It is a great percentage, but what will the rate be when you need to refinance again in 10 years? Also, do you want to incur new closing costs every 10 years?

If you are considering a refi, I would strongly suggest a regular 30 year self-amortizing mortgage. The rate may be higher now, but you won't be playing rate roulette every decade. Unfortunately the time for qualifying for 30 year mortgages may be running out because the proprietary leases for most co-ops formed in the early 1980's expire in the 2050's. Banks may not be willing to risk lending if the underlying source of repayment funds (the PL) expires before the mortgage is paid off.

Check with your accountant or managing agent if they have any expertise in this regard and can advise you.

If it is a large enough savings it may well be worth the prepayment penalty.. What the rates are in ten years is irrelevant since this is amortizaion and not interest only. Can someone knowledgable reply?

Sorry - to clarify - flip taxes were instituted to capture money from the rapid flipping that often took place just after buildings converted to cooperatives due to people selling who bought at 'insider' prices. Our building missed that wave. The sponsor currently owns aprox 1/3 of the apartments and will not be paying any tax yet will benefit form regular shareholders who get drained by this fee. I understand it is highly unusual for an older coop (30 years in our case) - to institute a flip tax when we already missed rapid turn-over, have 1/3 of apt who do not have to pay and can also anticipate very few sales in the near future. The excuse is that a tax is commonplace however I think this is partially a myth if you really examine finances and I do see many apartment listings advertising NO tax as a selling point.

I disagree with the analysis. Once the initial offering plan and flips go thru, a flip tax which should be exclusively written to go directly into the reserves, can be a significant income stream especially to coops with no commercial or retail income. A small building in a high price zone can see significant returns. It should be a two stage process in that owners of less than 3-5 years should have to pay 3% to prevent flippers, and longer term shareholders 1% or 1.5%.
It's a payback from the seller to the Coop for all the years of benefit from owning there, in a well run coop with a nice appreciation in realized asset valuation I.e. profits to them. Since they are leaving, the tax is on them not the purchaser, and therefore of little concern to the purchaser, just like the sellers Agent's fee.
Doing a % based on the gross sale price keeps it nice and legal vs. Dollars and shares, which is a problem.
It's a win-win all around for remaining shareholders and new shareholders alike.
After years of highly questionable to downright ridiculous applicants, as a Board President I was disabused of any feelings of owing the seller anything. And really surprised when past Board members sponsored purchasers who would pay a high asking price because they were totally unqualified to own.
Remember the purchase price is what the seller walks away with. What you have to ascertain is after paying that price, can the prospect show financial holding and stability, income and projections to meet future demands of maintenance and possible unknown assessments.
We don't know: future oil/fuel costs, RE taxes, water or insurance costs.
Surprise, surprise - OPEC, 9/11, Hurricane Sandy, global warming impact on water, utilities, temp, oh yeah and Local Law 11 - what's that new crack in the facade all about?
We can't predict the future, so we need to make reasonably sure we are financially healthy. Reserves and shareholder capability. Flip taxes are a reasonable and legitimate small revenue stream that should never be used in calculating operation budget projections. They are a serendipitous addition to your reserves.

I disagree with the analysis. Once the initial offering plan and flips go thru, a flip tax which should be exclusively written to go directly into the reserves, can be a significant income stream especially to coops with no commercial or retail income. A small building in a high price zone can see significant returns. It should be a two stage process in that owners of less than 3-5 years should have to pay 3% to prevent flippers, and longer term shareholders 1% or 1.5%.
It's a payback from the seller to the Coop for all the years of benefit from owning there, in a well run coop with a nice appreciation in realized asset valuation I.e. profits to them. Since they are leaving, the tax is on them not the purchaser, and therefore of little concern to the purchaser, just like the sellers Agent's fee.
Doing a % based on the gross sale price keeps it nice and legal vs. Dollars and shares, which is a problem.
It's a win-win all around for remaining shareholders and new shareholders alike.
After years of highly questionable to downright ridiculous applicants, as a Board President I was disabused of any feelings of owing the seller anything. And really surprised when past Board members sponsored purchasers who would pay a high asking price because they were totally unqualified to own.
Remember the purchase price is what the seller walks away with. What you have to ascertain is after paying that price, can the prospect show financial holding and stability, income and projections to meet future demands of maintenance and possible unknown assessments.
We don't know: future oil/fuel costs, RE taxes, water or insurance costs.
Surprise, surprise - OPEC, 9/11, Hurricane Sandy, global warming impact on water, utilities, temp, oh yeah and Local Law 11 - what's that new crack in the facade all about?
We can't predict the future, so we need to make reasonably sure we are financially healthy. Reserves and shareholder capability. Flip taxes are a reasonable and legitimate small revenue stream that should never be used in calculating operation budget projections. They are a serendipitous addition to your reserves.

I disagree with the analysis. Once the initial offering plan and flips go thru, a flip tax which should be exclusively written to go directly into the reserves, can be a significant income stream especially to coops with no commercial or retail income. A small building in a high price zone can see significant returns. It should be a two stage process in that owners of less than 3-5 years should have to pay 3% to prevent flippers, and longer term shareholders 1% or 1.5%.
It's a payback from the seller to the Coop for all the years of benefit from owning there, in a well run coop with a nice appreciation in realized asset valuation I.e. profits to them. Since they are leaving, the tax is on them not the purchaser, and therefore of little concern to the purchaser, just like the sellers Agent's fee.
Doing a % based on the gross sale price keeps it nice and legal vs. Dollars and shares, which is a problem.
It's a win-win all around for remaining shareholders and new shareholders alike.
After years of highly questionable to downright ridiculous applicants, as a Board President I was disabused of any feelings of owing the seller anything. And really surprised when past Board members sponsored purchasers who would pay a high asking price because they were totally unqualified to own.
Remember the purchase price is what the seller walks away with. What you have to ascertain is after paying that price, can the prospect show financial holding and stability, income and projections to meet future demands of maintenance and possible unknown assessments.
We don't know: future oil/fuel costs, RE taxes, water or insurance costs.
Surprise, surprise - OPEC, 9/11, Hurricane Sandy, global warming impact on water, utilities, temp, oh yeah and Local Law 11 - what's that new crack in the facade all about?
We can't predict the future, so we need to make reasonably sure we are financially healthy. Reserves and shareholder capability. Flip taxes are a reasonable and legitimate small revenue stream that should never be used in calculating operation budget projections. They are a serendipitous addition to your reserves.

$280 is way too low to charge in maint. Obviously your reserve account is near zero and your have some big bills or repairs coming up. A 7 unit building has great difficulty borrowing and most likely does not have full audited financials or even a outside managing company.

You elected board to represent you. I guess they feel the need to do this. Also you should have brand new financials. Financials and tax returns for 2014 should have been due in April. They normally get mailed out or sent to owners by late May.

A lawyer is useless at this junction. I would say you need to look at the financials first and talk to the Accountant for building if you have one. Also does building have a lawyer on retainer?

Honestly, I am on a board. And as soon as an unit owner starts talking they are hiring an attorney to sue me I no longer talk or communicate with them.

at that maint of $23,800 for an entire building how is that even possible. Casualty Insurance on a small building, liability insurance, D&0 insurance, paying the CPA to do financials and mgt fee/legal fees would be 100% eaten up on a $23,800 budget with no money left for maint, repairs, heat/electricity water common areas and snow removal let alone reserving for a new roof etc.

Otherwise I cannot make sense of your posting. What sum are they trying to collect?

It's a self managed 5 years young building. We do have separate "repair fund" which we contribute to as well. $280 covers water, electricity, insurance and cleaning/snow removal. Other expenses come covered from "repair fund". The maintenance was increased to prevent me from selling the unit. I would love to know myself what sum are they trying to collect. I am eager to pay them instead of attorney. But When I asked what sum are they looking to collect the only thing I was told that the number is "catastrophic". I don't want to sue the board, but they keep me as a hostage here. Needless to say that all other unit owners are Russian family members and friends and at the meetings a lot of time they speak Russian and I have no clue what are they talking about. Any ideas on how to communicate with the board to make them release financial statements, reports and budget, tax return....and justify the increase???

why do you need to sell the unit and who are you selling unit to?

I am treasurer of a condo in NY. I dont give owners stuff like reports, budgets and tax returns. What I do give them which is required by law our the annual financials. Usually due around a month after tax return is filed. It compares current year to prior year. If you have that plus the prior two years financials it gives a buyer a four year financial history. Pretty much you can see if you are spending more every year then your are taking in for maint and if folks owe arrears.

NYS does not require a reserve study. But is this a new building. Or was it an existing building? What could happen to a building in such a short time.

Who is the accountant? I mean even small building do a compiled financials even if not audited. I mailed my financials for 2014 to my condo last week. Also who is treasurer?

BTW small condo buildings rarely do a budget.

I accepted a new position within my company in headquarters in Dallas, TX. It's a permanent job and I have moved my family there already. Nothing is holding me back in NY. Buyer is a very intelligent family with Russian background. In by-laws it says that the board "doesn't have the right of first refusal".
As much as I appreciate your input in my question I get a feeling that you agree with my "board" and their actions. How is it fair to me to be told to pay $2000 a month without a single explanation. I offered to pay my share in one installment. I offered $10k, $15k, $20K but they don't let me pay. They want the maintainance to be $2000 ( how did they come up with this exact number is a mystery) and prevent me from closing on my unit. No buyer would want to buy a small condo with no amenities and $2000 maintenance. And the building was a brand new brick construction. Built in 2010, received c/o in 2011.

The treasurer is a guy who filed 3 lawsuits in a small claims court against the board ( for about $12 total) for some defective repaires that he performed on his unit). At the time of the hearing "The President" who is a friend of course had no objections and agreed to pay him requested amount. what do you think now about my board?

Your postings contain incomplete information and/ or uninformed info.. If people could post full correct facts on this site , it would help elicit short, correct replies and advice.

Your postings do not make sense. There is something you are not telling us.
Have you paid all your bills and taxes in full?

This is a very interesting question! If you haven't already been on their website, the Real Estate Finance Bureau might be a good place to start. http://www.ag.ny.gov/bureau/real-estate-finance-bureau. It's part of the A/G's office.

Good luck!
--- Steve

Unfortunately, it sounds like your only real option is to hire your own attorney. If you to fight this alone you'll get squashed. The Co-op corporation has certain obligations and you have certain obligations. An attorney is the only real way you have any chance of fairness.

Good luck!
--- Steve

OK firstly, you don't yet need an attorney. 311 is your route. Send a certified letter to the board pres telling him you are giving the lessor ten days until you call 311 to tell them to the condition persists and that the condition is in violation of the lease and the warrant of habitability and you will also file for a rent reduction in housing court and enclose photos of the condition. Do this now. A lawyer will anyhow basically take this route. YOu may need one down the line because coop boards can be really awful and very arrogant and misuse their positions.

DM and Steve, you guys rock ! Thanks very much for your help. I took the advice about the PL described by Steve above, and the board prez did agree to at least put a sheet rock there to cover up the hole in my ceiling. I've agreed to repaint the bathroom so it will pass the city inspection (and yes DM, I didn't use a lawyer; I just called 311). Thank you both to help me through this very stressful situation.

You're welcome! :-)

I agree with Steve: Hire a lawyer, send the co-operative board a legal letter and make it clear, that the co-operative will be responsible for all legal costs pertaining to the situation. Sounds like an infrastructure issue - which should be their problem, not yours and therefore their responsibility to fix, not yours.

Have you reported to ins. co?

I didn't buy insurance for my co-op. But the building does have insurance. How do I find out which insurance company the building uses ? Co-op prez wouldn't give me that info.

1) Get insurance for yourself. It is irresponsible not to do this.
2) Don't call in claims that are small (they can increase your rates) or otherwise coop responsibility.
3) The coop's ins. has no bearing in your case unless your ceiling caved in.

Hi,

While I understand your frustration, you are not thinking like an owner but a renter. You own a part of that co-op and yet you reported it to a city agency? I can see why the President is mad. I would be too.

Here is what I would do:
• Apologize for reporting the situation to the City.
• Ask the Managing Agent to investigate whether the leak is coming from inside the walls (the Co-op’s responsibility) or from a fixture or a tile grout issue (likely the owner’s responsibility).
• If inside the wall, then ask the Co-op to fix it. Give them a reasonable amount of time and ask a Lawyer to assist if no action is taken.
• Is from a fixture or tile grout issue, then ask your upstairs neighbor to fix it. Give them a reasonable amount of time and ask a Lawyer to assist if no action is taken.
• Alert your insurance company that a potential claim is pending and ask what they think you need to do to protect your and your insurance company’s rights.

I believe that this course of action would do much to restore your reputation within the co-op and accomplish what you seek – a completed repair.

Good luck!

I mostly agree with Steve BUT, keep in mind coop owners ARE essentially renters - they have a lease.
if the source of the leak is coop responsibility and you reported it (in writing) to the mng agent and Super and they denied / neglected to repair, then you should NOT apologize for calling the city. This depends on the situation. If it was 100% a case of neglect on the part of the cooperative then, in fact, you had no recourse but to call the city.
If it from faulty grout from the neighbors above - were they notified it was leaking? If not, why not? Did you contact them - did the mng agent/Super contact them? Again, if you properly notified the coop and they did not take action with the neighbor upstairs, they are negligent. If the neighbor was notified, he/she is negligent. (In my building the coop grouts small areas if brought to their attention as soon as there are signs of a leak but in many bldg this is apt owners prevue.)
Why are you defaulting on your lease? Did you deny access for repairs - if so then that is your fault. You must allow access.
We do not have all the information.

Precisely what was the source of the leak -was it from internal pipes or toilet bend above?
If it was from internal piping then the coop is responsible and they are behaving terribly.
1) You must allow access to repair it if it has a voilation within the city's time frame. 2) Before you do this , given that the source of the leak is coop responsibility, write them a letter stating all work is coop responsibility , cite the relevant paragraph in the lease plus prior instances in the building here the coop has paid for similar repairs and state you are not liable/responsible for any repair costs and will pursue your rights concerning this if they persist. Mail this certified to both the board president and the managing agent. Do this now.
Then, if they place charges on your bill, pay it but write 'under protest' on the check, let then know you are protesting it via certified mail, that they immediately need to remove the charges and then take them to small claims court if they do not. You will prevail in small claims or the coop will settle as they have no basis to fight (given the repair is their prevue) . The cost is $20-25.

Oh and I never ever refused access. On the contrary, they never bothered to show up and inspect the damage. And how do I find 'prior instances in the building here the coop has paid for similar repairs' ? The super and the managing agent have all the records, and he refuses to show them to me

Check your proprietary lease. Most PL's delineate which repairs are the responsibility of the Co-op and which are the responsibility of the shareholder.

After I read what Steve and DM wrote I thought I might have been too hasty in recommending you contact an attorney. But reading the additional posts I'm feeling more and more that needing an attorney will be inevitable. You also have to remember that besides the physical damage the water is doing, you have a real potential for mold which is a health hazard. This should not drag on for too much longer.

Initially the board prez doesn't have to know you've talked to an attorney. The attorney can advise you about what steps to take to get the problem fixed before having to go to court. Just as important the attorney can advise you what not to do that could weaken your position.

A couple quick questions. How many units are there in your co-op? How many other board members and have you approached any of them about this problem? They may not be aware of your situation and my be sympathetic.

Thanks guys. These ideas are very helpful. In my co-op, the president is also the managing agent. I suppose this is not unusual in NYC, but it just seemed that he is in a position of absolute power. I have reported the leak over a month ago in writing, and he ignored all my requests for a repair. So finally I had enough and reported to the city. And now he turned around and made it into my problem. Adding insult to the injury, he said that I'm in default of my lease because I failed to repair the water damage. I mean, come on ! The leak is still happening. Every time the guy upstairs take a shower, I start to hear dripping from the ceiling and stuff falls off from my ceiling piece by piece. It's really become an inhabitability issue. I'm thinking about filing a HP pertition the HPD Housing court. Did anyone every try this route ? Did it ever work in terms of forcing the co-op to comply ? It just seems that there are no oversight to any of these co-op boards, and the president/managing agent think that they are untouchable.

Have you allowed access for repair? Has the coop requested access?
If there is a 311 hazard violation, then the landlord is required to repair the condition. Let the coop have access but protest your obligation to pay via a certified letter. Then go to housing court for a rent abatement. (But make sure to pay your rent or they will have a legit default case.)

Maybe it is the responsibility of the upstairs neighbor - or is it internal pipes?
You have not specified this. If it is from plumbing above (in the neighbors apt) then the upstairs neighbor has to repair it. Is it pipes under his floor? Is it his shower body in the wall or outside the wall? What is it?

No, the leak was from the pipes between my unit and the unit upstairs. The super did fix the water leak (although I don't think it's fully fixed) to appease HPD, he refused to fix the damage in my apartment. To me, they are splitting hairs: how could u admit to the responsibility of leaky pipe, but refuse to clean up their mess ?

Also, I found a good Q&A on this website that talked about co-op's responsibility to ensure the habitability of the apartment:

http://www.habitatmag.com/Publication-Content/Habitat-s-Purchasing-Primer-News-for-New-Buyers/Your-Right-to-a-Habitable-Co-op-Apartment#.VU_x-vlVhBc

Looks like I have no choice but to go to court. There is no use arguing with a corrupt co-op prez. BTW, if the co-op prez and the managing company are one the same, isn't that an obvious conflict of interest ?

Hi Queens,

There are a lot of issues in play with your original question and subsequent discussion, but I'm going talk about just one aspect - board vs. shareholder responsibility for repairs.

As you stated, it *seems* logical that if the cause of the leak was in a common area (the pipe between your apartment and the one above you), that the board, who has responsibility for common areas, should be responsible for repairing your apartment. The answer is, they are, but only up to a point. If you have a standard Proprietary Lease from the early 1980's it will contain a paragraph titled "Repairs by the Lessee". We have such a PL, and that paragraph (#18) states, in part,

"Subject to the provisions of Paragraph 4 hereof, the Lessee shall keep the interior of the apartment (including interior walls, floors and ceilings, but excluding windows, window panes, window frames, sashes, sills, entrance and terrace doors, frames and saddles) in good repair..."

The way our building interprets this is that the co-op is responsible for the envelope of each apartment; the four walls, floor, and ceiling that encompass the apartment. In the event of damage caused by a common element of the building (in your case, a leaky pipe), the co-op is responsible for fixing the problem, obviously. The co-op is also responsible for repairing the envelope, which includes replacing the sheetrock, spackling, and skim-coating the repair. Anything further inside the apartment on the walls, floor, or ceiling (wallpaper, fixtures, parquet floor, etc) are the responsibility of the shareholder. We require shareholders to have casualty insurance so that expensive interior elements are covered.

It sounds like the discrepancy between you and the board president lies in the level of repair done to your ceiling. If you still have a hole in your ceiling, then from my perspective the board still has work to do. But if you have a bare sheetrock patch on your ceiling, then you have to call in the painters on your dime. At this point you have to consider if it is worth the time, cost, and aggravation to pursue any other remedies.

Read your Proprietary Lease to see what it says. Consult with an attorney if you need help in deciding how the terms in the PL relate to your specific situation. I hope if you show you are willing to meet the board half-way, they will also be willing to meet you.

Good luck!
--- Steve

Sounds like your bldg is self-managed if the board pres is the "mng agent." He should not be receiving compensation in any form if this is the case. But that is another issue.
Do this:
1) Write a certified letter to him NOW (address it to the corporation's full legal name) saying you demand restoration of the damaged area to it's original condition - skim coat and prime paint coat or as per precedent in the building (no wallpaper etc - the coop just has to restore it to basic condition), and that you otherwise deny any default of the lease - however the condition remains hazardous and in violation of the Warrant of Habitability. Just do this. FYI the city will demand it be restored, no holes or crumbling anything, to pass inspection.
Then get your own insurance. There is no excuse not to except that you are begin cheap. What if you flood your tub and trash the neighbors below?

You can't vote to remove someone! You vote that person off the board by replacing him/her with someone else ... and that cannot be a "separate" vote.

The sole purpose of the annual meeting is to elect a board. There can be only one election.

It is completely illegal to disallow proxies/absentee ballots. It's a fundamental shareholder right.

By the looks of it, that director seems to have quite a bit of support from proxies, which explains the "separate vote without absentee ballots".

ps: Many bylaws allow the shareholders to call for a new election, before the annual meeting, via a petition signed by at least 10% of the shares.

Hi V.P.
Are you saying that only the members (10%) through a petition can request to have a board member removed? That this cannot be suggested by the other board members and then put to a vote at the annual meeting?

I find it hard to believe that you require only 10% for a petition; if you had 100 owners, that's only 10 signatures; petitions would be rampant. It should be the same as voting (whatever that may be for your environment; ours is 40% of the owners).

They cannot remove absentee votes from the count unless that is one of their written by-laws or rules and regulations and for example "off-premise owners that do not attend in person or provide a proxy will be removed from the owner base" - or something like that.

There should be a Rule & Regulation that identifies when and how a board member can be removed including fellow board members asking them to resign and for example, a conflict of interest.

Suggest you get a copy of your Rules & Regulations/ By-Laws and scour through them. Don't only look at what's there - also look at what's not there.

No NYC

That is 10% of the total shares issued ... check your governing documents, there is usually a paragraph about this process. And that petition is to call for a new election, again you can't remove someone, you replace that person.

VP & Ned,
Thanks for the info

I agree completely with VP. There can be only one election and that is to fill seats which are becoming vacant due to term expiration. It sounds to me like the entire board needs to be replaced if they are contemplating actions which are in violation of your operating documents and probably in violation NYC corporation laws and regulations.

I feel you definitely need to treat the owner as an independent contractor. Same license, permits, and insurance requirements as with any outside contractor. There is an extra level of complexity - if there are problems during or after the job, holding a shareholder and your neighbor accountable will be more difficult.

You should discuss this with the co-op's attorney to get her/his opinion on the arrangement.

I agree with Steven. I would thank the owner "for their gracious offer, but due to potential liability issues and for example, if he or someone else gets hurt in the process, or something gets damaged or something is wrong with the work, it cannot be permitted. It's to protect him as well as the ownership". I would go onto say that "if the ownership deems this work as required, in the future, and we solicit quotes, we would certainly include you in that process".

Steve, Ned,

Thank you for the feedback. Much appreciated.

DC