I have an interesting question for you: is it possible to ban certain real estate agents from representing shareholders in your complex?
Here is our dilemma (I am leaving out details so that the identity of the people can not be traced). A shareholder had to move back home and entrusted their sale to a real estate agent. This agent is a friend and is not a local agent (located approximately 145 blocks away).
The unit sat on the market and unsold for almost a year. While the 'friend' made some effort, it is hard for them to hold frequent open houses. Their office doesn’t exactly have a list of prospective home buyers in our area – they have to convince them to come to the area. This unit is a two bedroom unit.
While I am very aware of the real estate slowdown, we have had some record high sales in our complex this year for similar units (from $317k to $359k) and our one bedroom units are consistently valued $30k over nearby ones (from appraisals). What the two bedrooms units are valued at over street is not known however with the record high prices, I can assume a similar spread.
So after it has been on the market for some time, the price gets lowered to $249k. Another real estate agent has a couple interested in a one bedroom unit and the couple decides to make an offer of $265k on this two bedroom unit instead (I can't fault them) and the offer is accepted.
The trouble is that even the higher $265k price (compared to the $249k price) is lower then what some one bedroom units have recently sold – let alone two bedroom units.
Why does the Board care? Well the Co-op owns two units in the same line which are being renovated for sale (former rental units - treasury stock sales). The funds are being used for capital improvements to the benefit of all shareholders. Such a low price on a unit in the same line could directly impact the price all of the shareholders can receive for the two common owned units – up to 60k each unit (condition adjusted).
If the Board fails to approve the sale, the unit is likely to go distressed and then auction – which means an even lower price.
So our current complaint is with the very poor representation the shareholder received from the real estate (friend) who: didn't know the area and out value in it; was not close enough to give the unit a fair showing; who didn’t already have a population of people interested in the area to take apartment looking and then tried to fire sale the units in the end.
Sadly, the shareholder chooses to ignore the Board's suggestions and complaints and chooses to accept the advice of the 'friend'. This is some friend by the way – accepting their advice cost them say $40-50k, adjusted for condition. This reminds me of a Solomon proverb about pride, but I digress.
So, can we ban the real estate agent from representing other shareholders in the complex for the future?
Does anyone know if Verizon has paid an Association with condos or coops under 25 units for FIOS set-up? Verizon refuses to pay us the amount they pay for 25+ condo/coops because "that is not their policy." They want access without giving us a cent. This seems quite discriminatory since our unit owners will pay the same monthly fee as anyone else. Thanks. JES
The sponsor still owns a minority share of apts in our non-eviction conversion co-op. He has been ordered by the HPD to make repairs/renovations to the kitchen and bath in some of his units that fall under rent-stabilization rules. Is he obligated to hire licensed, insured workers to perform this work just as shareholder's are? I ask because he tries to do things a cheaply as possible and his tenants are demanding to see licenses and permits. He tells them he doesn't have to show them anything.
Also, leaks from pipes in walls and water penetration through the brickface are causing paint peeling and plaster cracking in his units. Does that mean he has to pay to abate the leaks or the corporation?
Thanks for your input.
My co-op charges members different fees to access our gym. The fees are based upon the member's age, source of income, and employment status. Some members must pay three times what other members pay for the same level of access to the gym. Is this legal?
We replaced old wooden windows with new aluminumn ones and some of them were not framed right and there are drafts and water penetration. SHs are complaining and the board has offered to put plastic over the inside of the windows. Is this a legal remedy for the problem? The work is three years old so we can't call the contractors back on it, can we?
Lets face it folks that a great percentage of people that are on a board are there for their own selfish reason. Why else would they give up their precious time. (Of course you have the minority that want to serve to protect their investment, blah, blah)How do I know, been there many times over. It usually involves the people with the most power (president) who are corrupt and the rest are too weak or afraid to stand up. Many times the management company is aware, but would prefer to stay quiet as they receive their annual fee.
Then we ask ourselves years later how could this have happened. It happened because you knew about it, complained, but did nothing constructive to rid your building of these rodents.
So as we welcome 2011, ask yourself do you want to spend your time being miserable or make a stand and unite?. Get the message out, put your name on the ballot and make that change. Of course you can always continue to complain on this site how life is unfair.....
Frank
The Habitat article about the Ombudsman Bill is here: http://bit.ly/gAugzt
It's a good piece, but the stated arguments against the bill are illogical. The need is real, & the bill makes sense.
I don’t know Warren Schrieber, & make no assumptions about how well he runs his co-op…but he’s a “poster child” for this legislation.
The Ombudsman’s office would allow co-op shareholders (or condo owners) to call for monitors if they felt it necessary to ensure a fair & effective election. This provision could not be used by a disgruntled owner to create a nuisance, due to the minimum threshold of 15%; this ensures that monitors are brought in only if there’s widespread concern.
Yet, Schreiber disdains the use of monitors; his solution is for unhappy shareholders to simply “vote out the board or run for the board themselves." Right. If your problem is undemocratic elections, or if your building doesn’t bother to hold elections at all, you just need to get yourself elected so you can fix things.
Think about this classic chicken-&-egg problem: you need fair elections to get a seat on the board, & you need to be on the board in order to ensure that fair elections are held. Exactly how, absent outside influence, will you ever bring about constructive change? The answer is, you won’t.
Dianne Stromfeld spent money, time & energy pursuing election records. By the time the courts gave her access to the info she needed, it was time for another election anyway. The only winners of this game are the lawyers. It shouldn’t be this costly…or this hard.
Schreiber’s attorney, Geoffrey Mazel, is speaking from the same fantasy world when he says all you need to do to resolve disputes is “contact your board or your managing agent and ask to be heard." Of course, there are many boards, & many agents, that respond to owner/shareholder concerns in a timely & equitable fashion. (It should be noted that such boards & agents will barely notice that the ombudsman office exists.)
But when the board stonewalls, & the agent doesn’t respond to your calls, emails & certified letters, what are your options as an owner? You can’t use mediation, because it’s voluntary—& boards nearly always decline to participate (remember that you & your neighbors are paying their legal costs, & ratcheting up costs for individual owners is a common board tactic). Too often, the choice is between hiring an attorney to bring an action…& finding a new place to live.
There’s a better way. Having an ombudsman will level the playing field for apartment owners statewide.
I’m a past board president. I’ve discussed this legislation with many, many co-op & condo owners, & also with current & past board members. The board members have been split, with some strongly in favor, some strongly opposed, & most tentative—they think it could be a good thing, but they’re (understandably) a bit nervous.
I have yet to encounter an individual owner or shareholder who doesn’t favor the ombudsman bill.
Our coop board plans to overhaul our 2 elevators - including replacement of each cab.
It is a 6-story building with 120 units and 2 wings. A separate elevator serves each wing. Our management company feels this is not a highly complex project, and that an elevator consultant is not needed for specs/bids/coordination. We would like to get the advice of other coop boards.
Thanks.
I wonder if there might be some board or panel that issues advisory opinions about the ethics of board members' action. Lawyers, for example, can submit a question to a panel and ask whether they would be violating the professional code of conduct if they acted in a particular manner. In this way, a lawyer can protect himself from disciplinary action later. Is there an equivalent panel or something for condo board members?
The reason I ask is my board wants to know if it is okay for a board member to resign in order to become the attorney representing the board. We understand a board member cannot hold a board seat and simultaneously be on retainer provided some services to the board. But is there a "revolving-door"-type prohibition (i.e., would it breach the ethics applicable to board members) for a board member to resign and then submit a proposal to the board (with the replacement board member) to be retained as counsel for the board?
I need some advice, please.
I have been board president of a 90 unit coop in midtown Manhattan for the past 8 years, and I think I am burning out.
The board consists of 5 people. However, as in many organizations, the brunt of the work, including a significant amount of treasurer related functions, as well as the oversight of management functions, falls on one - me.
Our management company is OK, but not wonderful. We seem to have to stay on top of them, which I have come to understand is quite common for buildings of our size. They are certainly not proactive, but rather reactive.
Our staff is OK, but not great, and we have a decent super.
Our board works well together, and the shareholders seems to appreciate the work we do. We are all not professional people, but hold a variety of different paying jobs.
There are no major issues in the building, but many possibly looming on the horizon as the building ages - built in 1955 - and it feels like we may be one crisis away from chaos, which I also am sure many buildings feel.
The building is my home, and I am raising 3 children in it. I do not want to give up, and want to make a difference, but feel like I am burning out.
Has anyone had a similar experience?
Can you advise what you have done?
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.
I'm a licensed Real Estate Salesperson in NYS. I've never heard of any building being allowed to ban a particular agent. If there is a legitimate complaint you can report the conduct of the agent to the Department of State, but from what you describe it does not sound like you have a legitimate complaint.
You mention that the unit that was up for sale was "similar" to 2 that sold this year in the mid $300s. Then you mention at the very end, "accepting their advice cost them say $40-50k, adjusted for condition."
This tells me that condition of that unit may not be on par with the 2 units that sold earlier and therefore cannot be considered "similar" by real estate standards. Did the other 2 units have upgraded kitchens, baths and perhaps some other capital improvements that this unit lacked? I would check that out before being to quick to blame the agent.
Another thing is that regardless of where a Real Estate agent practices, once they have access to multiple listing service (MLS) they can research the comps to see what has sold in your building and in your area to keep pricing in line with the market for your area.
Open houses are also advertised on MLS and all agents get access of dates and times of open houses, but if there were photos in the listing that showed it was clearly not up to par with the other units that sell in that area, then buyers will not be enticed to go there and the seller would have to consider lowering the price if they needed to sell. And even if the shareholder chose a different agent, if they have extenuating circumstances in this economy, such as a job loss, reduction in income, etc., they may be inclined to accept ANY offer they get, which again may not be in line with the comps and recent sales of your building, so there are many factors to consider here.
Unfortunately, there is not a great deal you can do because the shareholder has the right to select whichever Real Estate agent they choose. You can always discuss this with the co-op's attorney as you don't want to be hit with a lawsuit later that you impeded the Shareholder's sale in any way and make sure that even in your approach to the Shareholder, you are not saying anything that maybe construed as illegal or unethical and your attorney can guide you better in terms of your approach.
Thank you for rating!
You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!
Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.