What you share with your former owner neighbour is between you and him. It's a financial report and if you are seeking better understanding from a professional so that you better understand the report - good for you!

Call the Attorney General's Information & Complaint Line: 1-800-771-7755

I have often wondered myself how this would work. It would seem that in the case of a calamity the insurance company would go for recovery and that would point to the management who described the duties of the super. But, looking forward to a more qualified and expert answer as opposed to my speculation.

The vendor should have told you that there was a real possibility of the work impacting ceilings; if it's an old building with plaster ceilings and a new sub floor is being installed, ergo, the ceiling below could be impacted. The prior water damage to this ceiling may have made this ceiling even weaker.

While there is no structural damage being done, if the ceiling in the unit is being impacted (bits of plaster falling), it's simple: you fix it.

Suggest you have a contractor enter the unit and cover the ceiling with a (thin clear) drop sheet so that falling plaster is not all over the persons furniture and flooring. Post the leveling floors work, address the ceiling and get it fixed. And if that's includes replacing plaster with drywall, then you do it. The owner should not be responsible for this.

Did someone on the board review the contracts? or did the board request an attorney take a look at the contracts? I would start with questioning the board.

The contractor would have some accountability to ensure that what they installed, works. Saying that, they can run into issues and I am saying this from experience with our own 1964 buildings. In our case and migrating to high efficiency boilers, we experienced issues with other older infrastructure that had not been upgraded; the pipes. Was this the vendors fault? No. Do they have a responsibility to ensure that the boilers work? Yes. I agree with CondoPrezDC, ask your board about the contract and whether or not the contract was reviewed by legal. If a board member gave you the response "we need to pay someone else again" in the event that the equipment is installed incorrectly or does not perform to spec sounds like it absolves the vendor from any liability.

You should probably consult an attorney to assist in the formation.

I am the president of my condo, we are incorporated under section 402 of the not-for-profit corporation law.

Good luck

We are a co-ownership but I suspect Boards operates similar. In our By-Laws/Rules & Regulations it stipulates "At all meetings of the board every question shall be decided by the majority of the votes cast on the question". So in answer to your questions as it applies to us, yes. Boards decisions/resolutions can be a separate document or within the minutes. For example, we do a lot of communication via email in between meetings as a number issues come up that require board approval - big and small and require immediate resolve. We document all email decisions and have a paper trail of who voted in favour or not. It's a majority vote. Even our Newsletters or responses to co-owner complaints via letter require content majority voting. Check your By-Laws/Rules and Regulations; it should indicate the voting rules for your operations.

Best approach is an amicable solution and not trying to shove a law at the resident
For example, you can attach a string the drain hole and the water will flow along that. Or a clear plastic tube and then you can control the direction of the drain flow.

I agree with DM, try to resolve it, but don't drag it out too long. It may be that the a/c is tilted down too much, it should be close to level front to back. The water inside helps the cooling.
I think there is a law about water running across the sidewalk, probably enacted to prevent water from gutters draining across a sidewalk in winter, when it may freeze and become ice and a slip hazard.

Water slushing around inside your AC doe snot help "cooling." The reason the air in your apt feels better in your apt is due due to humidity being removed by your AC.. Dripping it out, rather tan listening the fan whisk it around, is better. An angled AC is very important.

The humidity that is removed from your apartment has NOTHING to do with what drips out the back of your AC. The water that drips from the back of your AC is condensation on your evaporator coil. As a mater of fact water slushing around the back of you AC actually DOES help cooling in newer more efficient AC units. The newer units are designed to have the evaporator coil partially submerged in the water that normally drips out the back of your AC. New and efficient AC units do not have drop holes. Replacing the unit with a new high efficiency unit is the answer.

I am not an attorney so I cannot tell you if there is a strict legal difference between a sublet and a short- term rental, but I suspect there is.

You need to check your co-op's proprietary lease and house rules before engaging in any sort of sub-tenancy, and you will almost always need board approval. These two documents are usually very specific on what you can and cannot do in terms of allowing non-shareholders to stay in your unit without at least one shareholder present at the same time.

A sub-tenancy of any duration does not include a transfer of ownership or ownership rights. Having a sub-tenant means you are given approval by your co-op board to have non-shareholders live in your apartment for a finite period of time without a shareholder present. Approval almost always involves a qualification process where the prospective tenant is interviewed and may include a background check. You as a shareholder are always responsible for the conduct of your tenant so make sure you know who you are sub-letting to.

The board can set any minimum and maximum durations they want. These limits are usually for a minimum of one month to a maximum of two to three years. NYC regulations prohibit sublets for less than 30 days. Anything shorter is viewed as the same as a hotel and subject to all of the hotel regulations and taxes. Mortgage banks frown on originating co-op purchase mortgages in buildings where more than 10% or so of the units are not owner-occupied.

The reason for tight board control on sublets is to insure the safety and security of the rest of the community. The board needs to be sure that any non-shareholders they grant access to will follow house rules and won't be a disturbance, do anything malicious, or worse. This is the reason for the interview and background check. AirBnB definitely does not qualify no matter how much the company insists that they qualify their clients.

You co-op's attorney can give you much better answers. What I wrote above is just from my experiences as a board member.

A wrinkle on this is the roommate law. You are allowed one person in your apartment (you must be residing there concurrently) and the landlord may not ask anything except for the persons name. Evidently, you can advertises for a roommate (aka offer the room) on airbnbn and have them stay for 1 day or 30 days. there are no time limit with roommates. There are no limits on the $ you can charge a roommate in a coop. The $ is between you and them. Obviously it is better, in general, to have one person a month rather then nightly transients.

You're right, DM. I was considering only longer-term sub-tenancies of a month or more where the shareholder(s) vacated their unit. If the shareholder wants to live with a constant stream of new and unknown individuals, caveat emptor.

Another (albeit extreme) solution to one shareholder constantly allowing unfamiliar people in and out of the building and his/her apartment is for the rest of the shareholders to decide to terminate the offending shareholder's lease and then the board would move for eviction. This is an outgrowth of the Pullman decision. Again, this is an extreme response, but if enough shareholders feel threatened by the actions of one shareholder, it is a possibility.

The majority of shareholders would have to have a solid and valid basis to do that. If the roommates are respectable people there would be no such grounds. As for the other case there must be more to it. How old is that case? Did the tenant allow usage of the entire apartment? My attorney says you can have a roommate for 1 day or 30 days. You must allow access to the entire premise (kitchen, etc) and reside concurrently. In a standard coop, you are allowed a guest (or guests) for 29 day of each month in addition to roommate. Like a normal house in the suburb or anywhere. What of that? Bottom line: if you have nice guest who don't bother anyone or barf allover the laundryroom - why pester anyone? Get a life?

DM, you say that there's "no time limit with roommates" and you can have them "stay for 1 day or 30 days." This argument has been tried and has failed. See Peck v. Lodge, in which a rent-controlled tenant was ejected from her apartment for having a sequence of short-term "roommates" in a bed-and-breakfast arrangement. From the decision:

"Lodge insists that her "guests" were actually "roommates" such that she is protected by RPL 235-f ("the Roommate Law") ... However, this contention is unsupported by any credible evidence. A "roommate" is a long-term co-occupant of an apartment with the lease-holder, with whom s/he shares the entire living area."

See https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8096866326674503664 - and I must note that I'm not a lawyer, but this case is a ready-made answer for anyone claiming that the Roommate Law protects their Airbnb arrangement.

First the original poster did not mention if he lived in a condo or coop or if his unit currently has rental restrictions or fees.

A roommate is allowed per NYS law. Now what is a roommate. Well first owner is present, only one kitchen and no locks on bedroom doors and shared bathrooms are usually signs of a roomate.

Also in a roomate situation costs are normally split 50/50. And roomates usually are not a daily thing.

A little far-fetched, but a serious question.

Let's say a coop's proprietary lease has very easy sub-let rules -- application and a right of first refusal. No other restrictions on sublets.

Lessee submits an application for a 3-day sublet over the memorial day weekend. And an application for a 7-day sublet over July 4th holiday. Another application for a 3-day sublet in August.

Must the Board treat these as sub-let applications? Or do these short-term rentals not count as sublets.

(Put aside for a moment whether a short-term tenant violates the MDL.)

Sue, I'm not a lawyer. But this is how the system works, and will take years before anything happens. It's in the hands of your insurance company now. As a board director, the only thing you can do is cooperate and wait. We have a similar situation in my coop that has being going on for 8 years.

VP,

Thanks for your input. I am also not clear about who exactly is responsible for this tree pit. It was put in over a decade ago under the City "plant a tree" program to beautify the block. City didn't say anything about empty the pockets of our Co-op should someone trip and fall as a result of the "beautiful" tree.