According to a discussion on tenant.net, the lessor (the co-op corporation in your case) is NOT required to install security bars on windows, only child safety guards.

I have no idea if this is accurate, but the poster seemed pretty sure about it.

In this instance, I'd say the Board should check with your co-op's legal counsel for an opinion on the liability issues involved. My gut says it's the responsibility of a Shareholder for the windows in their apartment, and the responsibility of the co-op for bars on windows in the common areas.

How is this any different from gates on windows off fire escapes, which are up to individual Shareholders?

Regardless who is responsible the coop should make sure the bars/gates are of the approved kind. You do not want anyone trapped inside in case of fire.

Check with your co-op counsel; if you wish not to spend money check the NYC Builidng Code as to what is required.

Finally, if it is not required, your Board may wish to keep it standard. So, you may wish to have the Board specify the type of bars (ornamental, plain, with A/C space accommodation, etc. so that the first floor is standard.

AdC

In my view, it depends. If the building is in an area which experiences higher crime rates than neighboring areas or where street level break-ins are prevalent, then it may behoove the co-op to install “security bars” as opposed to child safety guards.

But, it is not cut and dry.

In this case (crime deterrence vs. child protection), an owner subject to a break-in may be able to sue the co-op for not protecting the owner’s quiet enjoyment of the domicile.

The counter argument is that the shareholder can install a suitable burglar alarm system to deter break-ins.

Since the safety of all residents, not just those on the ground level, is important to all residents and the quality of life in the building, it can thus be opined that the co-op should upon prudent reflection fund and install aesthetically pleasing security bars.

Do you want the bars? If you want the bars and the building is telling you to pay for them then they are correct. If they want the bars and you don't then I seem to recall a recent case where the building wanted to put the bars and the shareholder didn't want them. The shareholder won. If they want the bars and want you to pay, they should pay you for the decrease in value for your apartment. What about an alarm system?

Always better when you have resident owners. Sublets tend not to have a real interest in the building: how it looks, what's going on, etc. Having a higher percentage of resident owners is better for mortgage-seekers, too, I believe.

Investors (holders of unsold shares) also do not need board approval to sell to other investors, or to sublet. If your co-op has sublet fees, they are also not subject to them.

Especially now that we are going back into a time of very tight credit -- banks want to see a high percentage of owner-occupants, which investors will never be.

PROS: If the investor is "designated by the Sponsor" (in the language
of the Offering Plan), this usually means that a guarantor is backing
up the deal in case of default. We actually had four such apartments
in our building -- all rent-controlled -- that were sold by the
sponsor to various investors under such an arrangement. In the dark
co-op days of the early 1990s, *all* of the investors defaulted.
Luckily, the guarantor (Fannie Mae) continued to pay maintenance
until the apartments were sold to new investors in the late 1990s.

This was especially important to our co-op because the sponsor
defaulted as well! The rent on the rent-controlled apartments
didn't even come close to covering their share of operating expenses,
so the shortfall would have come out of the pockets of our
shareholders if it weren't for Fannie Mae.

CONS: A true "Holder of Unsold Shares" requires no Board approval
to sell, sublet, or renovate the unit. The subletting issue is
usually the worst problem, since an investor can essentially
turn the apartment into a rental unit and there's nothing you
can do about it.

A sticky question remains unresolved: what happens if the shares
are sold to an investor *not* designated by the sponsor? Is that
follow-up investor *also* a Holder of Unsold Shares with the
right to bypass the Board on sale/sublet/renovations? For years,
guidelines from the Attorney General's office said that such a
person had no special rights, but this was overturned in 2005
in Kralik v. 239 E 79. Under Kralik, until a shareholder lives
in the apartment (for even a day), *any* investor is a Holder
of Unsold Shares.

Kralik was decided by New York's highest court (the Court of Appeals)
and remains the official standard. In 2007, however, the judge in
Sassi-Lehner v. Charlton Tenants Corp. ruled that the Offering Plan
was the "crucial cooperative document." This meant that only an
investor specifically designated by the sponsor -- typically with
a guarantor in place -- was a Holder of Unsold Shares. This makes
sense, as the co-op receives the benefit of a guarantor in exchange
for giving up its Board approval rights.

This is a messy issue and it may not have a definitive answer
any time soon. For the moment, it's probably best to assume
that any investor whatsoever will have special rights that are
not beneficial to the co-op.

be careful to go with a company that has been around a long time. Many "roofing co's" change their name every few years so they dont have to honor warranties. Also, do NOT go to co's recommended by your managing agent - do your own research. Seriously, this is true.

I am Resident Manager, and at my previous when i was a working superintendent we had to have our flat roof redone. The cheapest way is not always the best way. I like (Synthetic Membranes). The use of synthetic membranes has just about eliminated the need for gravel on roofs. Why? Because many of these new roof membranes are glued down to the roof sheathing. Not only that, the new membranes contain materials that resist UV degradation. If you can install a new flat roof without gravel, do it!

We had a new roof installed about 4 years ago now - cold-rolled (synthetic membrane). Lots of protruding pipes. Process was smooth sailing and we have at least a 20-year warranty.

Be happy to give you more info if you're interested.

If you are employing an engineering company for the replacement, these are the individuals whose brains should be picked. Ask why they favor one type of roof over another, etc. Also, what you discuss initially with the engineer will probably drive to a great extent the selection of the roof. If someone is looking for a green roof, then the engineer will recommend the green roof or will tell you why he/she does not favor it for your specific structure. If you say, you do not have much money to spend on your roof, your deck may be overlooked to a great extent and he/she may try to get a second layer if possible at a lesser cost.

Again, engineers will do the recommendation based on the prelliminary study and based on your initial conversation to ensure that the work that they will finally sign off pleases the customer and the budget. No sense in designing a rolls royce if you can only pay for a chevy.

AdC

In my opinion, management companies, these days, appear to engage in many related businesses that enable them to increase revenue.

The Bible says something like you cannot serve two masters at the same time... Well, being a leasing broker and a building manager may not be compatible in a co-op. This may be okay for a rental, in which the leasing office may be under the property manager's scope. Again, a manager's role must be specified by the contract. Management companies may have their own real estate, commercial leasing brokers, etc, but you have to make sure that your manager provides the support to the property that you expect. Let other members of the same organization to run the leasing aspect if these departments are divided and you sign the contract to represent you.

AdC

how about the statement below? (from an article) and what would the current interest rate be?

Care must be given, however, to ensure that the proprietary lease authorizes those particular charges, otherwise the co-op opens itself up to counter-claims by the shareholder and for his or her legal fees, if the shareholder is successful.

The most common abuse by co-ops is the inclusion of cumulative late charges, such as $25 the first month, $50 the second month, $75 the third month and so on.

This type of late charge structure violates not only most proprietary leases (which provide that late fees can only be charged equal to the maximum legal rate of interest), but also violates usury laws. Since the purpose of the rent demand, or "Notice to Cure," is to afford the shareholder the opportunity to determine the claim’s accuracy, only those charges which are legal and permissible should be included in the notice.

Do you have staff that may be ready for promotion?

With a little help from your management company, a good porter/handy man that may have worked side by side with your previous super and had learned a lot about your particular building may be a good fit and would warrant a look.

Then you just need to replace the porter.

Thank you but no, we dont have anyone on staff that can fill this position.

This is a great job, its hard to believe that its so difficult to find qualified applicants.

HG

Here's a resource to explore http://www.nysupersclub.org/ for job postings at http://www.nysupersclub.org/jobssupers.htm.

Good luck!

I may be to help you out with some Superintendents. If you would like to call me at 212-319-8375 I can set you up with some resumes. I am presently the President of the Manhattan Resident Managers Club, Inc. and I always have members that are looking another position.

Mike MacGowan

I was featured in a habitat article last january The Super Man!

joeshkreli@yahoo.com is my e-mail address I have a great network of honest and Very handy people.I am a Resident Manager with great leads that can make you very happy. My last position when i left i made sure the board knew that they were not just hiring a new employee, but they were bringing a stranger into their home to live with them.So please contact me with any questions or concerns. I enjoy helping people.

Joe, Thank you for your response. We did hire a Super (refered by our prev Super) but I will keep your Emial address... The number of unqualified applicants was surprising. And our Mang Agent was of very little help..

Thank you HG

In my building the shareholder asks me (Resident Manager) and I put them on the waiting list. If their is a space available I assign them a hook number and then management charges them $10.00 per month on their maintenance.

we charge $4 a month. Keeping it affordable. IMPORTANT - you need some horizontle storage as not everyone can lift a heavy bike. we forgot to do this and then had to re-do it so th people with back problems did not have to lift their bike.

Our building uses vertical storage - you can get a lot more bikes hanging from hooks than in racks in the same space. Fees are monthly, charged on maintenance bill. Haven't run out of hooks yet...

Could you tell me how much you charge?

Be buy nothing but government securities with differing maturity dates as befits our fiduciary responsibility.

We never play craps with our shareholders funds.

Try contacting Ira Meister at Matthew Adam Properties, Inc. 127 East 59th Street NYC 10022 (212) 699-8900

Amazing -- I was just about to recommend Matthew Adam Properties myself. We've been with them a little over two years and we find them outstanding. They're total pros and very friendly people.

Naturally, every building is different, and if you're seriously thinking about changing management, you should get recommendations from a number of sources. Follow up in detail and be prepared to spend a lot of time on the search; it's an arduous process.

Try calling Greg Cohen or Stuart Halper at Impact Mgt. 718-898-0190. We are a community that is almost 30 years old and have been thru many, many management companies. We have recently renewed out contract with them.

The Argo Corporation.

Veritas Property Management 212-799-2365 ask for Carl Borenstein. They are the best out of all 3 management companies we went through over a 3 year period.

Pres.

I am a former Management Company Executive and perform this service on a consultancy basis. We will evaluate your management needs and prepare a Request for Proposal for you to send out to several management companies for evaluation. We will do all the leg work and narrow the field to a company that would be a good fit for you. Receiving recommendations from readers may be a good start but will leave your board with lots of leg work for you.Please email Jeff @ PJrealtyservices.com