Absolutely should be prevented. It has to be one rule for all.

I would send a nice, but firm, email to the Board and the Building Manager reminding them of the rule about not allowing washers in apartments, and it appears that the rule is about to be violated in this apartment.

I would inform them of the importance for all shareholders being treated equally by everyone having to follow the rules.

Marty is spot-on and I second his suggestions.

To clarify:
If a regular (sold shares) apartment in this coop has a washer is is grandfathered. But how does this apply to the sale of sponsor (unsold shares converting to sold shares) apartments?

Hi DM. As you said, if a washer was already present in an apartment at the time the no-washer rule was put into effect, it is grandfathered in. When a unit is sold and there is no washer, then I believe one cannot be installed simply because the seller is the sponsor. It is my understanding that in situations like this, all shares must be treated equally regardless of who the seller is. If possible, try to ask the co-op's attorney for an opinion. Others on here may have better knowledge than I do.

Who is responsible for making sure that the tax rebates are applied correctly? Our managing agent does not show us what they get from the state and there have been errors (people getting rebates they do not deserve or not getting them -- all due to sales).

Hi MissP. If you are concerned that you are not receiving the correct amount of rebate, try contacting the DoF at the email address listed on this website: http://www1.nyc.gov/site/finance/benefits/landlords-coop-condo.page I don't believe the managing agent has any obligation to share the list with you because it contains information about other apartments besides your the board may consider proprietary. We do not share the list with our shareholders for this reason.

The list received from the DoF by your managing agent contains the amount of rebate for each apartment if the apartment is eligible, or the reason why the apartment was considered ineligible ("insufficient information", "not primary residence", etc). It is the managing agent's responsibility to make sure the rebate received by each eligible shareholder is what is contained on the list.

Are you concerned about the accuracy of your particular rebate, or the rebate distributed to other apartment? The list of rebates received by your co-op from the Dept of Finance is per-apartment and there is no dependency between apartments on the amount calculated by the DoF. Your managing agent should let all ineligible shareholders know they are ineligible and work with them to make them eligible.

I hope this helps.

I'm on the Board. At one time there was an article either here or in The Cooperator saying the Board was responsible for reviewing what units the state and managment company had for the rebates. They have been wrong before. If the managing agent does not provide the Board with the list and does not correct it, is the Coop liable for the error?

If your managing agent does not provide the Board with the list, I would immediately fire the MA. Really. The MA is an agent of the board and reports to the board. Withholding anything relating to Co-op governance is, in my opinion, sufficient reason to immediately terminate their contract.

I am not a lawyer so please do not take the following at legal advice. Since the MA is an agent of the co-op and legally answerable to them, your board may very well be implicated in any litigation arising from a shareholder's loss. Only the DoF can change the list, the co-op (managing agent) needs to file update forms with the DoF. I believe, though, that it is ultimately the responsibility of each shareholder to correct any errors because only shareholders can prove to the DoF's satisfaction that their co-op apartment is their primary residence and meets all other criteria to receive the rebate.

But seriously, if your managing agent is withholding anything from your board like the list of apartment abatements, you have to wonder what other shenanigans they are playing. Someone on the board should work with your accountant to make sure there isn't any fraud or embezzlement going on, and then work with your attorney to fire your current MA and find an honest and reputable replacement.

managing agent has a responsibility to:
-advise shareholders who are not getting rebates that they are not
-ensure the rebates are applied correctly

note that a rebate can carry over from a sold apartment to the new owner for a year or so. if the co-op assesses the abatements, everyone is assessed. if you get the abatement you may be assessed for a slightly different amount as the abatement must be assessed on a per share basis.

if your mgmt company is not complying, the board needs to take action.

Wow. I know where you're coming from. I lived in a garden apartment rental near the corner of Jerusalem Ave and Greenwich St a few decades ago and know the area. I can appreciate what you're going through.

I'm not sure from your post if are looking for any suggestions or just wanted to vent. Advice is very cheap here, and you always get what you pay for. ;-)

My unsolicited suggestion is to consider if your mental and physical health are worth not trying to get out at any cost. Living under the conditions you describe is enough to drive anyone crazy. If you can afford to move, it may cost you, but it will be one of the best decisions you make.

Also, please don't swear off co-ops. There many many buildings which have a true sense of community and whose board always have the shareholders' best interests at heart. You've learned a lot from the situation you're in right now, let it guide you towards a more suitable building, if you want to own and not rent. Engage a good attorney who can read the board minutes and financials, and help you find a place that can be your forever home.

The very best of luck and good fortune to you.

You advise is on the money, I was just about to market it but I am so exhausted from this house of horrors that I have not had the energy to get out of bed for 2 days. It has taken its toll mentally and physically. I have not had an easy life and this was really the last straw for me. I just don't understand the mentality of these jug heads. But like I said it's a shakeup neighborhood and it was a mistake from the get go. But I loved the large rooms and high ceilings. What is even more bizarre is that people here are very concerned with security. I am also concerned with security but I have not had any problems with people from the neighborhood, only the people here in the building. Numerous verbal assaults and one physical assault. I called the police but this is Hempstead, they don't do harassment and it is not considered a crime here. So then they tell you where to go for help. You take the advise and guess what they were wrong. In fact I was told I could not get an order of protection unless I was married to or in a sexual relationship with the person harassing me. But that is what the police told me to do. Then they told me to go to landlord tenant court, but they only Handel evictions. Then they told me I went to the wrong court to go to another one. So I went to that one and they were wrong again. I am exhausted. Yes
It will be a financial loss and an hardship for someone who can't afford it like myself. But still I want out, I am planning a move out of NY into a small cottage type home. This experience was just to horrific to ever go down that rode again. No people who live in coops need more protection from the rouge board members and MAs. Nothing can be solved in house with Tia type of mentality. So did I choose to move no. My home is a dangerous mine field and I have no intentions of remaining on this sinking ship.word gets around agents already know it's a "difficult" board. Plus last year our water looked like something out of flint Michigan. I had to call the water department because the super was trying to claim the village was flushing hydrants. But really flushing hydrants for 6 months straight. When I told the ma that the rust was coming from within the building he had a meltdown and was angry I had called the water dept. I backed off let someone else take the heat, I have suffered enough. It was so bad that I was swimming in Hempstead lake park to get the Rudy off my body. It made me itchy and I ripped skin off my back scratching it. Also I take salt baths for medical reasons and suffered an electrolyte imbalance that left me barely able to walk. The claim the problem is fixed, but it is not. The new water heater was replaced but it was only 5 years old. The rust is returning and the super drains the system regularly so we don't see the rust. But I take baths because of my need for salts. So I see it and I know the cause. It is old pipes from the 1940s that have rusted. But again the board and ma are keeping shareholders in the dark. If I say anything it will be another full fledged witch hunt and they have not even finished the first one. But it it not the dark murky water like last year. It is faint because the pipes have not yet had enough time to destroy the new water heater. How do I know? Because I am inquisitive and I like staying informed. The exact opposite of the majority of people here who prefer to keep their heads in the sand. Any mention of it will bring out the Charlotteville in them and this place ain't worth it. But thank you for an honest answer. Nothing can be done to change simple minds. I need to cut my losses a get the hell out of here. After this experience I just want quiet and tranquility near a lake so I can recover and hopefully find a peaceful place to rest my bones.

I sincerely hope you find the peace and tranquility you are looking for.

--- Steve

I was preparing to market when I got this in the mail. One of the claims is that I set my carpet on fire. I spoke to the MA a day or so ago and asked him where he got this information. His answer "OK half of it is not true but the rest is". I was also informed by office personal that they do not care if I sue them because they have insurance.
WHAT?
It is a total abomination!
And I would like to sue. I had to vacate my apartment again because of the problem above me. I have located information that provides proof that board members and management knew she did not have carpeting. The MA promised the next tenant would have carpet.... And then I get the thirty day notice.
Give me a break I had already planned on getting out. But my harasser of the past 6 years there out her PC and I grabbed it to have a look. I have not yet had the material that was deleted resorted and I am looking for something very specific. But the 2 letters to board and management claiming that I set my carpet on fire and that I had mental problems were.... No words to describe how horrific this has been. Just moving on and allowing them to get away with what they did to me for years is not sitting right with me. You only know a small portion of what I have been put through. Is there any way to get them to take responsibility for there actions.

MK, If you have all your i's dotted & your t's crossed go to a lawyer with all proof in hand let him/her advise you. Now move to your dream cottage and put this craziness aside. Life is to short and consider this a learning experience. Best of Luck on your new journey. Peace of Mind.

I can only second the advice PC#1 gave you about consulting with a lawyer about your situation. In answer to your question, it looks like it is the only way to get your co-op attention and force them to take responsibility for their actions.

You can bet they'll take notice of a suit when their "insurance" informs them they are not covered for willful and malicious activity, and all legal fees and penalties will have to come out of their treasury.

That info was helpful. It was willful there is no doubt about that!
Thank you, I may be getting out of dodge, but I have no intention of allowing them to get away with the egregious and criminal behavior perpetrated upon me. That was very helpful thank you

It seems that fees for pets face the danger of 'how far does this go'?
What about goldfish, turtles, hamsters, guinea pigs..?

I've never heard of a "pet fee" and it seems problematic...

I totally agree with Bill & the one member that said fees should be for all pets is also right.
More important is requesting every year that the board wants copies of dog license and shots from shareholders Vet.
I too have never heard of a "Pet Fee" this will be more trouble then it's worth. Best of Luck

Hi Bill - What is the reason your board voted to impose a $50 monthly fee on dog owners and not, say, cat owners or girbil owners or any other domesticated animal?

Usually the best way of handling this is to explain to all shareholders the reasons why the board voted the fee for just dog owners. If the reasons resonate, this might end the objection.

If the decision was arbitrary, depending on the number of potential dog owners in your co-op, there could be varying levels of pushback from your shareholders. If you have a shareholder who is ornery enough and rich enough, this could ultimately lead to a lawsuit over discrimination against a specific subclass of "pet" owners, the definition of "pet" being up to the courts. You don't want to become embroiled in this sort of emotional litigation.

In my opinion, engagement with the shareholder is your best course of action. It also helps to have an understandable reason for the fee.

Good luck!

Agree with Steven and here are my 10-cents. If you have elevators and the reason for the fee is for dog-owners to pay for the higher cost associated with running elevators due to dog-owners using them more frequently, you could argue that cat-owners do not normally take their pets out.

Our Co-op charges a one-time administrative registration fee.
It seems like the $50.00 fee per month above is like charging the pet rent.

I re-read Lila's original post and some of the comments. Absent any stated reason for the $50/month dog fee, I'm wondering if it is intended to be a not-so-subtle way of letting future dog owners know their new pets won't be receiving a tail-wagging reception.

a pet fee seems ridiculous to me. $50 a month to have a dog? why? if the building wants to discourage pets, then don't be a pet-friendly building at all.

Why are you charging pet fees?

Great questions, why don't you present them to your board and your managing agent. In the mean time look back at the paper work they had you sign and read about your purchase of your parking spot. Look at your by-laws, house rules and priority lease. I'd be very interested in what your managing agent has to say and your board. Hope you'd share your out come. Good Luck

I am not familiar with the ins-and-outs of condo ownership, and I am definitely not a lawyer. You are asking a lot of very appropriate questions, and I suspect the answers are contained in your condo's governing documents and the condo rules and regulations in the jurisdiction in which your condo is located (NYC?).

My suggestion to you is that you talk to an attorney with experience in condominium law and governance about your situation. The extensive description you provided here should be a good starting point for an attorney to review your matter and offer opinions.

I know it shouldn't have to cost you anything (attorney's fees, etc) to get this resolved, but from the way you describe it, either your condo association is stonewalling you, or they know the rules are on their side and feel they don't owe you anything beyond what they are doing. Either way, you need an expert who can help you navigate this complex situation.

Good luck!

First contact the board tell them you need for this to be resolve ASAP see what they say put it in writing, Second call your homeowners insurance co. Explain to them exactly what happened and see if you can have them look at the problem and if your insurance policy covers it. They will have contractors to do the work and the insurance company will go to the condo to collect the money. With this leak you may also have mold, explain this to your insurance co. and the board. Take pictures of everything in case you have to consult a lawyer. Good Luck

Thank you Steven!

You're welcome. :-)

Go with your gut feelings, what you want is 100% share holders ownership. Habitat is correct. Sponsors can rent or sublet to anyone and control what goes on in the building depending on how many apartments they own in the building. You would be happier with a no sponsor building and a building that does not rent or sublets. Best of Luck in finding your dream home or apt.

I agree with your gut feelings and with PC#1's comments. Based on what you wrote I would walk away from this apartment.

In addition to all the warnings about sponsor ownership PC#1 listed, another big red flag to me is the issuing of multiple contracts for the same apartment. This sounds very shady at best and could be a scam. It sounds like serious pressure is being applied to get you to sign, and I'd have to ask myself why. I bet your anxiety is what's riling your gut.

You'll definitely find another apartment you'll fall in love with. I'd swipe left on this one.

Go with your gut and the recommendations here DO NOT BUY!
I purchased a co-op 7 years ago and I am still stuck here unfortunately. It was the BIGGEST MISTAKE of my life. I had a bad feeling about 2 board members, but I was green and did not ask the right questions. Living in this hell hole has been a life changing experience and not a good one. I feel as if I purchased my own tourture chamber. If you don't take it check to see how soon it is sold.....may not sell for a while.

If it is accessible to the public and you have foot traffic they will sit there. My building has a similar situation and people make themselves comfortable all the time. My neighborhood is in a high crime area (Hempstead) Long Island. So sometimes there are unsavory characters hanging around. Also the grammar school is close by so each morning and afternoon ther is a parade of kids. The lawn is raised and they love to run up the stairs and walk past the garden. I enjoy the kids and I would never want to stop them from this simple pleasure. And I enjoy there presence- I am not thrilled about the drug people, but they don't sit there-they panhandle and leave. Then there is the general public and they sit because they are tired and it is a nice shady spot. I am OK with that also. As long as no damage is being done and it does not become a hangout I am fine with it. I don't know where you live or what type of foot traffic you have, but that should be a consideration. Also the investment of a few benchmark is not going to break the bank. If it attracts people you don't want, simple remove them. Or start small with one bench. I think that is a pretty simple solution to a simple problem. Hope you try the benches, it would be nice for the residents of your building. Oh yea if you want put a sign on them "private property".
Enjoy the fresh air

Cleo Realty Associates, L.P., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Mike Papagiannakis

4% fee on the monthly rent is only 4%/ year.
Assuming $2,000/month rent, a 4% late fee is $80. If charged for one year, 12 x $80= $960, or 4% of the $24,000 yearly rent.

But I assume that if the building charged $960/month in late fees on a $2,000 monthly rent, it would be usurious.

You can name your co op and register for profit, you can decide to manage your small co op without a managing agent or you can be your own agent. But I would suggest you look into a managing agent in good standing. I would interview a few before you choose one some charge a lot for doing very little. I'd look into Cooper Square they turned so many co op's around and well known, I would not interview EBMG Excel they are very high price and do very little. Even though your a small co op you need to have a board or look to see who can be a treasurer who will look and pay bills and over see your debits/credits. Also look around your neighborhood and see who they use all, buildings have a plate with the agents name and #. Word of mouth is also good. If your lawyer knows of an accountant with co op experience you can also check the Habitat they are great for information. At 1st it's a lot of work to set up an honest managing agent. But with the right agent they will guide you through this process. Good Luck

I feel your first order of business should be to have an attorney look into the actual form of your condo's association (for profit vs not for profit) and advise you what is best and what you need to do. The two types of corporations are very different, and I believe (I am not a lawyer) being not for profit is much more beneficial for your unit owners and for tax purposes.

This being said, there may be extenuating circumstances which make being for profit better in your particular situation. This is why I suggested working with an attorney. The attorney can also help you get your building into the best legal form allowable, and answer your other questions.

Good luck!

Did the sponsor give you a reason why you couldn't sit in? Did you interview your renter yourself before they went for the interview? If your answer is yes you did interview the renter before the board approved then I would have trusted my fellow board members. By you insisting on being in the room made them so upset they walked out. I would talk to them and apologize for the misunderstanding. The full board voted to reject your tenant because you did not trust the Admissions committee to interview them without you.

Question #1: Since you are a board member who participates in perspective subtenant interviews and since it is your perspective subtenant who is being interviewed, your other board member might have felt you had a conflict of interest. Even if you remained silent at the interview, the simple fact of your presence could have influenced other board members into asking "softball" questions or not asking pertinent but difficult questions out of deference to you. It's just not a good idea for a board member who has a perspective purchaser or tenant to participate in that interview.

Your comment about "...make sure they give the correct information to the applicant" concerns me. It sounds like you and other board members have differences of opinion about what the subtenant should or should not be told. Your predisposition to approve your own subtenancy could easily color what you say, and this could be of concern to the other board members.

Question #2: Unless specifically stated otherwise in the proprietary lease or bylaws, there is no minimum limit on the number of attendees at a purchaser or subtenant interview. You first wrote the board voted unanimously to reject your tenant. Then you asked if only one board member could interview and then unilaterally make a decision about the tenant. This seems contradictory as to the number of board members involved.

Many boards vote to reject purchasers and subtenants without an interview. This usually occurs if, for example, the board feels a purchaser's financials are not strong enough, there is something unsavory revealed in a background check, the purchaser or subtenant has any sort of diplomatic immunity (impossible to control or evict), things like this.

Most attorneys strongly recommend that the interview be used to meet-and-greet and not as a venue for discovery. Once the purchaser/subtenant and the board meet face to face and if they are rejected, it is much more difficult to defend against charges of discrimination of a protected class.

All in all, it sounds like your board acted appropriately and you simply should have recused yourself from the interview.

Kinda long, but I hope this helps.