Co-ops, in and of itself, are intrusive enough, living through the scrutiny of the board. Small ones are probably worse.
3
This is not about NYC, but is still (I hope) interesting. I own a unit in a co-op, for years the only one in Alaska. Built in the fifties by the CAA (now the FAA) it went into private ownership in 1956 when the residents bought the 40 unit /multi-acre complex then on the edge of downtown Anchorage. Little 4-plexes and 2-plexes, built like old barracks, the complex has survived only because a strict no rental policy remains intact. Each unit now is worth more than was paid for the entire complex in 1956. It has had, and has weathered, all the problems described in this article. It is surrounded by high-value homes. It's a piece of history, in one of the country's newest states.
8
The comparison of small to large buildings and the benefits and difficulties is interesting. But the assumption that larger buildings have more “amenities” is misinformed. And narrow-minded. There are larger co-ops in all five boroughs and beyond at various price levels with various amenities. For example, in Pelham Parkway in the Bronx most of our coops have elevators that go up to the 6th floor as required by law but no rooftop or exercise facilities. Having a super and an elevator is legally required and not a privilege for the size of these buildings, so one could hardly call those “amenities.” And Charles Morisi’s idea of $4 a square foot to operate a building being on the low end is laughable. In Pelham Parkway the maintenance fees for our well maintained and safe buildings run less than $1 per square foot. Perhaps "amenities" are more accurately tied to the neighborhood and cost of the co-op when it comes to larger buildings. It’s all relative, both when it comes to size of the building and the “amenities” that come with the building.
1
I live in a small (six unit) condominium building. When I first moved in, it was self-managed. Some people do not understand that "self-managed" does NOT mean "the owners do the work". At least here, the board has no legal authority to require that. "Self-managed" simply means that the board has the responsibility of preparing the budget, collecting the assessments and making sure that maintenance and repairs are done (by hiring people to do it).
Frankly, the smartest thing we ever did was to raise our assessments in order to hire a management company that specializes in small condos. We make a phone call, the manager has a crew that comes out and deals with the problem or finds someone to do it. It's made our lives a lot easier, and really reduced the conflicts. Having a professional tell you you can't do something (or that you have to do something) has more of an impact than if it's your neighbor.
Frankly, the smartest thing we ever did was to raise our assessments in order to hire a management company that specializes in small condos. We make a phone call, the manager has a crew that comes out and deals with the problem or finds someone to do it. It's made our lives a lot easier, and really reduced the conflicts. Having a professional tell you you can't do something (or that you have to do something) has more of an impact than if it's your neighbor.
10
As a realtor who has to deal with co-ops all the time, I can assure you that the "ugly" part of these smaller co-ops is the way they break the law, and discriminate against people of color, women of child-bearing age, etc. There are many days I want to knock out the criminals who run these buildings as if they owned them, and in flagrant disregard for the law. Indeed, I have begun making recording of the most egregious "explaining" themselves, that I intend to use at a later date.
14
I spent nearly a decade in a small co-op in Park Slope. There were 16 units, with a few still owned by the sponsor and rented out. Unfortunately, most of the residents had no interest in serving on the board, so I and a few others served, and served again, rotating roles through the years. It was frustrating because there is work involved in running a co-op, and those who refused to serve were essentially free riders, who did not think their lack of participation should prevent them from criticizing the decisions and work of those who did. It was galling to do all the work and then have to hear from those who did nothing but didn't like the decisions the board made.
The final straw for me was when my very cordial next door neighbor got engaged to a chain smoker--and suddenly my apartment next door smelled as if I did, too. That was my second, but not final co-op. There was one more, and then I realized that, whether the building is large or small, people are not inherently cooperative when it comes to their living space. I now live in a little house outside of the city, and couldn't be happier.
The final straw for me was when my very cordial next door neighbor got engaged to a chain smoker--and suddenly my apartment next door smelled as if I did, too. That was my second, but not final co-op. There was one more, and then I realized that, whether the building is large or small, people are not inherently cooperative when it comes to their living space. I now live in a little house outside of the city, and couldn't be happier.
13
You want community then try a trailer park
I bet you like yours, right?
6
Hey, New York small co-op owners, stop complaining about garbage, snow and hall cleaning duties. This is New York, where you can buy anything including someone to do these tasks. When I became president of a nine unit building here's what I did: First, I changed the terms of service making each owner's turn three months of doing all three tasks. That meant each owner would only face 'duties' once every two and a half years. Then I allowed the assigned owner to pay someone else to do these things. Turns out we had more than enough kids in the building and on the block ready to earn a few bucks (even some owners who needed/wanted a few extra bucks). Done.
18
Monthly costs are oft lower for the owner in a small building, but that is because the owner is getting less and doing more him/herself. These costs tend to be higher in small buildings when apples are compared to apples. This is because there is no economy of scale for the small building. It cannot procure the same discounts larger buildings get for their bulk purchases of items such as electricity, oil, or gas. The costs of capital improvements and the repairs to them are less pro rata for the owner in the large building. A new boiler or roof for, say, 150 owners, will cost less, on a proportional basis, to purchase, and to repair, than the same item for perhaps 10 owners. The same is true as to the costs of accounting and legal services, and skilled tradespeople. The owner in a small building is typically not getting a super, porter, doorman, on-premises skilled tradespeople, a managing agent, nor, in some instances, accounting or legal services, and the owners must contribute their own labor to perform these tasks. The value of this labor is not factored in, nor the fact that the owner performing these tasks oft lacks the skills of the paid laborer, professional and managing agent. For these reasons I counsel my legal clients to carefully weigh the pros and cons of purchasing in a small building, and add in that they will in effect become "partners in a joint venture" with total strangers.
8
In Australia where we have strata (shared ownership) - and while committee membership may attract toxic individuals, it also attracts people who have spare time and interest to maintain and improve their community.
As one retires or gives up, another steps up to take their place - it's all free and voluntary, people do it because they feel it's worthwhile (plus the odd sharing of wine - our 3-monthly meetings are at a local pub) and enjoy giving back - plus the social opportunity for folk who enjoy sharing and helping their community.
As one retires or gives up, another steps up to take their place - it's all free and voluntary, people do it because they feel it's worthwhile (plus the odd sharing of wine - our 3-monthly meetings are at a local pub) and enjoy giving back - plus the social opportunity for folk who enjoy sharing and helping their community.
4
No, strata in Australia is more like boards in condos, not co-op. The board might function the same way, voluntary and all, but ownership of the property is way way different.
1
Having lived in a 4-unit self-managed co-op, I can attest that "community" is vastly overrated. Everyone knows your business and vice versa. I don't mind sharing chores like putting out the trash and shoveling snow, but the reality in such a situation is one owner usually ends up doing all the work while another owner creates 75% of the problems in the building. It got to the point that I did nearly all the snow shoveling, hallway vacuuming and trash clearing in the building. I would go away for a week and come home to overflowing garbage and swarms of flies in the alley because none of the other three owners could be bothered to put the trash out. It was like a second unpaid job without holiday tips.
The tipping point for me in deciding to sell: One day, the visiting mother of my downstairs pregnant neighbor asked me when I was going to clear the dead leaves from the front stoop - she didn't want her daughter to slip and fall. My jaw dropped. I managed tell her I wasn't the super - even though it may seem like it - and she should ask her son-in-law to do it. Now, I live in a 300-unit full-service condo building. I coudn't be happier. I don't know my neighbors beyond saying "hi" in the elevator, and there's a super to deal with everything. Yes, I pay a lot more in maintenance, but it has been worth every penny compared to my previous co-op.
The tipping point for me in deciding to sell: One day, the visiting mother of my downstairs pregnant neighbor asked me when I was going to clear the dead leaves from the front stoop - she didn't want her daughter to slip and fall. My jaw dropped. I managed tell her I wasn't the super - even though it may seem like it - and she should ask her son-in-law to do it. Now, I live in a 300-unit full-service condo building. I coudn't be happier. I don't know my neighbors beyond saying "hi" in the elevator, and there's a super to deal with everything. Yes, I pay a lot more in maintenance, but it has been worth every penny compared to my previous co-op.
43
@ Lynn C - All I can say is - Wow! I am so sorry you had to deal with that and I am not at all surprised. There is a lot of entitlement in NYC...you should have been compensated for your time. I just went through a similar situation here in Sac (except it was a rental) where I was essentially the defacto unpaid property manager. The other tenants just didn't care and I couldn't stand living in disgusting conditions so I did all the work. My energy was sunk into a black hole and it never got better; there was always more to do. I moved as soon as the lease was up. I always thought it would be better in an owner occupied building but your experience proves me wrong. I'm glad your living situation is much improved.
5
I believe that some of the issues raised in the comments would be less of a problem in a condo as opposed to a co-op. Unless it's different in NY, if you own a condo, you can sell it to anyone without an approval from The Board. You normally have to let the management company know you are moving, but that's about it.
Other problems, such as noise related issues, are probably going to be the same, regardless - coop or condo.
And I would be very hesitant to live in a small coop or condo because your portion of a major repair always seems higher than in a larger building or complex.
Other problems, such as noise related issues, are probably going to be the same, regardless - coop or condo.
And I would be very hesitant to live in a small coop or condo because your portion of a major repair always seems higher than in a larger building or complex.
6
One more reason why I'm glad I own a house. No awful NYC landlords, no personality clashes. NYC renters/co-op owners put up with a lot of abuse it seems. I don't even mind doing my own recycling.
12
l have lived abroad for 25 years but just reading this article gave me a frisson of recollection about NY coop living (double entendre in the coop)...especially "family style" coop living. I did 25 years of uptown and downtown, but issues were ultimately the same. I had the Sutton Place coop experience where (as one interviewee noted) the communal roof garden was actually the private sanctuary of a few tenants who commandeered it every fine evening...either you shared your wine, food, guests and chat with them or you sat as an interloper perched on the roof ledge because it was absolutely their domain. And I had the Village coop experience where a financially clueless soft sculpture artist (not talking Claes Oldenburg here) dominated the board (and my most valuable asset at the time) and vehemently pressed forward a position that the only laundry room (no private washers/dryers allowed in the apartments in those days) should be turned into an art studio! Living in Vienna now, in a relatively cheap, well located, elegantly renovated and large RENTED flat which due to very stringent tenant protection laws is effectively mine until death (and then my beneficiary's) and very relieved that my frisson is only vicarious. NY living...so good when it's good, but so phenomenally bad when it's bad!
18
We live in a small co op condo. I have posted this up in our mail room for everyone to see - right on.
13
This happens in small condos too, which might be even worse. In a three residential one commercial condo in Tribeca, the top floor duplex was sold to a family who intended to do major renovations to their unit. The reno was stopped due to major disagreement with the other unit owners on their plans. Therefore the unit owner decided to run an Airbnb out of his unit while not living in it. Given that the board is only 4 people, and given the size of his unit (percentage of common space for voting), there's no way to stop this guy from doing this. Literally a constant flow of humanity up and down this 6 floor walk up with no recourse. Board can't hire an attorney without his approval, and proving the guy is running this as Airbnb in violation of New York law is difficult.
6
@wpr8e: Bad idea to be in any condo or co-op where one person/entity has 51% (or more) of the shares. That said, nothing is stopping individual owners from hiring an attorney of their own (you don't need anyone's approval to do that). Further, security cam footage would be very interesting to prove the Airbnb activity; you can also report the owner for running an Airbnb illegally in the space, as I imagine Airbnb and NYC would be *quite* interested in that information.
7
Proving someone is running an Air BnB is as simple as printing off the web page, and reviews. Don't pretend otherwise.
9
Condos can be tough. Co ops are awful. Stay away from them.
8
There are so many rules and regulations,” Ms. Toh said. “But here I see students all day and make a lot of music. If my neighbors object, we talk about it one-on-one and we make a connection.”
Wow she's teaching music all day long and she thinks the neighbors want a connection?????
Wow she's teaching music all day long and she thinks the neighbors want a connection?????
25
I'm impressed she's apparently charming enough to get away with running a noisy business out of her apartment. Might be one thing if she were a professional concert pianist practicing, but bumbling students making mistakes loudly? Eeeks!
13
Ms. Toh needs to realise that she is a member of a close (quite literally so) community and act the part.
Has she sound-proofed one of the rooms for the purpose of her business yet? She should get to it if she hasn't.
Connections are made when her neighbours can take it no more and show up at her door?
I'd pass on those negative connections any day, folks.
Has she sound-proofed one of the rooms for the purpose of her business yet? She should get to it if she hasn't.
Connections are made when her neighbours can take it no more and show up at her door?
I'd pass on those negative connections any day, folks.
1
"We make a connection." ie, we talk and I don't change anything. Because I still want to have students all day and make music even if it bothers my neighbors.
5
Having made the fault of buying shares in a Coop, it's my personal opinion the outdated cooperative structure of residence should be abolished. Most of the nightmare stories do not even scratch the surface. Personal investment should never be affected by neighbors - good or bad
24
It like buying shares in any corporations, you can't always control the up and the down, or the good or the bad.
3
@Carl: The mistake was yours; the legal structure of co-op apartments has been pretty well set for many decades. It sounds like you didn't comprehend the nature of co-op living, nor the difference between a co-op and a condo. Perhaps you are among the many who need to live in a detached single-family home.
5
But they always are. It's very difficult, if not entirely impossible, to live in isolation of others; no matter how much Trumpsters will tell you that we should.
4
This article doesn't mention the huge risk that the financial health of the other members is not solid. In larger entities the impact of one or two deadbeats is averaged out over many owners. But in smaller coops (& condos) the impact of even one unit which can't keep up financially can be devastating.
36
Very true. Not to mention the cost of an surprise major repair. Even a relatively simple structural repair to a small building in Manhattan can run into the six figures. Unless the shareholders had the foresight to budget for unexpected repairs, a single event can cause serious financial strain to the coop and the individual shareholders who have to come up with the money to pay for the repair. Also, small coops may not be able to obtain the financing that larger coops can draw on for major repairs and capital projects. Beware the small, undercapitalized coop!
7
It sure helps if you are hard of hearing.
25
Ms. Toh says. “I see students all day and make a lot of music. If my neighbors object, we talk about it one-on-one and we make a connection.”
I used to live right next to an opera singer who would practice scales in a really high octave for 2 hours per day. The noise was piercing and it was as if someone was practicing in my living room. After 6 months I couldn't take it any more so I went over to her to "make a one-on-one connection." She was nice but she wasn't going to stop practicing. She texted me when she was about to practice and my options were to wear noise canceling headphones or leave the apartment.
I had a another neighbor who was a musician but he understood the fact that maybe people didn't want to hear his music day and night. He was super considerate and I never heard any type of noise coming from either him or his wife.
My experience in NYC makes me wonder what Ms. Toh's idea of compromise is. It seems like people who make the noise always win out - whether it be because they are musicians, have children, etc. What about peoples' right to quiet enjoyment of their apartment?
I never bought anything in NYC but I could see the advantages to living in a small co-op if everyone was on the same page. But I think that's difficult to achieve even if it's only an 8 unit building. Seems like the dominant personalities always win out.
I used to live right next to an opera singer who would practice scales in a really high octave for 2 hours per day. The noise was piercing and it was as if someone was practicing in my living room. After 6 months I couldn't take it any more so I went over to her to "make a one-on-one connection." She was nice but she wasn't going to stop practicing. She texted me when she was about to practice and my options were to wear noise canceling headphones or leave the apartment.
I had a another neighbor who was a musician but he understood the fact that maybe people didn't want to hear his music day and night. He was super considerate and I never heard any type of noise coming from either him or his wife.
My experience in NYC makes me wonder what Ms. Toh's idea of compromise is. It seems like people who make the noise always win out - whether it be because they are musicians, have children, etc. What about peoples' right to quiet enjoyment of their apartment?
I never bought anything in NYC but I could see the advantages to living in a small co-op if everyone was on the same page. But I think that's difficult to achieve even if it's only an 8 unit building. Seems like the dominant personalities always win out.
49
I'm pretty sure that Ms. Toh's use of her unit as a studio for giving music lessons is a violation of her proprietary lease. The lease usually provides for use of a residential cooperative unit as a residence. Home businesses are allowed, but the shareholder usually cannot have customers coming to the unit to transact business or in this case, take music lessons. I think NYC municipal laws also follow this distinction. In the case where the shareholder is in violation of the proprietary lease, the coop has the right to demand that the shareholder cease running a business that involves customers regularly coming to the unit. If the shareholder does not cure the violation of the proprietary lease, the cop[ have the right to sue to cancel the lease, and the shareholder could lose the right to occupy their apartment. There may also be grounds to sue based on a nuisance caused by the noise. So there are things that can be done. I love music and support musicians, but I don't think Ms. Toh's neighbors are obligated to put up with noise regularly caused by music lessons.
4
If you need peace and quiet, you have to live in a private home, obviously you should not live in an apartment building where you usually share a floor with other residents- unless you can afford a place in the Dakota. You have to make reasonable allowances, and you have to compromise when living next to and on top or below other residents. It's that simple.
1
Noise problems can be very difficult to deal with in an apartment building. Years ago, I had an upstairs neighbor who played a large stringed instrument professionally. He practiced at home and would not modify his behavior when I complained -- until the time that I had an all night Rolling Stones marathon just before he had a major concert. After that he wouldn't talk to me, but confined his practice sessions to times that I was not home. Shortly thereafter he moved out.
9
With small co-ops there is also the danger -- not looming but not insignificant, either -- that if a single entity (like a developer) acquires a large majority of the shares, that entity can collapse the co-op. If you want to sell your apartment to that entity, the situation is all good. But if you want to stay in your home, not so much -- you actually become a rental tenant after the co-op is dissolved.
A few years ago, the NYT wrote about this situation, which is apparently on the rise as developers chase fewer and fewer places to develop.
A few years ago, the NYT wrote about this situation, which is apparently on the rise as developers chase fewer and fewer places to develop.
9
@JLW: No co-op should put itself in the position where a developer or investor could be ABLE to collapse the co-op. In my small building, we make it clear that a "developer" "investor" or "flipper" will NOT be considered as a buyer. We make it clear to sellers & to brokers. We want people who will live here & make it their home.
To that end, we have a very stringent clause that requires that any buyer MUST RESIDE IN THE APARTMENT as their LEGAL PRIMARY RESIDENCE for a minimum number of years; if they choose to sell before that, they pay a punishingly large "flip tax" to the co-op.
Also, buildings with large numbers of developer-owned shares cause a problem for anyone else who's trying to get a mortgage (an initial mortgage or a re-finance). Banks look at how many shares/apartments are owner-occupied; and how many are "investor-owned".
The co-op board's job is to protect the best interests of the majority of the shareholders, so the idea of letting an outside entity buy up so many shares that the co-op *could* be collapsed should not arise (unless the co-op is looking to dissolve itself, via majority vote).
To that end, we have a very stringent clause that requires that any buyer MUST RESIDE IN THE APARTMENT as their LEGAL PRIMARY RESIDENCE for a minimum number of years; if they choose to sell before that, they pay a punishingly large "flip tax" to the co-op.
Also, buildings with large numbers of developer-owned shares cause a problem for anyone else who's trying to get a mortgage (an initial mortgage or a re-finance). Banks look at how many shares/apartments are owner-occupied; and how many are "investor-owned".
The co-op board's job is to protect the best interests of the majority of the shareholders, so the idea of letting an outside entity buy up so many shares that the co-op *could* be collapsed should not arise (unless the co-op is looking to dissolve itself, via majority vote).
6
One way to minimize future stresses of the sort mentioned in this piece (alas no longer available thanks to changes in developer's codes) is for members to start out as fellow homesteaders, buying raw space in a building then jointly debating and achieving at least close to unanimity on every decision made, from heating to elevator to public space allocations. That was how we did it back in the mid 70s.
In our case, after all the adventures we had during a more than two year long renovation period the charter 12 owners (a mix of ages and civil statuses) were a pretty tight group. Of course in the thirty years I was a member there were changes and by the time I left the original residents were down to five, and there were certainly occasional brush fires--often clashes between second/third generation residents--but speaking for myself (a fairly get along, go long type I like to think) I don't think I could have lived more comfortably in any other setting.
In our case, after all the adventures we had during a more than two year long renovation period the charter 12 owners (a mix of ages and civil statuses) were a pretty tight group. Of course in the thirty years I was a member there were changes and by the time I left the original residents were down to five, and there were certainly occasional brush fires--often clashes between second/third generation residents--but speaking for myself (a fairly get along, go long type I like to think) I don't think I could have lived more comfortably in any other setting.
1
You do understand the article is specifically about New York City, right?
4
Oh, Lord. We moved from a house in NJ into a small condo (8 units) in Greenville, SC eight years ago because we didn't want the maintenance of a house again. Well, guess what? My husband is doing more maintenance work than he ever did. (I'm not because I did so much maintenance on the house, it almost broke me.) He coordinates maintenance of the security gate and the pump room (for storm water and sewage). He served as president of the board, and now I do. I replace bulbs in the outdoor walkway lights. I'm on the landscape committee. And, gosh, we're tired... but we do love it here.
12
Many in NYC have war stories about co-ops and condos of course.
Unfortunately, whatever articles like this say -- one really cannot 100% know what you are getting into until *after* you buy. You can read the board minutes (good luck getting hold of them but worth getting them no matter what). However a smart board knows what to put in those minutes. Disagreements are rarely included in the minutes. A healthy contingency fund is arguably the most important thing to note before buying -- that is a sign that everyone is paying in and paying up. OTOH, you wont know how good or bad the super is until you are in the apt and actually asking for something. That's when you find out he will only do things if so-and-so asks him to do it.
One thing made me shudder in this article. The last thing I would want to be in is a "toddler friendly" co-op. What that means is that the parents will allow all manner of noise and the board will go along with it, kids playing in the hallways for playdates for hours and hours when there is a playground nearby. Can you imagine the one or 2 singletons in that building? Run away. Run away.
Unfortunately, whatever articles like this say -- one really cannot 100% know what you are getting into until *after* you buy. You can read the board minutes (good luck getting hold of them but worth getting them no matter what). However a smart board knows what to put in those minutes. Disagreements are rarely included in the minutes. A healthy contingency fund is arguably the most important thing to note before buying -- that is a sign that everyone is paying in and paying up. OTOH, you wont know how good or bad the super is until you are in the apt and actually asking for something. That's when you find out he will only do things if so-and-so asks him to do it.
One thing made me shudder in this article. The last thing I would want to be in is a "toddler friendly" co-op. What that means is that the parents will allow all manner of noise and the board will go along with it, kids playing in the hallways for playdates for hours and hours when there is a playground nearby. Can you imagine the one or 2 singletons in that building? Run away. Run away.
92
@K. Henderson: You are leaving out the fact that, to buy into a co-op, the prospective owner(s) must meet with the board in person - which is a "getting to know you/how well will this work?" meeting.
In a small building, usually the prospective owner(s) are meeting EVERYONE ELSE who's already a tenant-shareholder living in the building, so one would know who's older, who's younger, and there is the chance to ask (on both sides) about noise, parties, problems, the attitude toward maintaining the building (like new roof, etc.). One can ask "how's the super?" One can ask "How do you handle disagreements? Do you allow children to run & play in the hallways? Do you require floors to be carpeted? How respectful are people living here toward each other?" Listen carefully to the answers: what you're told, what's not being said, and what you're hearing "between the lines."
The board interview should be used to the fullest by prospective owner(s) AND existing tenants (who don't want a new owner who is going to be a bad fit or who sees themselves as not having to obey rules). In the small building I live in, the board interview can be anywhere from one to two hours. This is when to ask the tough questions and get answers - and if you don't like the answers or if you think you're being stonewalled, then proceed with caution or walk away.
In a small building, usually the prospective owner(s) are meeting EVERYONE ELSE who's already a tenant-shareholder living in the building, so one would know who's older, who's younger, and there is the chance to ask (on both sides) about noise, parties, problems, the attitude toward maintaining the building (like new roof, etc.). One can ask "how's the super?" One can ask "How do you handle disagreements? Do you allow children to run & play in the hallways? Do you require floors to be carpeted? How respectful are people living here toward each other?" Listen carefully to the answers: what you're told, what's not being said, and what you're hearing "between the lines."
The board interview should be used to the fullest by prospective owner(s) AND existing tenants (who don't want a new owner who is going to be a bad fit or who sees themselves as not having to obey rules). In the small building I live in, the board interview can be anywhere from one to two hours. This is when to ask the tough questions and get answers - and if you don't like the answers or if you think you're being stonewalled, then proceed with caution or walk away.
7
Um, yeah, what got me was “But here I see students all day and make a lot of music.” Holy yikes, not to mention running a business out of your apt is a big no-no.
39
You are so right. Had anyone warned me I never would have bought in one with kids, especially on the second floor of a small brownstone without an elevator. The first time I mentioned that the owner might want to have he nanny store or carry their stroller up one flight of stairs and not leave it locked to the banister in the lobby where it blocked fire access and created several other inconveniences was the end of peaceful life for me. My neighbor and cooperator said, "I'll talk to my husband about it." But, what she really meant is, "This is war, I will never speak with you again. We will go behind your back and turn the whole building against you and when you try to sell we will make your life hell."
It took me a while to pick up on the suddenly hostile vibes, but my girlfriend said to me one morning out of the blue, "any reason why the rest of the people hate us in this building."
I tried to sell. Good luck with that. The board took three different offers I had, and sat on them. Each of them were single professionals like me. They turned them all down. But, no reason, - the husband of the upstairs neighbor - a lawyer likely counseled them all that they're protected as long as they give no reason.
Now I'm stuck abroad paying my monthlies and an assessment, and they passed a 'flip tax' of 12% "because they're a small building" after my last turn down. I've talked to lawyers who all said, "Good luck! Hope that they have a relative who wants it."
It took me a while to pick up on the suddenly hostile vibes, but my girlfriend said to me one morning out of the blue, "any reason why the rest of the people hate us in this building."
I tried to sell. Good luck with that. The board took three different offers I had, and sat on them. Each of them were single professionals like me. They turned them all down. But, no reason, - the husband of the upstairs neighbor - a lawyer likely counseled them all that they're protected as long as they give no reason.
Now I'm stuck abroad paying my monthlies and an assessment, and they passed a 'flip tax' of 12% "because they're a small building" after my last turn down. I've talked to lawyers who all said, "Good luck! Hope that they have a relative who wants it."
34
1. Everyone should understand the by-laws and regulations.
2. The authority of the president must be recognized and accepted by all. Our by-laws make it clear the president if the general manager of the corporation. Any attempt to rule by "consensus" will end in disaster.