Subscribe for Daily Updates!
Hi all...I received some very helpful responses when I first asked about absentee owners...and our board is considering some of the suggestions.
I have another question. We have four owners who rent their units. One owner lives in the area, another lives in Washington, D.C, and two others are some distance away. None of these owners comes to their units to check on them regularly, nor are they physically present at annual meetings (but they do phone in). The board is thinking about requiring the owners come into town at least once a year (maybe even for the annual meeting) to take stock of their units, building issues and repairs, and essentially be involved to a greater extent. Otherwise, they essentially have no role other than paying their monthly maintenance fees. I wonder whether this is something a board can mandate, of course, probably with a shareholder vote? Thanks.
In agreement with efy. Subleasing is against the very reason people buy co-ops. Why not rent? Co-op living should be exclusive not to rent / sublease.
Sorry...this is a condo...thx.
The board really should not legislate a unit-owner's participation in the co-op's or condo's governance. There might be very good reasons why a unitowner cannot return for the annual meeting, military committment being one. If you start carving out exceptions, you'll wind up with something that resembles the federal tax code. :-)
What the board should mandate is that all unitowners who know they will be away from their units for longer than a specified time (2 weeks, month, etc) pay some nominal fee to have the super or whoever maintains the common structures enter the apartment and perform a general safety review. Simple things like making sure the electricity and gas are turned off or aren't leaking, no water problems with leaks or overflows, no signs of damage like from an upstairs leak, things like that. The board's first concern should be the safety and security of the building. If a unit owner is not going to be present for an extended period of time, I don't think a nominal fee to have a surrogate like the super perform simple safety and security checks is inappropriate
even coop owners have protection against someone entering their apartment unless it is an emergency. Opening the building up to charges of theft, etc.
It has to be an bonafide emergency to enter the apartment , like a leak downstairs and the apartment above the empty apartment has no leak. i am sure once a leak above was repaired , and it was obvious that the middle apartment must have water damage , after trying to contact the owner to let them know what was going on, the building could enter for mold mitigation measures and structural checks.
I suggested a fee to (1) force the apartment owner and the board to come to an agreement on entry conditions, and (2) to reimburse the board for the time the super (or whoever) has to spend performing an out-of-band chore for this one particular shareholer.
Introduce yourself to other members of Board Talk! Log in below or register here.
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.
people would need to know if it is coop or condo.
If co-op, subleasing IMO is against the very reason people buy co-ops. Short term to get a buyer is one thing .
condo's is a whole different situation
Thank you for rating!
You have already rated this page, you can only rate it once!
Your rating has been changed, thanks for rating!
Board Talk members who registered prior to March 9th, 2016 will need to reset their password.