I assuming you are referring to the questionnaire your new mortgage company is requesting you have filled out by the co-op corporation (by their managing agent).

$150 is actually inexpensive. For as long as I can remember, the cost of completing the questionnaire by our MA is $250. Depending on what questions are asked and how frequently your MA completes a questionnaire for your building, there is probably research someone in the MA's office has to perform.

There's almost no way around needing to have the questionnaire completed. It provides your new mortgage company with a snapshot of the health of your co-op.

If you think the legal and financial situation of your co-op is such that your application may not be approved, you're wagering $150 (and other refi costs) against how much you'll save if you are approved. All you need is a good handicapper... ;-)

Good luck!

Thank you, Steven. That is indeed my present situation. I hate to throw away $150, especially since it wouldn't be deductible next year. I don't know how to do the actual math to see how much I could end up saving, in order to discover if it would be worth it.

Not sure what you mean by a "good handicapper."

Thanks again!

A handicapper is a self-proclaimed expert in how much to wager on competitive events, like horse racing. They try to determine if a certain bet at any given odds is worth the money you could lose.

I assume you've done the math to see how many months it will take for the money you will save each month due to refinancing to cover all of the costs you will incur to close on a new mortgage. All you really need to do is find out what your repayment savings will be each month and divide that into the projected closing cost. Say your total closing costs are $2,000 and you'll save $50 each month in loan repayment. Your break-even point is 2000/50 or 40 months. You may find that the projected payback takes so long that it's not worth moving ahead with the refinance.

$150 isn't too bad. You can ask a board member (treasurer?) if they could complete the questionaire, our treasurer has done it in the past.

Thank you JG. Yes, I suppose $150 isn't bad, but knowing the history of this building, it might be lost and then it would be bad, wasted. Interesting idea about the Board Treasurer. Thanks.

Normally I would agree with JG about asking a board member. But at this particular moment in time, almost all board members are dealing with far more urgent coronavirus issues. You run the risk of having your request filed near the bottom of the pile and possibly missing important milestones, especially your rate lock expiration.

Good luck.

I presume they are concerned about the corona virus, is a desk any different than a food delivery? But maybe it's a concern re: the delivery person getting injured if he should trip or fall in the building? Some buildings want certificates of insurance from moving companies for move-ins/move-outs, or deliveries of large items.

Just to add a note - Washers and dryers are a breeding ground for Mold and Lint. Keeping them in Proper order is essential!! Please note that Aces Laundry is the ONLY route laundry operator to provide De- mold and De-lint and SANITIZING services for ALL of our locations on a regularly scheduled basis!!
WE CARE ABOUT OUR TENANTS HEALTH AND WELL BEING !!!

Stan never heard of Aces, our co op lawyer has said we can not break our contract with Coinmat they are too rich to fight. I say get rig of our lawyer and get rid Coinmat.
Do you have a way of getting rid of them so you can do business with us?
Can you also post your contact # and e-mail. Thanks you in advance.

PC - I never heard of Aces but it looks like they're based in Hartsdale (https://www.aceslaundry.com/).

If your current company is Coinmach, then I agree that they suck and they are so big that you'll never beat them. Keep your lawyer. He can't do anything about them.

We had no choice but to wait until the end of our contract and then, like failing the door test in a Bronx Tale, we dumped them and we dumped them fast!

I too have never heard of Aces... But I did get rid of Coinmach in all my buildings and went with Hercules. I am satisfied with them.
In one instance, I placed their machines on the curb and called them to get them or lose them... Don't let their tactics push you into a corner.
~AR

Can’t help you out of your contract, but when you are ready we at Aces Laundry are also !
Like I said - Scheduled De-Mold and De- linting
we have office throughout the Boroughs, Westchester, Nassau and Suffolk Counties -
We are here to Help Keep Our Patrons and Tenants Healthy and HAPPY !!!

Look in the Occupancy Agreement if there's nothing in your by laws. I'm sure it's mentioned because it's such a common question.

Look for something that might begin with "If, upon the death of the Member..."

The verbiage regarding transferring shares is usually in the Proprietary Lease and not the Bylaws. In my PL there is this:

16 (b) If the Lessee shall die, consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed to an assign ment of the lease and shares to a financially responsible member of the Lessee's family (other than the Lessee's spouse as to whom no consent is required).

I think this covers the financially responsible sibling.

As for subletting, the Board usually reviews the proposed sublet tenant to make sure they are a good fit for the building. The answer to your question might turn on the nature of adult son's disability.

You have a number of potentially conflicting rules and regulations in play when dealing with disability, tenancy and residency, and I would suggest you contact the co-op's attorney for a definitive answer.

Steven makes a good point about checking with the co-op's attorney. I think that the co-op would be satisfied with a relative who can be relied upon to pay the monthly maintenance with no issues. I think the adult child is on safe ground morally and legally to stay in the apartment.

First off, it generally isn't good publicity for a co-op to kick out a disabled child of the shareholder.

Legally, I think it's okay. My Occupancy Agreement states that upon the death of the Member, the shares shall transfer to:

1) The spouse who resided with the s/h at the time of death, or

2) A natural or adoptive child of the Member who resided with the s/h at the time of death, and who has resided in the apartment as the child's primary residence from the later of:

1) The date of birth or adoption of the child

2) The date on which the deceased Member purchased their shares

Of course, this is what my Occupancy Agreement (OA) states, but I think that most OA's are probably written in a very similar manner. Sounds like the son should be able to stay.

Marty - Did you have to sign a separate Occupancy Agreement in addition to your Proprietary Lease? I didn't because our PL spells out occupancy requirements. If you had to sign a separate document I'm curious as to why.

My concerns about the Adult Disabled Child taking ownership of the apartment and/or living there by himself, turn on the nature of the disability. If it's a physical disability, then I can't see there being any problems.

But if the disability is emotional or psychological, and the now-deceased parent was caring for and participated in the treatment of the disability, the question becomes, can the child live by himself? Will they become a nuisance or a danger to other shareholders, the building, and possibly himself?

IMHO this is where the issues of succession and sub-tenancy become dicey. The board will need to weigh the rights of the child vs. the rights of the other shareholders. The co-op attorney is the best resource for guiding the decisions of the board.

I did not have to sign the Occupancy Agreement. It was a package deal with the By-laws.

I agree with you about weighing the rights of the child vs. the rights of the other shareholders. You know that this type of balancing act is a common dilemma facing many boards and can concern many different issues.

I would see a potentially very difficult road for an emotionally disabled adult who could pose a danger to himself and/or other shareholders.

Get the attorney involved.

In my building, we require a complete purchase application from the proposed occupant, to ensure that he/she can afford the maintenance and have a reserve in the event of an assessment. We also do an interview.

I live in Queens so I don't have valet parking. Can't help you with that since I don't know anything about it.

I do find your overall parking situation interesting. You say you don't have enough spaces in your garage, but you actually do - for one car per unit. I think that's as fair as it gets. Are new buyers told at their interview that they are entitled to one car? I hope so. No surprises are needed.

What you actually don't have is enough parking for the # of units who want multiple parking spaces. I assume that people who want multiple spaces knew the situation when they moved in, so how can they complain now?

I hope you get some volunteers who grab the $50 maintenance decrease in return for giving up their spot, but I don't see that happening.

You describe your small town as having limited parking. So if I give up my car for the $50, where am I now going to park my car? That doesn't make sense to me.

Would having valet service somehow help these owners who surrender their spaces?

I can see how having a valet service could seem to add value to the units, but at what cost? The Board should be able to divulge exactly how much valet service costs. Perhaps you can also do your own research to see how much valet service would cost. Call up a few companies and get a quote. I'm sure that's all your Board did.

Good luck.

I was just looking for feedback from anyone in a building with Valet & their experience using it, which company, etc. Everyone is told at the interview & prior that each unit gets one space, but we are always looking for ways to offer better amenities. Our parking is underground, covered & heated. I personally think that it would be great if all 2+ bedroom units were able to have 2 spaces. During the day many spaces are empty. The shareholders asked that an ad hoc committee be formed to see if there was a way to allow day visitors to park in the garage if space was available, but this request was met with silence.

I'm guessing that allowing day visitors creates potential security problems for the Board. Since you have a garage, day visitors would need to gain access. How do you get into the garage? Remote control clicker? Key?

You would have non shareholders in a area where other owners' possessions (car, maybe other items in the garage belonging to owners) are located. That's an insurance/theft/personal injury liability situation to be considered.

Does the garage lead to any access into the units or is the garage a stand alone structure? Do you have cameras in the garage in case something went wrong?

You might need to review your insurance policy and check with your attorney if there are any liability concerns for your building due to day visitors parking there.

I understand how it would be nice if the 44 2BR apartments each had 2 spaces each. But, how will you do that? By taking 44 spaces away from other units who already have them?

We had a similar situation last year. Our attorney said that as long as they are not in arrears with their parking fees and they are not subletting their space (not allowed to do that here), the parking spaces belong to the unit and the Board cannot take the spaces away.

It's a pain in the neck issue for the Board, but they should at least give you the courtesy of finding out the valet costs and answering your questions.

We are just lookin for creative ways improve the garage amenity.
We all have a fob to enter the garage, but you can buzz the front desk if you need to.

Thank you for the comment regarding day parking and liability. Good point!

All we are allowed to keep in front of our car is a shopping cart.

No other storage allowed. Occasionally someone steals a shopping cart, unfortunately.

I'm sure we could never give all 2 bedrooms a second space, but there are spots where we could double up cars and who knows, maybe a valet system could determine how many total cars could be parked in the garage. A premium could be charged for the 2nd car. We already have people saying they would pay more for a 2nd spot. Each unit is guaranteed a spot, so there is no taking any spots from anyone unless you somehow were able to acquire a 2nd or 3rd spot when there were some available.


And that is why I'm here, to connect with those that use valet to gather info. If our Board wants to inquire, they will or won't. The Board does not appreciate people getting info on their own.

You need a fob to get in to the elevator banks.

Good info and thanks for further explaining the situation. Let's say it's possible for valet parking to somehow put extra spaces in the garage.

How do you determine who gets first choice for these extra spots? Is it based on seniority as an owner or seniority from how long you've had a parking space?

I'd recommend reviewing your game plan with your attorney just to make sure you're on solid legal footing.

The Board will need to fine tune these details and have the answers ready for the shareholders, some of which will surely complain no matter what you decide.

As far as the Board not appreciating people getting info on their own - what does the Board expect people to do if the Board won't get the info for them?

Do you want the info or do you want the Board not to be mad at you? Your choice.

Good luck.

I commend the board raising the garage rentals it has been long time coming. All garage renters expected the garage spots to be subsidized by shareholders. I don't understand why these people rather pay the high maintenance increase than their garage rental cost. Please do not let them bully you into feeling guilty they do this every time it goes up. I've seen a couple of them have a fit over a $20 raise. Also you have a handful of shareholders who use their spots as a car storage and not an active parking spot. These cars never move. I suggest you do what we tried to do raise the rental fees until it reaches the street value. Keep in mind you have 149 shareholders to only 35 parking spots. By your 4-3 count your board has 3 people that rent garage spots. What happened to your 2 other board members? Maybe before the new elections you can put it writing that it be mandatory to raise the rental fee every time maintenance is raised until it reaches street value. Since there was a budget shortfall makes sense to maximize any possible source of income for the benefit of ALL shareholders. Keep up the good work.

we went thru this same situation a few years back. our garage was running more than $150 below market in the neighborhood. i suggested bringing it up by $50 and received a crazy amount of pushback. My point was that the garage has a waiting list and it's therefore a privilege (NOT an amenity) and it should serve as a source of income for the building. a higher maintenance will impact sale prices so the garage increase is the smart way to go. i finally got this thru the board when i had the treasurer do the math for the board members with parking spots and showed them the difference between the incremental garage cost and the incremental maintenance increase (about $2). good luck.

My building doesn't have enough spaces. 150 units and no guest parking in NJ in a small town with limited parking. We have 160 parking spaces. Our 3 bedroom PH apartments or 5 units, each get 2 spaces & everyone else gets one space. We have 44 two bedroom units and the rest are mostly one bedrooms leaving 11 studios. We recently decreased our maintenance by $50 to increase the parking fee to $100 to see if anyone would give up their spot. Waiting to hear the status of this. We've suggested valeting the garage to the Board, which would bring an additional cost, but they feel it would be too expensive. We feel it would add value to the building. They gave no numbers to back up the valet cost, but it would allow all day guests to park in the garage when many are out at work.

In our case, the parking fees had not been raised in years until three years ago. The fees had gone from $75/month to $180/month in 2021. Jumping from $75 to $125 the first year. As a result, two elderly couples could not longer afford theirs spots and this year the Disability Rights Advocates (DRA) and the Legal Aid Society have a claim against the co-op. Wondering what advice had legal counsel provided for those who have raised or are raising their parking fees next year.

In our Co op we have elderly people who cry that the garage is too high. What's sad these people rather have a large monthly maintenance increase instead of a garage increase. At least they can opt out and save the fee.
Do these people stand in the grocery store yelling it's too high, lower the prices for handicap, 65 and over?
Do they argue with the pharmacy the drug cost is too high?
So what are they saying all elderly and handicap should get free or discount prices? How about lowing the cost of living there?
Selling and moving to a handicap living facility would accommodate their needs. A Co op or Condo does not have to give special privileges to elderly or handicap except handicap accessibility to enter the building.
I wouldn't worry about the suit against your Co op or Condo this is ownership not public housing. Good Luck

Congratulations! Wish my building will do this. Call Brooklyn Solarworks (347-474-7144) 200 6th St. Bklyn NY. They have done several roofs in my area. They will guide you and educate you on the process. Best of Luck moving into the 21st century. Your building will save in your electric bills. $$$$$

Contact Bright Power and ask for Darren Johnson. Bright Power is a leader in all things energy. Our building is starting to think about doing the same.

https://www.brightpower.com/new-york-city-solar-co-op/

This company has been installing solar panels all over Bklyn.
"Brooklyn Solar Works" (347-474-7144. They just installed solar panels in a co-op building in Prospect Pk S.W. the super said they are getting cuts already on their electric bills. It's a win win. Wish my building will do it, but they can't move away from 1990. Best of Luck

Another minor issue you may encounter if your building is landmarked and any part of the solar panel installation will be visible from grade level along what's called a "view line", you may need to check with the Landmarks Preservation Commission. They sometimes get persnickety about what should be a non-issue.

If you are landmarked and someone who passes by your building sees the solar panels and complains to the LPC, expect a visit from an inspector. So if you're landmarked, check with the contractor who's doing the installation.

If you're not landmarked, please disregard all of the above...

I commend you for sticking up for your rights, now hire a lawyer to solve your sublet problems. I would also consider running for your board they all seem to be do as I say not as I do. Does your board have open shareholder meetings? if not ask for one. Talk to your fellow shareholders to vote for new board members and see if they have the same problems as you. Then pack up run don't walk and sell ASAP. Best of Luck