I applaud you for pursuing this line of inquiry, & suggest you trust your own instincts more than your agent’s advice.

If the engineer does find a serious condition, are you going to be upset because it has to be mentioned in your financials? Or will you be gratified because you’re able to prevent a catastrophic failure...or at least enabled your building to plan & fund efficient repairs?

Remember:

1—The agent is hired help, & works for you. Board members are fiduciaries, & MUST do what’s right for the building. I’ve seen far too many board members blindly accept agent recommendations without asking basic, common-sense questions.

2—The agent says an engineering study “could cause ‘problems’ if anything significant is found.” Knowledge of significant issues never causes problems. Rather, that knowledge gives you choices, & allows you to plan effectively. It’s lack of knowledge that causes problems.

3—A real problem would be if, because you’ve followed the agent’s advice to make like an ostrich, you’re surprised when you have to announce a big assessment to deal with something that’s worn out. Or, much worse—if there’s a failure resulting in injury. In either of those instances, exactly how have you served the interests of your association?

4— An absence of needed repairs & capital improvements is not what makes a set of financials “clean.” Auditors will deem your statement “clean” if there are no fiscal irregularities or unexplained/suspicious items. A footnote on your financials can explain that the warranty on your roof has expired & the engineer says it has 3-5 years of useful life remaining; your audit will still be “clean.”

A recent law requires every owner in the state, when selling a 1-4 family home, to make detailed, affirmative statements to the buyer about its condition. A loophole allows sellers to “buy” their way out with a $500 credit to the buyer, but the intent of the law is clear. When you accept the role of fiduciary for a building comprising dozens, or hundreds, of families, is it really OK to perform to a lesser standard, saying “the Board has opted not to conduct a study; the Board chooses not to know"?

Pretend NY has no auto inspection law. If your dealer says “don’t inspect your car because you might find that something major needs replacing soon,” how would you react? If he says “you should especially avoid inspection because you might sell the car soon, & if you find something like a fractured hydraulic line that could cause brake failure, you’d have to disclose that to the buyer”…what would you do?

The image of fiscal health you present to prospective buyers is important, as is keeping your common charges reasonable—but should you really let that concern trump your need to know that the building is safe? You also must ensure that your reserves are sufficient; how is it possible to state that they are, without conducting a thorough assessment of your infrastructure?

Whatever your motives for serving on your board, you surely believe you can do a good job, & make good decisions—for your family, for your neighbors, & for your collective investment. If others are so concerned about short-term fiscal impact or liability that they won’t objectively assess building conditions & implement necessary maintenance & repair protocols, they have no business becoming board members.

More here: http://condocoopowners.org/repair-replacement/