your posting is completely wacko. ok first of all - ss numbers should not be on any list. what are you asking exactly?

Your annoymouse posting is out of line. skip your editorializing and just answer the question, or skip your response.... Also no annoymouse postings!!!

It's just my opinion but why be concerned with the Patriot Act unless you have reason to think that SHs in your coop are involved with terrorist groups or activities?

Your proprietary lease says what documents your SHs are entitled access to. They generally are allowed to the SH name/address list as long as they act in good faith and intend to use the list for a valid coop purpose. But SHs' Soc Sec numbers SHOULD NOT be given to anyone at any time.

It's easy enough to find out what SHs live in a building by looking at the doorbell or mailroom directory. Some coops send all SHs a form and ask them to indicate if they do not want their phone numbers and/or e-mail addresses given out. Some coops send a form to just non-resident SHs and ask if they want any of their info left off a SH list that may be given to other SHs since they live in other locations. We all still have our right to privacy.

Can't understand why anyone would want such information on shareholders to be MORE readily available. It would be interesting to find out from the orginal poster why he asked this question.

If your Super is doing any of this on co-op time, when he or she is acting as your paid agent, this could be a liability problem.

If it's being done on his/her own time, there could still be problems...

BTW, do your House Rules or Proprietary Lease address the issue of permits and licenses?

Contact your co-op counsel about this issue ASAP.

Where is your management company? They should be taking care of this for you.

I agree with your letter to the residents regarding medic alerts. Those who have it should be thinking with their family members how they wish access to apartment to be handled if they trigger the medic alert. The co-op should not have an involvement as this is a "private emergency call" for a shareholder, but is not considered an emergency for the co-op.

AdC

I am appalled by the inhumanity of the above two forum posters.

They speak about not wanting the co-op or condo to be responsible for elderly neighbors, for fear of liability.

Yet they know very well that any competent attorney can fashion a simple form that removes that issue.

These forum posters simply don't want old people around. Old people may not aesthetically pleasing. They may, god forbid, need a hand to get across the lobby, or to get their groceries up the elevator.

Of course a frail older person wants the building staff to have access, and to be the contact person who calls for help. The building staff is there 24 hours. Friends, relatives, other neighbors may not be.

Jesus, how hard is it to call 911 or to give a freaking key to an EMS worker?

The liability issue is a smokescreen. A lawyer can create a form that frees the co-op or condo of liability.

But nothing frees each of us from the simple human responsibility of taking care of our neighbors.

I hear you.

I’m really encouraged by the dialogue, despite what one may infer from my comments.
.
But, allow me to regale you about life in the insurance industry as we have experienced it
.
We had a long term resident trip on the carpeting in out hallway. It is perfectly good carpeting, installed on all floors, in all hallways and well maintained. Resident sued, and insurance company paid without fighting it.
.
We had a resident trip on the sidewalk outside the building because an acorn fell from a tree, maybe not even our tree. Resident broke a wrist. Resident sued. Insurance company paid.
.
We had a resident who parked in our garage for many years in the same spot. One day the resident tripped when walking away from the car. The parking deck is perfectly within specifications. The resident sued. Insurance company paid.
.
Why do insurance companies pay? The answer is they do a cost benefit analysis and determine the cost of paying vs. the cost of fighting.
.
But then, our insurance experience file showed a number of “liability” payments. And our carrier cancelled our insurance. Assigned risk, here we come.
,
What do you folks think will happen if a resident’s medic alert sends an alarm and there is delay in gaining entry to the resident’s apartment because our folks (security, doorman, etc.) are 10 seconds late (yes, try and prove 10 seconds) and someone’s survivor sues?
.
As fiduciaries, we cannot allow our other 499 shareholders to be put at financial risk by a major insurance claim, not to mention the erosion of time for our highly paid board members. We pay our board members $00, twice what other buildings pay, but it still does not cover their “costs”.
.
Our position is that we cannot be the penultimate respondent to a resident’s medical emergency.
.
Thus, we are about to publish a letter, with essentially the information contained my original posting. If that is the form which the counter view herein poses as a solution, so be it.
.
Our next step is to put the letter in our admissions package such that every buyer signs the letter.
.
And I need to ask what “form” would our attorney draft other than the letter that would emerge from my posting?
.
Yes, I am very empathetic to the needs o the elderly. That’s why I moved my father, now 92, to an assisted living facility in NJ from his condo in Florida. A year ago, I moved him to a nursing home as his physical prowess declined.
.
Why an assisted living facility and now a nursing facility? We’ll because they are accredited to provide a certain level of service. One may argue whether they meet the commitment, and my response is that in my estimation they do.
.
By the way, he has the clarity of mind to assert that he could have changed world history, maybe spent a few years in jail and perhaps ruined the family, while in prison. After all, he was the NYC police department assigned bodyguard for Fidel Castro, upon Fidel’s first visit to NYC, when he stayed at the Hotel Teresa in Harlem. Fidel offered him cigars, fried chicken and brandy
.
Again, I need to repeat that we are not a nursing home or an assisted living facility. Nor are we a warehouse where children can warehouse the elderly to avoid their responsibilities in this day and age when our adults are living longer, albeit curtailed life styles. We are not Florida with endless senior citizen warehouses where parents are stockpiled by Northern children until their next dutiful visit in nine months to a year, unless death prevails sooner.
.
Perhaps we can charge an extra fee for being responders to medic alerts. After all, responding, regardless of situation, its not in our proprietary lease, our bylaws or house rules. After all, why should all residents underwrite the costs of the few?
.
But can you conjure the liability insurance we would incur for failure to provide an agreed and paid service.
.
Folks, it’s a litigious word and as fiduciaries we cannot place our shareholders at financial risk
.
Perhaps, we should sue the children of the resident needing assistance for failure to provide adequate care and for endangering the life of elder dependent.

.

A well reasoned point of view and an interesting story about your father but still, you must admit, somewhat cynical and at base, detached. If we are not our brother's keeper, a nursing home will be.

ANYBODY in the building can sue over a trip-and-fall case. You're simply singling out older people. (I'm not one myself, nor have I an older friend or relative in a co-op, nor am I a lawyer, so I'm speaking as a disinterested party.) It sounds like nothing more than resentfulness that other adult children DO NOT follow lockstep with you and put their parents in a facility. That's fine for some families, but the way you do it is NOT the only way and wasn't brought down to you in tablets from the mount.

And that whole story, who knows whether it's true, advocating the assassination of a foreign leader we disagree with but with whose country we are not at war? The only relevance I can see to that tangential tale is that, taken together with your attitude toward older residents, shows a remarkably cavalier attitude toward the lives of others.

D, it's not about wanting to get rid of elderly residents -- no one ever said that, and I think you are jumping to conclusions. What's so wrong about requiring those who use a medic alert service to list neighbors, relatives or friends as a contact rather than automatically assuming the building staff is ready, willing and able to let police/EMS into their apartments?

Our building does not have 24-hour doorman coverage, but we do have an older resident who uses a medical alert service. She has a sibling who lives 30 minutes away but who cannot or will not be involved in any aspect of her care. She was recently offered a space at an assisted living facility but turned it down because she wouldn't be allowed to smoke or to use her mobility scooter there. When our older resident falls out of bed in the middle of the night, the only way the police can gain entry to the building is by pressing buzzers until someone lets them in.

Thank you, TedNJ. I will propose to our board that this older resident provide a neighbor or nearby friend as her medical alert service contact.

Very well said, Disappointed.

As a building Resident Manager, I am asked by some of my older residents about responding to the medic alert. I tell the residents that it is fine with me if they would like to put my name and number down to check on them. I think some of them don't have anyone (family members) who can check on them.

...to the resident manager above, who behaves like a reasonable and decent human being.

Ted,

I think that the only type of activity that we prohibit by way of stuffing papers has to do with outsiders, i.e., restaurant home deliveries who end up putting menus, politicians who gain access to the builidng, etc.


My opinion is as follows:

If the House Rules and By-Laws are silent about stuffing mailings under doors of shareholders for co-op elections, why would a board object to such an activity if it promotes elections within the building?

I would say that boards should promote independent election committees for the promotion of ALL candidates prior to the annual meeting. Similarly, information nights in lobbies, meeting room etc. should be held well in advance so that shareholders may have an opportunity to exchange ideas with prospective candidates for a better informed decision on the part of the shareholders. These committees may help pre-print a ballot for those who would like to vote by proxy.

Finally, if a board has not done the homework to form election committees, then it should collect proxies that will guarantee annual meetings. At least, shareholders may be able to submit their names from the floor at the night of the meeting and at least have the opportunity to be elected.

In our case, the co-op counsel and independent auditor count the ballots and destroy them once tallied.


AdC

Some questions:

How was the independent auditor selected?

How costly is an independent auditor?

Any recommendations for where our building might find an independent auditor?

Thanks!

First, Ed is looking for his convenience, not the shareholder's convenience. Both should iron out a compromise, but it's not up to Board to provide an opinion if the shareholder is being greedy or Ed is trying to negotiate the best for his pocket.

The bottomline is that if Ed is trying to buy a condo, a house or a coop and it's hard to predict the date of the closing, etc. So, I don't know how ED is going to calculate when to give three-month's notice to the shareholder.

AdC

The Board should stay well out of any sublease situation, except to enforce any regulations regarding subleases and Shareholders (ie., the Board must approve all sublettees, a fee must be paid, etc.)

Getting involved is not legally wise for the corporation, and the Board should make it a policy to state its neutrality to all inquiries, from Shareholders and Subtenants alike.

Folks, maybe you misunderstood me. In my last posting, I said the board DID tell the tenant that his sublet issue with the SH is between them. The board is not involved and has no intention of getting involved in this.

I was just curious if any of you think:

1)it's unfair for a SH to ask a tenant for 2 months rent if the tenant renews for a year, with a good chance that he'll leave a few months into the renewal

2) if the tenant agrees to pay 2 months rent then refuses to pay if he leaves early, could the SH deduct the 2 months rent from the tenant's security deposit

Just interested in other opinions on these two points.

Thanks

Again, what I think is simple:

This is a matter of convenience among two parties that has nothing to do with the co-op. Hence, why even think about it. I would rather spend my valuable time in trying to do something productive for the co-op.

AdC

A very good point, AdC.
Board member is neither "Information bureau" nor a mediator.

Feona

You are absolutely right, RLM.
Why would the tenant approach a Board member with his complaint? It looks like this apartment sponsor owned - so let him handle it. I don't think it is any business of the Board to get involved. AdC is right, too - "If not of concern why worry". If your curiosity is satisfied and you get answers from this site I would not advise you to deliver the obtained information to the tenant in question if you don't want any troubles.

Feona

many coop have short term sublets. For, say, sixth months. This would solve your problem. Change your house rules. This is espcecially good for professors who often go away afor six months at a time and cannot afford not to sublet.

Many also allow , say, 2 year out of every six of ownership.

If you raise the question, then it a conflict of interest. However, the conflict of interest in this case may have to be analyzed and, if sales are allowed by the company, then there should be some disclosure requirements on their part prior to acting as real estate representatives.

Usually, management companies may run a real estate as a branch of the busines, separate from the management function; it's a way in which management companies supplement their income. There may be some advantages to having the real estate branch represent your co-op as they generally know the building more intimately - amenities, population, house rule practices, etc. Also, they may have more inside information that you do not want to be shared.

IN one of the Habitat Magazines relating to legal counsel opinions, one of the opinions stated that the Board should abide by the most stringent rule of conduct possible and avoid any type of conflict of interest. I agree with this position as trust in the co-op community is critical to establish and maintain.

AdC

we have a similar situation in our building (apparently) - can people please put up more responses. it would be helpful.