follow the rules in effect for the other shareholder units. The regular shareholders have to pay sublet fee's ,need approval to sublet, buyers and subletters must be approved by the board. To name a few .
I uncovered some self dealing where the rented apartment was being treated as unsold shares for about 25 years . Family members lived in the apartment for about 5 years prior to it being rented out. The by-laws and proprietary lease state that once. Family member occupies unsold shares it ceases to be unsold shares. I want to check and see if other units should be off the un-sold share classification.

> Join the conversation
Maintenance fees - Andrea Sang Jul 27, 2012

Hi, does anyone know if when maintenance fees are raised do they go by how many shares you own? Mine is being raised 15% so is it figured out 15% of the shares I own or by how much I am paying now which is $590 a month so 15% of 590

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

your second scenerio is correct, the number of shares owned multiplied by amount of increase.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

In a strict tecnical sense, shareholder financial oblications like maintenance and assessments are calculated on a "per-share" basis. If your board has approved a 15% maintenance increase, it means that the amount of maintenance every shareholder in your building pays is being increased by 15% for each share they own. Assessments are usually calculated by "X number of dollars per share"

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation
ConEd rates - Anon Jul 24, 2012

My Board is trying to figure out the cost effectiveness for converting from #2 oil to gas from ConEd. I know what we pay per gallon of oil and how much oil we use each year, but trying to (1) convert how much oil we use into how much gas we would need to maintain the energy usage, and (2) figure out the price per therm for gas. ConEd's website has tons of tariff numbers, but it's hard to make sense of what their price per therm is (rough estimate) for a brief cost analysis.

Anyone familiar with the gas rates? And any talk of how much the price of gas will probably go up in future years as demand will continue to go up with the new rules eliminating #6 and #4 oil?

Any help is much appreciated.

> Join the conversation Comments (3)

The cost effectiveness of converting from #2 to gas involves several factors including the cost to upgrade your systems internally and Con Ed's cost estimate to bring in the gas line to your building. Natural gas has been running at about half the price of oil for some time now. The price per therm for gas will vary with market conditions and you chosen supplier, which does not have to be ( and shouldn't be) Con Ed. My firm, Informa Energy, could do a simple pricing analysis for you based upon current rates. Depending on how quickly Con Ed can bring in the gas line, though, it may make economic sense to wait to convert. The natural gas market hit a ten-year low in April 2012 and has climbed steadily from that low ever since. The mild winter of 2012 and enhanced extraction techniques ("fracking") created a huge surplus of gas that drove the price down to those lows. While gas prices are still quite low generally speaking, the surplus is not predicted to remain at current levels due to factors such as: large users switching over from coal to gas & the unexpectedly hot summer increased demand for gas (which is used in generating electricity). Thus, many of our gas customers have opted to lock-in gas for multi-year terms to avoid the likely rise. However, be way of any firm wanting to help to you finance a conversion in exchange for locking-in for five years -- you could lose your conversion savings in the process.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

The cost effectiveness of converting from #2 to gas involves several factors including the cost to upgrade your systems internally and Con Ed's cost estimate to bring in the gas line to your building. Natural gas has been running at about half the price of oil for some time now. The price per therm for gas will vary with market conditions and you chosen supplier, which does not have to be ( and shouldn't be) Con Ed. My firm, Informa Energy, could do a simple pricing analysis for you based upon current rates. Depending on how quickly Con Ed can bring in the gas line, though, it may make economic sense to wait to convert. The natural gas market hit a ten-year low in April 2012 and has climbed steadily from that low ever since. The mild winter of 2012 and enhanced extraction techniques ("fracking") created a huge surplus of gas that drove the price down to those lows. While gas prices are still quite low generally speaking, the surplus is not predicted to remain at current levels due to factors such as: large users switching over from coal to gas & the unexpectedly hot summer increased demand for gas (which is used in generating electricity). Thus, many of our gas customers have opted to lock-in gas for multi-year terms to avoid the likely rise. However, be way of any firm wanting to help to you finance a conversion in exchange for locking-in for five years -- you could lose your conversion savings in the process.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

The cost effectiveness of conversion depends on several factors, including the cost to upgrade building systems internally and the external cost Con Ed may charge to bring in the gas line to your location. Upon receiving your info, my firm, Informa Energy, could easily do the price comparison based upon current rates. natural gas has been running at about half the price of oil for some time now, so there are definitely savings to be has in that respect.
The natural gas market hit a ten-year low in April 2012, but has been recovering ever since due to switchovers by large users from coal to gas as well as the unexpectedly hot summer creating increased demand for gas (which is used in generating electricity). However, the prices are still quite favorable and many of our customers have been opting to lock-in for multi-year terms to avoid rising rates. However, be wary of any firm offering to finance your conversion in exchange for locking-in for five years or more, as the markets simply aren't predictable over such a long period. You could lose the savings you'd otherwise enjoy. If Con Ed can't bring gas in anytime soon and you can't afford the conversion costs, it may make sense to burn 2 oil and wait.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation
Denial of Sale as Retaliation - M.C. Jul 21, 2012

We are a 120-unit coop, with a community that represents a mix of affordable housing and market rate.

Recently we were faced with the decision of whether to take a line of credit to repair ongoing (ten years) developer construction defects, as well as local law 11 façade work. Some on the Board wanted to appeal to local politicians to put pressure on the developer without the co-op acquiring financing to address the defects. This would still leave our responsibility to perform the local law 11 repairs. Also, our reserves are low, and it was argued that some of the loan would be used to replenish them.

Long story short, we took the issue to the shareholders. We held two financial meetings to explain the details up front and had ample time to discuss the pros and cons of both approaches. This was followed by a shareholder vote on the issue.

The majority of the shareholders, on both a unit and share basis, voted to go with a line of credit, as did the majority of the Board.This decision brought out unforeseen hostilities from the opposing members.

At a recent meeting, when we discussed the possible sale of a unit, one Board member stated, “I vote no. He voted for the line of credit,let him stay and pay for it”.

To complicate matters, our Board president, who voted for the line of credit, has her unit listed for sale. While this in itself is not an issue (two past members, including a Board officer, held their Board seats while their units were listed), an opposing member chose to make it one,stating in an email:

" I think we should all make sure that you stay here and contribute your share of the debt. Since you wanted it, you should want to be part of it."

It is customary to accept a Board decision, even if you disagree with the outcome. In this case, it seems that some members are poised to retaliate. The majority of the Board believes that this opens the apartment corporation up to liability issues, and that the two Board members are in violation of their fiduciary duty. My question is, how should we proceed to address this? Does anyone else have any experience with issues like this one, and any advice? Thank you.

> Join the conversation Comments (7)

Michael, this is a lovely email, but it's 128 units and if the person has an accepted offer and contracts are out on the apartment, which is most probably a ploy, why would she vote to put all shareholders in extreme debt. Why would this board member vote for such a huge debt and then leave? What does that tell anyone?

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

It would have been a good idea to have a series of meetings over a few month period before deciding on a line of credit for a financially strapped corporation. Was there enough representation at the meetings? Were all issues addressed? Did the shareholder's have adequate information and an adequate timeframe in which to answer? A sale can be turned down for no reason at all so where is the violation of any fiduciary duty?

You mention that the majority of the board believes that the corporation is open up to liability issues. Was this said at a board meeting or a shareholder meeting? If it was a board meeting, then how and why would anyone know? Bantering at board meetings are commonplace. If the majority of the board leak this, it is they who are in violation. Board members should be allowed to express opinions without fear of others leaking this to shareholders.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

You state that two past members held their seats, did these past members also inflict a huge debt on shareholders and then decide to leave? That's a question.

Morally, one who creates a huge debt especially on affordable housing, which seems to be most of the building, that's generally the case on mixed housing, (they generally have restricted income floors), should morally not create such debt or recuse oneself if one will not be there to assume such debt. On the affordability, during economic times this should be carefully looked into. If votes were taken were they the ones on the floors with the most shares? That would be unfair. That will always counteract the votes on the restricted floors with less shares.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

To M.C.

How much is the LOC? We can better answer if we had this information.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

I am not a lawyer, but from the nature of the issues and questions being raised, it sounds to me as if you need to speak with an attorney about all of this, to know where you stand and what your options are. One obstinate board member cannot block a sale (unless your bylaws require a unanimous vote), and Co-op boards are protected to an extent by the business judgment rule.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

Though I'm not a lawyer, it's a fundamental principle of co-ops that shareholders have to be treated equally. A board absolutely cannot condition its approval of a sale on how a shareholder voted on a particular issue. I can't imagine such a decision would pass muster under the Business Judgment Rule, since it's a classic example of a bad-faith decision.

And what's this weirdness about sticking around to pay the debt? A shareholder has no such obligation, moral or otherwise. If the debt is large, then the value of the apartment will be reduced. The shareholder doesn't get off scot-free and the debt doesn't disappear. It's effectively figured into the sales price.

For future reference, please keep in mind that you were under no obligation to put this to a shareholder vote. The board has the power to arrange financing, so long as they don't breach their fiduciary duty. Transparency is great in general -- and you should certainly be 100% up-front with your shareholders -- but I'm wondering if this would have been less divisive if the board had presented the line of credit as a fait accompli.

Bottom line: consult your attorney right away.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

A sale can be turned down for cause or no cause. Is this a line of credit or another mortgage. What type of building is it? Some say there are restricted income floors, does this building have anything to do with the City? Was it built under a program of sorts? If so, there is more to it than meets the eye. Was there funding involved, credits and such? It might not be a straight forward co-op. I don't know about the value of an apartment being reduced? There are many issues to this large debt.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation Comments (1)

The anonymous poster wrote, "A sale can be turned down for cause or no cause." You have to be EXTREMELY careful with that statement. There are reasons for which a sale can NOT be turned down. Not only would it be illegal to reject a sale for these reasons, but the board members could be held personally liable and subject to damages. On top of that, New York law prohibits the co-op's Directors and Officers insurance from covering punitive damages in these cases.

The best-known example, of course, is discrimination based on any of the 14 protected classes, including race, age, and whether or not a person has children. Refer to the well-known case of Broome v. Biondi, in which board president Biondi was hit with six-figure punitive damages and had to sell his apartment to pay for them.

Most cases along these lines involve claims of illegal discrimination against the prospective purchaser. But a shareholder has additional grounds for a lawsuit based on NY Business Corporation Law (BCL) -- especially Sec. 501(c), which requires that "each share shall be equal to every other share of the same class." So if you treat shares that were voted in favor of the line of credit as unsellable, you're in egregious violation of this law.

It's not going to help you to claim that the purchase application was rejected for no reason, or a made-up reason that doesn't hold water. If the court finds that your real reason was a different and illegal one, then the board has acted in bad faith and is not protected by the Business Judgment Rule. Just ask Mr. Biondi.

To reiterate: CONSULT YOUR ATTORNEY. You're going down a very dangerous path.

Thank you for rating!

You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!

Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Register

Forgot your password? Click here

> Join the conversation

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Log in below or register here.

Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Login below or register here.
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.

Ask the Experts

learn more

Learn all the basics of NYC co-op and condo management, with straight talk from heavy hitters in the field of co-op or condo apartments

Professionals in some of the key fields of co-op and condo board governance and building management answer common questions in their areas of expertise

Source Guide

see the guide

Looking for a vendor?