ARTHUR WEINSTEIN ON ADMISSION POLICIES, P.2

 

The letter can also provide information about the co-op's procedures and policies and offers proof for the board that the potential buyer has been advised of them, understands them and agrees to be bound by them. The form shows that the board has given the applicant an opportunity to look at the proprietary lease and the house rules, the co-op's admission procedure, alteration polices, and any other rules that the co-op wants incoming shareholders to know.

This gives the board protection in case of misunderstandings?

Yes, this is a protection page to have the buyer confirm that they have made them aware of some of the co-op's rules, even including some basic rules such as prohibitions against subletting or refinancing without board approval and existence of "flip taxers."

I assume it also helps if you have to sue them or they sue you?

That's correct. And there have been cases decided on the basis that the buyer knew about the matter that they later decided to challenge before they bought the apartment.

What about this personal information? Can you ask about their job?

There are several difficult areas. For instance, the law says you cannot discriminate against a buyer because of his profession. And yet it's virtually impossible to properly evaluate the applicant unless you know their profession. A glaring example is the professional trumpet player who will be practicing his profession in the apartment by rehearsing at all hours of the day and night. There are steps that we go into that can protect the co-op against somebody playing the trumpet at two o'clock in the morning.

What do you do?

Although you cannot reject someone because of their profession you are entitled to an assurance that they will not use the apartment in connection with their profession.

How do you do that without knowing what their profession is?

That's the point. You can't. So it is obvious that the board can and should determine the profession of an applicant.

You can argue that there's a reason for asking besides discrimination?

That's correct. If you reject the trumpet player, you have to have a record in front of you that you have rejected because they have not demonstrated that they will not practice their profession in the apartment. If you have somebody who's a professional trumpet player for the New York Philharmonic, you're allowed to [ask], "Is practicing the trumpet a professional requirement of your job?" If the answer is "yes," then the next question is, "Do you have a place to practice other than this apartment?" If the answer to that is "no," it is reasonable to assume that the applicant is going to use the apartment for commercial purposes. The proprietary lease usually provides that apartments may be used for residential purposes only if the board specifically consents to some ancillary use. Practicing a profession in the apartment is a proper ground for rejection.

But if you get someone like a writer…

I've never seen a board reject a writer, because the board usually gives specific permission to the profession of writing, after determining that the writer does not have a stream of people coming to the apartment for related purposes and will not have an adverse impact on the rest of the shareholders. So, it seems to me to be a totally rational decision to say, "We will consent to any writer practicing his profession, but we will not consent to somebody who's a sculptor using metal that he bangs into shape in his apartment." The distinction is, what will be the adverse effect on other shareholders caused by the practice of the specific profession?

I represented a building where there was a psychologist who practiced primal scream therapy. The patient would come to the apartment and be urged to scream as loud and exude as much of his pain as he possibly could. Obviously this drove the neighbors crazy. The co-op has a valid interest in excluding people who practice their professions if the practice is likely to interfere with the quiet enjoyment of other shareholders' rights.

Why do you ask about the period of employment?

Because we want to know the steadiness of the applicant's income. One of the difficulties with people in the arts is that their employment is so dependent on the ability to get jobs. So, the board is addressing that question: is this steady income? The board is not addressing the nature of the employment. You're entitled to tell your managing agent to ask for prior employment history if the application shows a short period of employment. People are nervous of somebody just starting out and that's relevant.

In Part 2: Finances, References, Children and Diplomats >>

 

Adapted from Habitat March 2009. For the complete article and more, join our Archive >>

Photo by Carol Ott. Illustration by Liza Donnelly