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.

Hi APayne,

I hear what you are saying - yes, the units were already price adjusted for condition. The unit was offered and priced well below current market and condition.

What I didn't hear from you was the effect on the shareholders: those who sold their unit and all remaining shareholders (who are selling two corporation owned units in the same line). You are right; Boards do not have much power to protect an individual shareholder against their own actions - just an up or down vote. But how about the rest of the shareholders: surely Boards have a duty to protect them - not against market forces, but against poorly performing agents and blindly following shareholders?

A friend of mine suggested setting a floor price as a way of establishing protections. How about credentialing a broker before they can be allowed to participate in a sale? Or requiring a local broker? Do any buildings have any of these requirements?

Thanks!

At first look, some of your suggestions sound excellent. However, there are many laws that would prohibit some of your suggestions. First, barring a broker from participating in sales in a building because residents didn't like his market analysis or amount the unit sold for could easily fall into a restraint of trade category. If you set a floor price it could be injurious to someone in difficult financial straits who must sell immediately, or an estate sale, or, someone transferred for business. No one should ever have the right to dictate how much I can sell somethng for. The board should not have the responsibility to set prices for any reason unless the board is willing to buy the apartment at the discouned price and then resell it, then the owner would not be injured. A sale is based on two people, buyer and seller coming together on terms that are agreeable to both. A low sale prce in a co op has no more impact than a low sale price on a one family house on a street with other property for sale. Condition, supply and demand and most of all each parties individual situation dictates what will be agreeable, not boards and neighbors. Every owner has the right to say no if they feel the price is too low and every buyer the same if the price is too high. Would you also set a maximum price. If you don't, when the market picks up there will be an overabundance of apartments for sale and that could look like there is something wrong with the building.

I have forty years of real estate experience and can assure you that the number one reason a house doesn't sell is because it is over priced. The three most important words in real estate are not location,location,location, but rather, price, price, price. Whatever the location if it is priced well it will eventually sell. Let's not interfere with a free market unless you are prepared to buy at the low price and resell at what you consider a "fair market price"

Hi Dianne,

I respect your posts a lot. What about the remaining shareholders who are very likely injured by a sale such as this? Per my original post, the corporation owns, is renovating and will sell two units in the same line (we are a six floor building so they are all close together). Are you trying to say that a low ball (under market - we have recent appraisal and sales data) sale in the same line will not have any impact on those two units? Two people - a buyer and a seller, can hurt remaining shareholders too, no? Does one shareholder take precedence over all shareholders? In some senses, brokers have it easy in that they get to walk away after the deal is done (unless they happen to live in the same building).

I disagree with you on why units don’t sell – I believe that most units don’t sell because they are not worked.

My thoughts are that yes, we can not control the market but we can influence it. We do it every day by replacing landscaping, repairing buildings, having reserves, painting hallways and all the other things that Boards do to maintain value. Why give up all of the hard work to a deal such as this? I can’t buy it.

There is no question that one sale MIGHT have an effect on others. Typically appraisers will look at any that seem atypical and either throw it out completely or do a little investigating into the reason for he low price. My real point is that we just can't prevent someone from selling at any price they choose unless we are prepared to buy the property from them and resell it at whatever price we choose to. I understand your position and rationale, but we need to look at the legality of it. Because you live in a six story building one sale will a greater impact that if it were a 50 story one. Where do you draw the line? At what point is a single sale relevant. So many things seem unfair to one person but might have little or no impact on another. Look at another side of the coin. Have you considered the overall share price as a way of generalizing prices. In other words if 3 units have sold add up their cumulative shares add the total sale prices and divide, giving an average at which shares are sold. It might be a little less glaring for a potential buyer than comparing actual sale prices. Do you factor in the floor the unit is on, higher is more expensive or views are there any negatives one floor to another. These all need to be considered, not just the line. You frustration is well taken, but fair trade is fair trade.
Happy New Year

I have noticed a consistent problem with sales and sublets over the years. Inexperienced and not too bright Agents, and older lazy Agents who know better. The problem is undervalued appraisals by Agents who do not know better, and lazy Agents who instead of really selling just sit back and say lower the price, because they are interested in turning the sale over, not selling for the right amount. As a Board President I get the calls from upset shareholders about low ball sales pricing, and know that we can neither ban nor refuse a legitimate sale. Being sent inappropriate applicants is easy to deal with, an upset shareholder who has been led down the path by a foolish Agent is painful to deal with. A building with a lot of Estate sales is going to be so devalued over the years because of fire sale pricing that it ruins the asset value of the remaining shareholders. How do you compensate for that? How do you lift the pricing against that tide?

Banning an agent for something like this doesn't seem appropriate. We had a similar issue come up in our co-op several years ago.

An owner was ready to sell and instead of using a broker with a base in the neighborhood used one whose focus was distinctly different: a broker whose firm is known for top-of-the-market listings for clients who are sometimes known as "individuals of high net worth." Our building, and NYC neighborhood, is on the edge of middle class.

From there the story is very similar to Steve's. Apt sits on the market, asking price gets lowered. At the same time, apt's in our building were selling well and for record-breaking amounts (this was pre-crash).

At least two board member mentioned to the seller that the broker may be the issue--not herself, but her client list. The seller insisted she was happy with the broker, but eventually accepted an offer lower than she was happy with.

I think a better solution is to explain to sellers why it's important to choose a broker who can work for them: brokers who know the neighborhood, have a client list, etc., and how that can have an impact on sales price. The challenge is getting such a tip sheet in the hands of sellers before they sign up with a broker. I usually heard about an apt for sale after the broker was hired (and sometimes not until I saw the notice for the open house).

@board member, I've seen this myself in my own building; people go with their cousin or a broker in a huge firm or someone their boss (who lives in a neighborhood far, far away) recommended or their best friend used. And usually, that broker knows absolutely nothing about our neighborhood or our building, and throws up a boilerplate ad in the NYT and does an Open House sheet and we only see him/her every other weekend.

I've also seen sellers who use a savvy local broker who knows every building in the area, what it sold for, what it listed at, why there was a difference, etc... prices them right, and they nearly always come out over the ask.

I wish more local brokers would hold seminars for prospective sellers about the best way to sell their condo or co-op. (Or ANY local business or agency to interact with the co-op/condo residents in their neighborhood in an informational way!)

Maybe they're waiting for the boards to invite them? I can think of few "value-added" activities for shareholders that could have a large financial impact, especially if they're free. And ensuring the board and broker interact in a meaningful way (so everyone has first-hand information) is also helpful: put newsletters in their hands; make sure they know your website exists; give them last year's financials.... get copies of the sell sheet, the ad, etc.

An engaged broker is a broker who will sell, just as an engaged board innovates when necessary.

I've never heard that they won't pay because of the number of units. Our co-op recently completed the Fios wiring. We were in talks with them for 2 years. Our previous board dragged their feet and by the time the new board gave the Okay, we were told that the money they initially were offering to multi-dwelling units was no longer being offered because many buildings took advantage of it when they were offering it and they no longer had the funds available to pay buildings to bring in Fios.

they HAVE to pay you a nice fee to access your building. otherwise just deny them access.

They will pay your building a fee for access if you state it is an absolute.

Yes - the sponsor's obligations are essentially the same as any shareholder except for tenant screening and sales. The sponsor may try to intimidate the Board and manager, but this should not be a problem. If it gets difficulet, then get the lawyer involved.

That is discrimination those Shareholders should go to Department of Fair housing,and Department of aging. Fees should be universal in a building.

The Board should find out why the windows are leaking air and water and find legal recourse if necessary. Problems with windows could be as follows:

1. Aluminum windows always allow cold to transfer due to the metal. Consequently, insulation would cut the coldness and air leaks through a retrofit.

2. Caulking may be a problem. If the window was not well caulked in the outside, water may be coming into the structure through the frame.

3. There is also the fact that there might have been water leaks before through lintels and sill that were never reported.

4. Did the new windows cover any cavities exposed when the old windows were removed?

AdC

AdC

Before you look into plastic sheeting (which I do not recommend) have you followed up see how you ended up in this situation. Did you.

Have an engineer or someone oversee the project?
Water test the windows when the work was done?
Do you have a warranty?

I would address the above issues if you have not already done so.

Good luck MRR

Thanks, MRR. How do we "water test" the windows?
Is that something we can do ourselves? The windows were replaced in 2006 so probably no warranty would apply.

Sorry, Frank, I just don't buy your premise. I joined (and led) my board because I thought I could make a difference to the co-op, and had the time to devote to turning it around. No kickbacks, no corruption -- just a seemingly unending list of stuff that needed to get done.

Frank;

Many of us serve on the board with no self interest. In fact, on my board I work hard to ensure that I am not seen, as President as gettting any preferential treatment from ANYONE.

There are some of us who do it because we honestly care.

I am not saying that we, sometimes, don't screw up. We do. But never will ill intent.

You may be an exception. I and five others wanted to run on the Board to make a difference, but the current Board is sooooooooo corrupt, that they extort signatures, have the super involved in collecting their proxies which is unorthodox. They threaten Shareholders, don't do repairs that are legally their responsibility. Two management companies quit due to their behavior towards shareholders and the fact that they wanted them to participate in their illegal management tactics. I sued the building for six figures due to the their illicit act of trying to defraud me out of my apartment, they got in touch with my bank where I have my mortgage and lied to them that I was in default of payment, when I was not, I proved to the bank that I made payments directly into the bank and had receipts, they negligently released the funds which the coop never returned to the bank and started an illegal foreclosure. Took four years to resolve, but I won. They didn't learn their lesson and are trying to put me in default again of doing reparis to my apartment which was their responsibily since 2004. Another lawsuit will commence if they continue to harrass me. So don't tell me about ethics there is non in our building.

You are one hundred percent correct Frank. We have a President that goes door to door quietly and threatens the oppositions supporters. She promises to do repairs for them that have not been done for years, she sends the super around to do the repairs and sign a paper telling the Shareholder that it for the work completed, but it is a proxie for the corrupt president. He is involved because he is protecting his job. This super does illegal renovations all around the building the Board pays out of the building his supplies and workers when he needs help. Before anyone does any renovations, the President tells them that Sergi the Super is the only one that can do the renovations, and they must sign their proxie come election. When you talk about corrupt, our building is the worst in history. Our reserve is almost nill, we have no money in the operating account come the end of the month, bills are deliquent, and assessments are coming every six months and she blames shareholders that take the building to court for their repairs to be done or sue the building. How these people don't go to jail is beyond me.

Unfortunately I have to agree - our board- most of whom have been there for almost 10 years and the worst one for over 20 years have destroyed our buildings - they definitely do not have a fiduciary duty to serve the shareholders and the corporation - everything is double the price and then must be repaired again at our cost and money keeps disappearing - management company, falsified financials, lawyers who agree with board members against the interest of the shareholders and of course no reserves - Running for the board which a few of us have tried to do many times does not work as these persons get their people down who don't know or care and they vote them back in again - We also have the problem that we are not allowed proxies and we have a massive amount of illegal renters - so who is there to vote for change
and who is there to go to to correct these situations - My feeling is that if all the persons from the coops/condos could get together and voice these problems then something could get done - but you need a large group from as many coops/condos as possible

Stephanie makes a perfect case for the critical need for an ombudsman. It is financially impossible for most middle-class people to take a board to court when board elections are outright crooked or simply rigged in an existing board's favor.

I am with you all the way, maybe we can get many supporters to get together with us and form a group, enough to make a difference. I am elated that you are coming forward. I have been trying for years to open the eyes of our politicians. They know what is happening to us, but government intervention does not exist in private Corporations so they say. The Attorney General whom signed and approved our offering plan now looks the other way with blind eyes and deaf ears. Maybe we could group with signs around the Mayor's office to be heard, even maybe catch the media's attention.

I would be honored to walk with you - but that is what is needed - many many shareholders and owners in public view announcing these problems to the media - They are usually hidden through law suits and not made public but the situation is endemic and becoming worse because no one agency will do anything abut it - however with enough people speaking publicly then maybe something would be done - We have nothing to lose by trying

Congratulations for realizing that we can get together and we will have a voice. A fairly new organization has been formed, the Alliance for Condo and Coop Owners, ACCO, and we have already begun to make our voices heard. There have been forums hosted by elected officials and attorneys, with more planned after the holidays. There is important legislation in the City Council and Senate and Assembly that will impact our ownership and we are working hard to get our needs recognized. Please go to our website and learn how you can join and support getting the necessary help for the problems that plague so many of us. We all remember learning in school "in unity there is strength". Well, join us in the unification of owners: www.condocoopowners.org.

Try this email:www.condocoopowners.org, maybe they will help us form a rally so that we may be heard. We must make a difference, coop and condos are legal behaviors to be illegal, corrupt and theifs. This is a crime without punishment nor laws. This reminds me of the wild wild west where crimes can go on without law and order.

This is a disgrace that this is able to go on in 2011, without laws, proper investigations. In our building the Board President approved a section 8, if the shareholder signed a proxie for her. This section 8 recipient lives with her boyfriend in the apartment, she works for a hospital and he no one knows what he does do or doesn't do for a living. The owner of the apartment claims she is renting (to her boyfriend), he claims he does not make enough income to sublet, so they are living together and collecting rent on section 8, defrauding the City. This current Board is so corrupt, they are taking cash out of the laundry room, which they raised the washers and dryers. They are running an illegal construction company with the super, all cash defrauding the IRS, no taxes are being paid, the Super ownes three homes on our building tax free income. The list goes on and on. Let's get help, let our voices be heard.

Perhaps you are going to the wrong governmental agency. Why not try the DA's office.

I went to the DA, they said they can't do anything. I almost had my apartment defrauded by the Board, they went to my bank where I have my mortgage and lied to them that I had not paid my maintenace in over nine months, they clamed that I also owed bogus bills that were put on my maintenance statement, they claimed I owed legal and late fees. They told my bank that if they did not pay these charges, they will forclose on my apartment, I submitted all documents to the bank that I was not in arrears that my payments went directly to their bank because the Board and management refused my monthly payments. But, the bank went ahead and paid these charges, therefore the Board and management Arco/Wentworth aka Marvin Gold now known as Cooper Square/Wentworth aka Marvin Gold defrauded my bank out of funds, when all was settled the building had to pay not only the seven thousand dollars they took and never returned but it cost the building 20,000 instead with all banks fees included over the four years of litergation. I went to the DA and they did nothing, they said sue the building.

Unfortunately quite a few years ago I spent a lot of time at the Queen's DA office - they laughed alot told me to move - The problems according to law actually are the Attorney Generals' domain but when I contacted them with massive financial information I did receive return calls and they agreed that management company, board members, accountant were stealing millions from our little coop but they said they would not do anything - so that again leaves us with what to do and how to do it. As I have said many times if we had a large vocal group together then if you could get the media involved something could be done - A few individuals as you and myself do not get anywhere

I think if we keep calling the media and explain our problems maybe we will be heard. Lets call all the Newspapers and get their Real Estate section email, tell them about the DA, Attorney General and all the community leaders how they they are blind and deaf to our problems. I have contacted the Mayor's office through their website and told them of our problem, if we keep writing maybe somebody will listen.

With all due respect, DD, the media is not the place to get action. As I and others have stated several times there is legislation in both the Senate and Assembly addressing this issue. Senator Liz Krueger has introduced the bill. The place to go to make your voice heard is in the office of your Senator and Assemblyperson. They need to get behind the bill so that there is protection. I personally have appointments with a Senator and Assemblyperson to push for passage. I am also meeting with several council members to try to get their assistance. This is way past the media, it needs to be pushed person to person. As has been stated several times, the Alliance of condo and coop owners ACCO is working toward this goal. Join us. Remember the old saying, in unity there is stregth.

I disagree with Ms. Stromfeld, the media will call attention to this legislation – boards are already telling owners that it will cost too much and there will be too much government interference. Most owners are not knowledgeable and not everyone has experienced firsthand corruption. I emailed Ms. Kreuger to see if she was interested in my story – her office has not replied. I suggest you contact all the media outlets you can and don’t listen to board and management company members on this site who have other agendas.

I agree there is a place for this in the media, however, the bill is in the
Senate and if we don't let our elected officials know how we the apartment owners feel, then, you are right, board members just might prevail. But, most of all we have to come together to get this bill passed. What would you have the media do? A story on board corruption? It will have a life of a couple of days. Get the bill passed and we will have somewhere to go in order to get the support and help we need. I am a sharehold, not a current board member and know first hand the workings of many boards. Just by shear numbers, there are more of us than board members so we can certainly have more influence if we come together. Get your neighbors together on an email campaign. Make an appointment as a group to meet with Senators and Assemblymen, write letters to local

Sorry, i hit send before my response was complete. This is it in its' entirety

I agree there is a place for this in the media, however, the bill is in the
Senate and if we don't let our elected officials know how we the apartment owners feel, then, you are right, board members just might prevail. But, most of all we have to come together to get this bill passed. What would you have the media do? A story on board corruption? It will have a life of a couple of days. Get the bill passed and we will have somewhere to go in order to get the support and help we need. I am a shareholder, and a former board member and know first hand the workings of many boards. Obviously there are more of us than board members so we can certainly have more influence if we come together. Get your neighbors together on an email campaign. Make an appointment as a group to meet with Senators and Assemblymen, write letters to local newspapers giving not only the problem, but the solution as well. WORK TO GET THE BILL PASSED. Don't worry about board members defeating the bill, we need to use our collective effort to make it happen.

I tried to get the media interested in this many years ago - even those reporters that wrote about some of the same coop problems - didn't work unfortunately

Sorry to disagree but also for many many years I went to my State Senator and Assemblyman and wrote to all the Senators, etc in Albany to vote for this bill - nothing happened As I said this bill has been before the houses for I believe 10 years - There is another party and group who go and have gone every few months to Albany for many years to lobby for this bill and yet it has not been passed - why? It is not a difficult concept - I read a while ago that Dade county has a condo bill because they understand that board members, etc can steal - why not New York

You asked the rhetorical question....why....didn't the bill pass? I don't know, why do you feel it didn't pass in NY and yet there is one in Dade County. Interesting that it is only in one county and not the entire state of Florida. If one takes a defeatist attitude, one will be defeated. Just because it didn't pass doesn't mean it can't. Perhaps owners are now more aware of what boards are capable of doing. I don't know, but I do know that if there is a bill and I believe in it, I will fight for it.

I never said that I did not believe in the bill,I definiely do, all I am saying is that if we had the media's attention then maybe they could exert influence on the legislature and that could help pass the bill. As I said I belong to the condocoopowners/association and if all these people who complain and have these problems would come forward and voice them together than maybe someone would take notice. I know alot of people in coops with these problems but they will not do anything, that is the key.

Have you considered trying to set up a public forum with your councilperson, Assemblyman and/or Senator which was done quite successfully a few weeks ago. There is another one set for the middle of this month, also in Queens. That would be an excellent opportunity to get the media involved by inviting them to attend the event and report on it. Our local elected officials are usually agreeable to do this type of forum for their local constituency. Contact ACCO or Senator Liz Krueger's office for help. Good Luck

I actually joined the organization but have not followed up on what they are doing - too many problems in my coop - President who hires illegal contractors for asbestos removal and our lawyer defends him - changes in management etc and no one knows anything except it should not have happened - and of course that is when most of our money disappears - but I understand that money is being transferred by ATM - in our savings account - no one understands the value of a paper trail - of course that is why nothing can be checked - Hopefully if enough of us could get together something could be done

I have the same problem, but I did send copies of our monthly financials around the building describing how our money is being mishandled and disappearing. There are too many friends and relatives living in the building that are promised special treatment, being that they are uneducated and corrupt themselves they don't care who is paying for these favors. they can't smell the coffee that they too are paying for their own favors as well as the rest of us. They keep voting them in even though we keep getting assessments. The only conclusion is when they attack you personally and refuse to give you what you are entitled to you must sue them for breach of their fiduciary duty, and report the attorney when they aid and abet their misconduct to the disaplinary Committee. That is the only way hurt them in their pocket.

With the complexity of a replacement of two elevators, I always recommend hiring an outside consultant to at least oversee the work once it is in motion. I prefer that they draw up the specifications as well so that the bids that you are receiving are an apples-to-apples breakdown of what the consultant feels is necessary and not just what the elevator companies are trying to sell you. How is the managing agent, if they are monitoring the work, supposed to certify that the proper parts are being used (machinery, cables, etc.)?

It's always safer to hire an experienced professional who specializes in this field.

Dont waste your time with anyone else.
Give them a call they are that good.

Robert Cuzzi, Senior Vice President
VDA
Seven Penn Plaza, Suite 404
New York, NY 10001
Phone: 212-868-9090
Fax: 212-868-9099
rcuzzi@vdassoc.com

Just talk to your current mechanics or the mechanics (repair departments) at companies like Arco and PC Mercato. They know their stuff and will give you great advice. Consultants will cause you to spend way more than you need to. Especially some company called Vertical Systems.

If there's not such a prohibition, there should be, IMO.

Otherwise, a lot more self-serving "volunteers" would then become the accountant, contractor... etc.

Do you really want your neighbor to be the buildings attorney ?

Are you confident that he can initiate proper legal action against ... hmm ... let's say his next door neighbor who hasn't paid his dues for six months or the nice old lady down the hall that his wife loves to chat with in the laundry room. Are you really sure that he will be able to do what is in the best interest of your building or simply apply any board decision without any emotional interference ?

I would strongly advise you against even considering his application.

Thank you for your response. I wonder though why it would be any harder for the board's attorney, even if he owned an apartment in the building, to take legal action against a neighbor than board members voting on a resolution to take legal action against a neighbor? First, it's not the attorney's decision to sue anyone, it's the board's decision. The attorney acts at the direction of the board. Second, one could apply the same reasoning regarding favorable-neighbor-bias (or negative-neighbor-bias) to argue that board members shouldn't live in the building they govern because the neighbor-bias impedes board members from exercising independent decision-making about their neighbors. Yet, almost every residential coop and condo board is governed by neighbors. Is a board member less likely to vote to initiate a lawsuit against the next door neighbor who hasn't paid his dues for six months or the old lady down the hall his wife loves to chat with in the laundry room? Yes, probably or at least no more or less likely than a the board member would be. In fact, as an elected officer, the board member would be more influenced by neighbor bias. My question doesn't pertain to the general dilemma living and governing in the same building. Being uncomfortable or having conflicting feelings is one thing- these dilemmas make for the hassles, headaches and war stories of board members and residents aliek, but they are not stories of unethical behavior and self-dealing. If I vote with my board to fine my next door neighbor, I may be reluctant because he may resent me and he indeed may give me the evil eye in the hallway. But that's not an issue of self-dealing or unethical behavior. My question is about outright prohibitions on certain actions and whether there is a panel that issues advisory opinions for board members, analogous to ones with attorneys. The reason the panel exists for attorneys is that these issues are not facile and there are often countervailing benefits that sometimes result in the answer that an attorney is not acting unethically. For example, what attorney would more zealously represent the building's interests in a construction defect lawsuit against the developer than one who owns in the building? What attorney would be willing to give a discount for legal services to a building with weak financials for services other than one who lives in the building? Or should we reject this option because the attorney, who is a former board member, should continue to "volunteer." That's not realistic, expecting not only present board members to serve with no compensation but they should also continue to provide their expertise for free in perpetuity? I understand there will be differing and valid perspectives, but I really want to take my issue to an official panel if there is one for an advisory opinion rather than have an interesting debate that doesn't give me an answer either my board or the attorney can rely upon to protect ourselves.

Dear Coop and Condo owners, I would advise you not to allow an attorney that served on the Board to represent your building. The reason is about ten months ago our Board through the reccomendation of Cooper Square/Wentworth Management AKA Marvin Gold brought in an attorney Jack Lepper without a Board meeting or minutes. Cooper Square realty was fired by Seabreeze Condo board for the same illicit practice of harrassing Shareholders and covering up information.

The reason Cooper Square/Wentworth AKA Marvin Gold, brought in Jack Lepper was to cover up the Boards malfeasance. Mr. Jack Lepper involves himself with the Board meetings, how to conduct them, how to position n Board members at the Board election so that no questions regarding the buildings financial postion or the improprieties of funds, such as no money to pay bills, every month we are in a deficit etc. Mr. Jack Lepper of Kagan Lupic Lepper Lewis Gold Colbert 200 Madison Avenue 24th. floor, New York, N.Y. 10018. Mr. Lepper set up a mock meeting called the informational meeting a couple of weeks before the election,he advised his clients (the Board) to advise their supporters not to attend so not to hear the questions that will be addressed to the Board, what he did was to conduct the meeting, he is only to represent legal matters in the building no to run the Board meetings, it is only for Shareholders and he is not one of us. When he heard the questions that was asked and the Board could not answer nor will they answer them, he then knew how to postion his clients at the election, what he did was advise them not to sit at the podium so that questions will be directed to them, he had them scattered all over the meeting room so that they would not be questioned while he was busy counting proxies, he allowed his clients proxies that were extored to be counted, but disqualified all ours that held the name of a Board member collecting for her team, because she happened to be away that evening on a trip that had been preplaned. Instead of allowing us to go to those Shareholders to find out what their intent was, he disqualified them so that we would lose the election.

At the informational meeting we asked Mr. Jack Lepper why he was paid $4000.00 recently from our coop, his response was he didn't know, or remember, we asked him if Knight Marketing sounded familiar, he said no. We said but that was recently, why didn't he recall being paid $4,000 as a new attorney in our building. His response was oh that was for many services I performed, we asked what services, he said for letters written to Shareholders in arrears, that was a lie, the Board hadn't collected arrears in three years, she saves those people to extort signatures for her proxies come election. We showed Lepper an invoice for Knight Marketing in the sum of $2,000 that hadn't been paid in two years,for supplies delivered to our building, the client turned the invoice over to their attorney for collection and therefore, the invoice for $2000.00 was paid to Lepper plus $2,000 in legal fees. Which in essence Jack Lepper is guilty of errors and ommissions and will be reported to the Disaplinary Committee for unethical practices. Jack Lepper is now harrassing Shareholders with threats to those Shareholders that went against his clients. We are taking him before the committee on many unethical practices, as well as to court for mailings from his office without letter head in behalf of his clients. Do not use or trust Jack Lepper of Kagan Lupic Lepper Lewis Gold and Colbert or Cooper Square/Wentworth AkA Marvin Gold of 6 East 43rd. Street New York 10017 save your building and your investment. Our building is a nightmare since they have been brought in by a corrupt Board, birds of a feather flock together.

Too DD:
Was Jack Leppper a former member of your building's board?

No, but he is acting as one now. Whether before or after it is a direct conflict of interest, once on the Board or any affiliance in a coop or condo it is a conflict of interest, therefore they cannot represent the building in a legal capacity.

How ironic, Jack Leppers practice is advertized at the bottow of web talk?

Bob

It is ironic how this man should be allowed to practice. He has been giving false advise since March 2010 when he first was hired in our building without board meeting with all members, no competive bidding or interview process and no minutes. He has been giving false information to Shareholders and harrassing them not being familiar with our proprietary lease, by-laws or ammendments. He only requeste them when a potential lawsuit became visible in November 2010 when he contacted the Sponser for them, and they didn't have all the amendments. Would you trust him in your building?