Sorry, but all those are the responsibility of the coop to repair. If there is an assessment, the sponsor pays based on the number of shares assigned to the apartments he still owns

It's astounding that the co-op was NOT named. Plaintiff attys usually err on the safe aside; it would be wise to assume this will happen.

Even if you're not brought in, you're not off the hook: whether this goes to court or settles, the sponsor's carrier will likely pursue yours through subrogation.

Suggest you notify your carrier ASAP.

The water penetration is probably due to a lousy pointing job from a few years ago. The sponsor tries to tell tenant it's just he needs a paint job. Should we call in an engineer to determine what is causing it?

With an engineer's report, you'll confirm responsibility, know the scope of the problem & cost of the repair, & can make better decisions. Besides--your insurance carrier [& any court] will know you did the right thing.

it goes without saying that your board has a fiduciary responsibility to the entire co-op; if you do not take steps to ascertain whether your building envelope is no longer secure from water damage, you may be in for a world of hurt down the line, either from legal actions or from the repairs you'll have to make.

A board's first responsibility is to its shareholders -- and their investment depends largely on ability for resale. If your building isn't sound, both structurally and financially, future shareholders will look elsewhere. I always urge boards to do a complete survey of their building, top to bottom, if it has not already been done by previous boards; you need to find out where you are before you can determine where or how far you need to go.

Hiring an engineer to make a report seems a logical first step; and I have also found that a good super knows where problem areas are... so if yours is good, ask for input.

I as a shareholder had the same problems, I had to sue the building for the repairs. In your proprietary lease/bylaws states that anything in the walls such as pipes and all exterior facade damage such as pointing is the buildings responsibility. As for the sponsor, he is responsible for his tenants repairs as stated above, but the building must repair the sponsors tenants repairs and damages or the sponser can sue the co-op because the co-op owns over 50% of the building, therefore they are the landlord.

is the sponsor , still the sposor/. usuallu after the AG accapts the co-op plan, the sponsor after 5 years is no longer the sponsor, they may be the managing agemnt now. The original real estat company may still own 30 apartemnets, but they are considered unsold shares.They own the units and rent them to the prior renters in a non eviction plan, but i beleive ibn 5 years, they are no longer referred to as the sponsor.
the4 tenant with the problem in unsold shares wold contact their landlord, which may be the original owner of the building, the original sponsor. or it may be another owner of unsold shares. That owner would , or should inspect the damage and if it is the responsibly of the co-op. They are to notify the co-op. renters do not have proprietary leases. . If it was something the owner of the apartment is liable for, then they as landlord have to fix it.
it gets confusing , but it really helps to call the participants the correct title.
our building has been co-op over 25 years and there are people that have been here since before the conversion, bought, are shareholders, and have no idea what unsold shares are. They never read their proprietary lease and still wont, they take the oral lies from the managing company as gospel. They cant understand why the unsold shares do not need board approval to rent or to sell

sorry about the misspellings, but i cant fix them ,there is no editing after post

Thanks everyone for their input and insights on this problem. Great group here on Board Talk. One more question: can the judge hearing the HP case order an engineer's report to be submitted by the Co-op for the water penetration problems? The owner of the unsold shares won't want to pay for it:)

Not sure I understand why the sponsor would be responsible solely for such a report; the co-op owns the building, not the sponsor... and it is the owner's responsibility to secure the building against water damage.

Only exception might be if there's been negligence on the tenant's part... might be hard to prove.

not legal advice (not a lawyer) but from experience, I'd say this is true. The sponsor WILL have to pay for its share of the report, at least -- as all shareholders will.