Our Building Insurance was to expire on 12/31/07. Two weeks ago our Man company presented the Board with the new Insurance package (and expensive) for the building -- to take effect 1/1/08. The Mang agent hired an Insurance broker, and they made the final decisions on the buildings insurance, and cut the deal -- WITHOUT CONSULTING THE BOARD AND WITHOUT BOARD APPROVAL.
The Board received the information a few days before the deadline, during the holiday. Although there was no time to review, One BM questioned the policies, and was answered with a condescending and snide reply from the Insurance Agent. There were substantial raises in policies.
Our Mang agreement states that the Board is to be consulted and the Board is to make the decision. Certainly this is breech of contract BUT.. Besides our Man contract, is anyone familiar with the Insurance laws. Can, the Mang agent along with the Insurance broker, without consulting the Board and without their consent, make this agreement? The Board had no choice but to go along with these choices -- but is it legal?
Retired Board members were shocked, and said that in the past the Mang had made a presentation, they were given options, and the Board – made the decision.
Any Insurance info would be appreciated... Thank you
How should a building calculate its space for purposes of the new 80/20 rule? In particular, should it only include above-ground space? Or does it have to include basement space as well? Does it make any difference whether the building rents out part of its basement in conjunction with the rental of part of its ground floor space?
Our management company has just negotiated a bulk resident contract for the individual heating/cooling units in our condo building. Their price is $352 per year per unit. Would appreciate any feedback on whether this sounds reasonable to you. Also, should the fee be adjusted for the size of the unit, or is it usually the same fee for all units?
We have a lot next door to our six story co-op that had been vacant for some 60 years, but now a new eight story building is going up. We obtained a copy of their plans and we see that they are building within 2 inches of our wall on the adjacent property line. This wall has a lot line of bedroom windows on it. The bedroom (corner apartment) also has two more windows on antoher wall with fire escape access.
Is there any legal precedent to protect our windows and make them redraw their plans?
I have noticed news that HR 3648, the Mortgage Debt Forgiveness act was approved by the Senate with changes. I have heard, but have not been able to confirm, that the changes were the ones affecting cooperatives and 80 20 rules.
Since the 80-20 component of this bill is one coops with 80-20 issues should be concerned about, I was wondering if anyone in this forum has any information on what is going on with this legislation.
Any information here is helpful.
proper repair of leak goes neglected in an apt rented from a sponsor in a coop. extensive mold damage to personal property. who is responsible to reimburse for property damage? the coop? the sponsor who owns the apt? or the residents above who did some construction that may have caused the leak?
At times I am very confused on the following: some
shareholders say we should have an increase in our
maintance and or an assessment to build up our reserves.
a president of another building said you cannot over
charge just to build up reserves. that reserves are for
unforseen issues or emergencies. Yet some residents
say have an incrase in mainteance to build up reserves.
If we have residents pay to build up reserves for the
future are we not asking current residents living in
building now to subsidy future residents. It is my
thought that if you need a new elevator now you ask the
residents for the money now. Also, if we build up our
reserves and a more aggressive board comes along they could
spend all the money in the reserves on whatever and the
money is not going to be there for the future.
I guess my final thought is what are the requirements
for reserves? assessments? and can we increase mainteance
to put into reserves not earmarked for any project but for
future possible emergencies. Help if anyone can tell me
where to look or how to get this issue straight with my
thoughts. thank you
There is a shareholder in this building that has enough votes to get himself on the board and he also has been a chronic source of noise and smoke violations in the building. Recently another board member and shareholder who live on his floor have made complaints about unreasonable noise from his place cause mostly we think by his live in lover--bass music, banging the door at 3 AM etc. They have asked hin nicely to stop it and the Board member argues and denies making any noise, tells the shareholders to soundproof their hallways and then circulates defaming letters from his lover to the Board. Some members of the Board are uncomfortable with sending a formal lawyer's letter to this couple. The Board president thinks it's unfair to vote on taking this action without including the offending Board member in the discussion and vote. I thiknk this is ridiculous -- why don;t we just let the offending Board member write their own letter to themselves? This is very preferntial treatment -- how can we send a letter to any other shareholder about house rule violations and not a Board member who does much worse things. I feel like one member of the Board has something else behind his take no action agenda. How do other building deal with this? Would calling in a mediator help?
Article 2, Section 1 of our bylaws states: "The number of directors shall not be less than three (3) and not more than five (5). The first Board elected by the shareholders shall consist of five (5) members."
Section 7 states: " . . . the Board, from time to time, may fix the number of directors of the corporation, provided the number of directors shall not be less than three (3), nor more than seven (7) or such higher number as the shareholders shall have determined pursuant to Article 2, Section 1."
For as long as I have been in the building (since 2002), our board has consisted of four members who live in the building, and a phantom fifth member: the sponsor, who never attends any board meetings and has only attended one shareholders' meeting in the time that I've been here. Several times both when I was on the board and subsequently, action would be proposed and two members would be for it, two against it. Thus deadlocked, no action was taken and a certain inertia seemed to take over. To me it seems most pragmatic to have an odd number of directors and I would like to see an additional person (an actual warm body who would attend meetings and share responsibilities and vote on issues) added to the group. As we are more than 75% owner occupied at this point, must the sponsor even be a board member? The bylaws don't seem to address this.
It seems to me that a board majority could vote to remove the sponsor from the board and, at our next shareholders' meeting, a real flesh-and-blood person could be elected to fill this phantom role and, I hope, make moving forward on issues a little more straighforward.
I hope that I've managed to explain myself here and would appreciate your feedback. Thanks.
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.
Habitat U: learn about how to manage a building, and what you should know as a co-op or condo board member.
Search, by word or phrase, all magazine articles from January 2002 to present. You may print or email your results. Print subscribers receive free access to the Habitat Article Archive.