The condo association should be liable, since it approved the work; it has the responsibility to ensure all work done is legal. Also, there's a big question in my mind about what's in the question. When I renovated my last apartment, I took out the railings from a captain's staircase to make it more usable. Against code? Certainly, but I can't imagine a building inspector caring if he saw it.
How old is the condo? There is no guarantee that any renovations that occurred were done by the immediately previous owner.
3
My sister quickly closed on a house she fell in love with and was amazed at the price. She moved in only to find that railroad tracks ran next to her property and trains went through on average of four times a week at night.
3
Ha -- your sister is lucky. We bought a home that has railroad tracks about 1/4 mile away. They are hidden by trees. We were lied to about the frequency -- freight trains that run 24/7. Putting together a list of all the things the realtor lied to us about to sue her.
2
Does this mean she didn't walk the property? Look at a map of the boundaries?
3
"[T]rains went through on average of four times a week at night."
Only four times a week? Once a night? And that's a cause for regret?
I grew up in a house in Windsor Terrace that has IND tracks running beneath it. For most of my family's multiple decades there, we had quiet; only a very occasional work train passed below, and most often we weren't home to hear it.
Then the track began to be used more frequently. One night I awoke to the entire house rumbling, and I thought Ben Hur's chariot race was thundering over my head.
And then the MTA used the track for rush-hour F-express trains every weekday beginning around four o'clock and going way past my parents' long cocktail hour.
Our antique brass table from India shook violently the entire time.
Now the house has been sold, and the brass table is in my living room, where every few minutes the great 20-foot ditch that carries the Q and B trains shudders, and along with it my c. 1850 house. My wisteria along the fence does nothing to muffle the sound or mitigate the shake, that's for sure.
My parents' block fetches a good $2.5 million a house. My block, substantially less, but not because of the trains. It's just not in Windsor Terrace.
But you did not answer the 1st question: How do I legalize the work?
Answer please.
1
If the work was done illegally, it will need to be brought up to code IF the buyer wants to make other renovations.
This might involve completely removing whatever renovations were done or it might mean making some simple fixes or it might just mean paying for permits to be issued and the work inspected. No way of telling what needs to be done to "legalize" the work without knowing what about it is not legal.
4
The buyer did not mention having hired a building inspector to check out the condo before the sale, which was probably a mistake to omit.
3
Illegal renovations are usually shoddy renovations.
The inspector one hires to look over a house or apartment doesn't go behind walls anyway, so if you're replacing, say, a fixture and there's electric tape holding things together, that's nothing you can sue about.
For heaven's sake, if you find substandard work in what now belongs to you, just redo it.
5
I have only bought a house once in my life but I thought everyone knew to check or have their lawyer check for permit issues. But apparently not. In fact it amazes me how many people buy RE without having their own legal representation (disclaimer I am not a lawyer.) But then again a few months back their was a story about some people who bought a house without even checking their commute time to work! Driving around the neighborhood at night and reading the police report / stats are also a must. Look at the county or city master plan for future development and check the flood map. School quality is important too whether you have kids or not. Too many people are too focused on aesthetics of the property.
5
I would not say outright that NYS does not have property disclosure law. This law does exist, however, the seller can opt to give buyer $500 credit in lieu of completing a lengthy questionnaire and this is how the sellers choose to avoid having to file the full disclosure. It's funny how NYS and NYC are pro-tenant when it comes to landlord/tenant and pro-seller when it comes to seller/buyer. The article does not mention anything about conducting an inspection for the property and this is a huge mistake that most condo and co-op buyers make, assuming that if it's a building rather than a house, everything has been built with permits and up to code. The inspection would have surely revealed many problems if items were not done up to code, but probably would not have revealed items done illegally. While I had a great inspector and an attorney handling the purchase of our house, I did a ton of legwork on my own. The seller provided us with permits for the various extensions that were done to the house, all were fine, however, when I asked whether the concrete patio in the backyard was legal, no one knew the answer. I called the town ordinance and they told me that patios under a certain height were exempt from the need to obtain a permit. Then I called the real estate agent and told her to notify the seller that I will be coming over to measure the height of the patio. She almost had a heart attack as none of the buyers were driving her as crazy as I was.
6
I'm not sure what kind of "inspection" you're referring to. But standard inspection from mortgage would NOT be looking for illegal renovations or provenance of the property "original" (or legal) condition, if only to the extent that, say, this is legally a 2-family home instead of a 3-family property as it's being used right now, etc. I've gone through lots of inspections in the past, from purchases and sales and refi and insurers over a number of properties (both single family, multi-family, and condo), and that has been true for all of them.
3
Wow. Here in San Francisco, a seller is required to provide the buyer with a Report of Residential Record (3R) which lists all permits pulled on the properties and their status; going back to the original building permit.
On the Real Estate Transfer Disclosure Statement (TDS) and the also on the Seller's Property Questionnaire (SPQ), the seller is required to list all remodeling and painting, down to the year it was done and answer whether the necessary permits pulled.
I'm amazed at what folks get away with in other States, especially those states otherwise known for Progressive consumer protection laws.
14
We bought a 1902 apartment that had clearly had ‘non-code’ work done— holes cut in beadboard for outlets were so big you could stick a finger in beside the faceplate— but the price was right-ish and we insisted on an inspection prior to sale so we thought we knew what we were getting in to... electrical shenanigans.
Then we renovated the bathroom and discovered that someone had cut most of the way through two joists to run PVC pipe to the soil stack (apparently unaware there was a pipe chase against the wall). It’s a miracle my toilet hadn’t fallen into the downstairs neighbor’s kitchen.
If you can see poorly done work, there’s a decent chance even worse things have been hidden inside the walls.
22
But codes change, MC. Electrical outlets in new construction have to be installed, I think, every six feet. In my c. 1850 house, I'm lucky to get one on every other wall.
The person who owned the house before me put in a few dedicated, solid lines here and there for air conditioners. But there are still walls with no outlets at all.
1
I'm well aware that codes change. My new kitchen has outlets every 4 feet. My bedrooms have 2 outlets per room [which were retrofits from the single knob-and-tube outlet per room. The house originally had gas lights.]
...but I don't believe any code ever allowed for exposed bare wired because the wall was cut so badly the faceplate didn't actually cover the hole.
My example was modern, shoddy DIY-by-owner... and that ethos extended to potentially disasterous alterations to the structure of the building. That was my point. It could be worse than just what you see.
1
"It could be worse than just what you see."
Absolutely.
I thought the upstairs bathroom in my new house was a disgusting mess and had my contractor rip it all out and start with everything fresh -- pipes, electric, mud floor, the works.
But even with what I saw, I could never have imagined that an old rotten window was covered up with bathroom tile above the tub, and resting on the moldy brown windowsill was a foul hair brush and encrusted shampoo bottle.
Faugh!
That window was removed, the wall secured, new shingles went on the outside, new tile went on the inside, and a new, smaller window was carved out above the new toilet.
What kind of people do that sort of thing?
The buyer's title insurance may be able to help.
1
Title insurance only covers the title, and there is no title dispute in this case. I very much doubt it would help at all.
6
Title insurance only protects you against defects in the title, not in the property itself.
4
I dont think most people hire lawyers. I mean how many lawyers can inspect a building and find any problems. That is what a good house inspector is for, and a good buyers agent. Where I live a permit is required for nearly everything including changing a toilet. The permits are expensive and the number of city inspectors are so limited that it takes weeks to get an appointment. That being said, the POs of our 130 yo house did nutty things but nothing essential was wrong.
1
It's the buyer (or most likely, the mortgage provider of the buyer) who would be paying for the house inspection (most often, as part of the contingency clause in the P&S agreement). If the buyer opts to go without, I don't see how it's the lawyer's fault. The same goes with, say, title insurance.
More often than not, buyers want to skimp on expenses (given that the purchase itself is already expensive as it is), opting without full inspection, title insurance, and whatnot. It's truly a case of buyers buying at their own peril without proper due diligence.
3
A city inspector recently told the owner of my building that a conversion of 1 apartment into 2 smaller units was illegal.
The conversion occurred in the 1950s, but he has been told to "make it whole." In other words, he couldn't rent out the apartment behind mine, because they considered the unit illegal. He only bought the building in 2015. I'm not crazy about him, but this does seem very unfair.
Plus the city has inspected the building at least twice since I've lived here and never brought this up before, third time is a curse, I guess . . .
10
So, add written questions to any future real estate due diligence: What renovations or repairs have been made to the property since the current or previous owner bought the place? Were any, and which, repairs or renovations done without a permit or without before-and-after inspections by a permitting agency or its designated agent(s)? Ask your attorney to review the additional questions, and whether s/he would add or modify any.
16
What would happen if even the previous owner was not aware of the illegal renovations all those times?
2
I find it interesting that the owner is concerned about the legality and not whether the work was code conforming. The building department serves two functions:
1) Ensure work meets safety and in some cases, community standards. That is what plan review and inspections cover.
2) Reporting change in valuation for tax collection.
There is no mention if the alterations were conforming or if they added value to the unit. Would you be so quick to make sure the work was done 'legally' if you were to find out your assessed value would increase by a few 100K, I think not.
7
The functions of a "buildings department" vary from state to state and within each state. In NYC, for example, it's "Finance," not "Buildings" that evaluates values for tax collection purposes.
Similarly, the role of NYC's Buildings Department re ensuring that renovations comply with code is accurately described in the article.
8
If the prior renovation was never filed, but an architect or engineer confirms that the work would be code-conforming if it is filed now, you could include this work as part of your project filing, and describe it as “new”. This way the City has a record of all changes in your apartment (which is the goal) and you have cleared the problem without ripping out work that you want to keep.
The Board, however, should never have allowed the existing renovation to occur without the previous owner filing all the correct paperwork.
9
I'm stunned to learn that NY owners are required to reveal nothing negative about their property in a sale. Those looking for rural property might be better off buying in PA. Our seller's disclosure form covers everything from ANY water intrusion, EVER, to "spots on your flooring", and includes, among others, pest infestation, ground shifting and what your pipes are made of. Soon we'll have to disclose whether we've ever brought home products made in a facility that handles peanuts....
26
Maybe the seller isn't required to volunteer information, but if the seller is asked specific questions orally and in writing, about material facts, and fails or refuses to answer, or lies, then fraud should be suspected, and liability should attach.
10
Do you have radon problems in NYC? In Iowa it’s a major problem which we learned the hard way when we sold our condo.
I read the real estate section from time to time and just shake my head at the huge prices and tiny places.
Where do the regular people live?
6
Mimi,
Many actually commute from the Poconos area. The paper did a story on this a few years back. Heck of a commute. Certain formerly-crummy-now-sweet towns in New Jersey. I suspect not a few from western Mass. communities, and up near Albany.
Regarding leaks: are there statutes of limitation on such fraud? About 4 years ago I purchased a Brooklyn condo unit, and subsequently discovered the entire building was leaking. No meeting minutes I was provided disclosed this, and my seller sheet rocked and painted--a temporary fix--before I could find out about it. Later I found evidence he knew the scope of the problem. My share of the repairs was approximately $20,000, and I certainly would have reduced my offer by that amount if I'd known. Or perhaps I would have kept looking!
24
Was there a real estate agent in the equation? Just asking.
9
Yes, why does that matter?
Haha. Like a real estate cares about anything but a sale and their percentage.