Coop Board at 1056 Fifth Avenue

do a search

how do you do a search on a co-op board

There is a website, wallfly.com I think it is. It is a great idea but most of their buildings have no ratings yet. Also, their comments on the buildings are very generic (good for Rockefellers & Astors) but not specific so therefore almost meaningless. The feedback can be good if you can find a building where people have acturally responded but overall I've found it to be a disappointment so far. Maybe somebody here knows something about 1056.

wall fly sucks

I just googled the address & there is a good city review article about the building. Sometimes you can get lucky googling an address.

I don't know why wallfly hasn't caught on. The idea is terrific. I just checked 1056 - Surprise! No info on wallfly.

This board has recently rejected two financially qualified buyers for a four bedroom apartment. Yes, I am a broker, will not waste my time showing apartments in this building. The board is totally out of control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

this is so sad for the owners of those 4 bedrooms . what are these people looking for . the coop boards are so wrong . we are moving to brooklyn because we do not want to deal LETS BRING DOWN THE COOPS NOW

What this coop board is doing is turning qualified buyers down in order to drive the price of the four bedroom apartment down so one of their friends can buy it really cheap. They are corrupt.

OH really! can you prove it.

Just another reason to only buy a condo.

coop boards are absurd. what really kills me is many of them bought thier apartments when the building flipped years ago at low insider prices; they couldnt afford the place today, but have the nerve to turn down people based on "financials" today...hypocrites.

why are we assuming the applicants were qualified - on the say so of a real estate agent trying
to get a commission? Unless we are given the data: the financials of the applicants and the
criteria used by the building, the only utility of the opinions expressed are to reveal the biases
of the writers.

Do Search on intro 119 which was introduced by Counsel member Hiram Monserrate.
It would force coops to disclose the reasons for rejection and bring the coop community more in line with housing law and away from corporate law.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/21/nyregion/21coop.html?ex=1334808000&en=ee39a8d1ee922ad9&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

I urge everyone to contact your counsel members and voice your support for this.

It's time Coop sponsors and their boards are prevented from ruining peoples lives and stealing there assets. This bill is one small step in that direction.

119 was discussed on this and other boards when it was first proposed some time ago. It sounds like a great idea but could have unintended consequences. You can still sue a coop board if you believe you were unjustly rejected - having a law that forces a board to disclose this won't stop them from discriminating, it would only mean higher legal fees for coops. As it is, mosts people are rejected for not meeting the financial requirements.

the internet is a more powerful tool than a law for increasing coop board transparency. And once the market starts to level out and the idiots who sit on these corrupt coop boards try to sell or start dying off, you'll see a change in attitude.

I fully agree with uptowngal. By the way, this coop is featured in www.wallfly.com at this link:

http://www.wallfly.com/review/manhattan_ny/index2.php?item_id=174
I don't know why blhz decided to revive the talk about this coop...seven months after the last comment was posted! If you are trying to sell an apartment in this building, I feel your pain.

[uptowngal wrote]
"119 was discussed on this and other boards when it was first proposed some time ago."

I think it should continue to be discussed rather left ti die on the vein.

[uptowngal wrote]
"...It sounds like a great idea but could have unintended consequences."

Like what? The consequences are fully intended. Make corrupt landlord coops accountable for their actions.

[uptowngal wrote]
"...You can still sue a coop board if you believe you were unjustly rejected - "

Good point. That fact should dispel the myth that transparency will somehow bring about more law suits.
But what about coop boards who are harassing a shareholder? A corrupt board can easily cause a shareholder financial hardship if not financial ruin by perpetually rejecting purchasers. Once the broker community spreads the word that the apartment is going to be an impossible sale the shareholder could be forced into bankruptcy. The shareholder has no protection whatsoever. The coop comes out ahead after they mysteriously find an acceptable purchaser after the victim is ousted and they pay themselves or all their "expenses". Or even worse, the coop secretly purchases the apartment themselves and rents it out.

[uptowngal wrote]
"...having a law that forces a board to disclose this won't stop them from discriminating,..."

I disagree. But why NOT have a law? It will simply make them more accountable. Any housing or financial institution who controls and holds the assets of citizens should be accountable for their actions and fully transparent.

[uptowngal wrote]
"...it would only mean higher legal fees for coops..."

Only if they do something wrong. And, so what? If the higher fees turn into assessments it might cause legitimate shareholders to probe the corrupt board and expose them even further. As you said yourself "You can still sue a coop board if you believe you were unjustly rejected" So what's wrong with transparency?

[uptowngal wrote]
"As it is, mosts people are rejected for not meeting the financial requirements."

How do you know that? As it is, we know what coop boards want us to know. THAT'S what needs to be changed.

[uptowngal wrote]
"...the internet is a more powerful tool than a law for increasing coop board transparency..."

What are you basing that on? The internet is a wonderful and liberating force but most of these RE developers behind the corrupt boards could not care less about what people say. Transparency should be mandated in any financial institution.

[uptowngal wrote]
"And once the market starts to level out and the idiots who sit on these corrupt coop boards try to sell or start dying off, you'll see a change in attitude."

I hope so. But I'm not inclined to just sit and wait for that possibility. I think people need to recognize that, presently, Coops are only a good idea for the transient elite and for the landlord sponsors who control them.

The Bottom Line:
The only people who need to be afraid of transparency are those with something to hide. And I am suspicious of anyone who thinks it's a good idea that coop boards be allowed to function behind a cloak of secrecy.

goldfish, no one is saying we should stop the debate. Some good points about 119 were hashed out on a previous post in case readers want to look.

The reality is that you can't legislate morality as people continue to hold their views. If 199 were passed coop boards may be reluctant to take risks - if you disclose something you better back it up or don't say at all (this is why many boards keep scant meeting minutes and why many companies are going private nowadays). If you don't like the gay couple who wants to join your building you'd likely give another reason and if the couple comes back to sue that reason would be open to interpretation by the courts and the case could drag on and on. Just ask anyone who's a litigator how our legal system works.

The coop board would have to enlist the help of an attorney as part of its application review process and BEFORE disclosing a reason for rejection, as they would be legally obligated to do. And attorneys cost money. And in the end it won't change a thing except drive up maint fees and drive down the values of coops.

At the end of the day, coops are private companies, not public institutions that people are 'entitled' to like healthcare. We can debate whether that's good or bad but it's the way it is.

And regarding transparency - as condos outprice coops on the market, and more info on this becomes available on sites such as streeteasy or propertyshark, and condos comprise a greater share of the RE market, smarter coop boards will take this into account. I know mine does.

uptowngal is on target - coops are private corporations formed for the specific purpose of having control over who may "buy in". No secrets here - thats basically why they exist. I have no problem with the structure or with whatever selection process each individual board chooses to employ. Many coops have a specific "profile" and others are more relaxed - the key is to find a building that fits your lifestyle. Quite frankly, it decreases the probability that you will have warring factions in a building.(and at these prices who needs that?) Personally, I do not want to live in an apt. with a rock star or drug lord living next door - just not my scene. Further , I have young children and would like to be able to have some input as to who they might be exposed to. No different than choosing a particular neighborhood in the suburbs. Why do I have any less rights than those applying?? If you have a problem with the coop structure there are many other options, but don't tell me I don't have the right to live whatever lifestyle I choose for myself and my family.

uptowngal

Kindly note that your unsavory and dangerous comment in reference to gay couples has been formally reported.

11201962 - just what "unsavory and dangerous" comment are you referring to ? I see nothing in her post that would be classified as either of those things. And as far as reporting it - thats a joke, right???

11201962, in case you couldn't figure it out, the reference to a gay couple was used to examplify why a coop board might discriminate, which unfortunately some do.

Your posting is quite clear, uptowngal. It will also be clearly and formally addressed. Kindly refrain immediately from mocking me or from referencing me in any future postings.

11201962, the coop board in this building is known for turning down your kind of people. Why don't you "formally report" that also.

11201962 - it is defensive, hostile and agressive individuals such as yourself that perpetuate whatever discrimination that may exist against the gay community.

11201962, let's call it a truce then - you stop making issues where there are none and I'll continue to post my views as they add value to the discussion.

uptowngal: Kindly refrain immediately from mocking me or from referencing me in any future postings.

11201962, OMG, you live in this coop, don't you?

11201962: If you do not want to be referenced to or addressed, GET OFF THE BOARD. You cannot order people what to write.

11201962 Is this person serious? S/he should be on a therapy board, not a real estate board.

I can't believe I missed this all the fun on this thread 3 months ago. 11201962(which suggests a Bklyn resident to me) get the nut job poster of the year award. I love him! Where'd he go? Is there really a place to make "a report" when someone "mocks" you? What kind of penalty does mocking carry?

oh, pu-LEEZE, not again?!?!

It's fun and easy to trash this building. E.g. look at the one apartment for sale in this coop. Listed for over one year with three price reductions and not one offer...ouch! Or as Cramer would say...HOUSE OF PAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!

It fascinates me to try to figure out why a given apartment isn't selling. Here, the one for sale in the building is $2MM after coming on the market a year ago at $2.25. It appears comparable units (perhaps not comparable condition) sold in the last 1-2 years for about $1.25MM - $1.45MM. Not sure where the extra $600-800K in supposed value for this unit as currently priced is coming from here. Also, take a look at the photos. It looks as if a 12 year old girl and her grandmother with too much money to spend decorated the place. After a year on the market, don't you think someone would rethink the entire approach and make more changes than simply reducing the price by $250K?

Da problema, kylewest, is the mantra of the coop board and share holders. They think that this is da best top coop building in NYC. We know that is not so! But the seller is at the mercy of the coop board, and that explains the ridiculous ask price...I agree with you, they should be asking for $1.1MM - $1.25MM. Maybe less, due to the crazy coop board the buyer will have to deal with. This building is truly the house of pain.

Better yet, do an Auntie Mame. Remember what she did to get even with a ridiculously self-important and biased Connecticut community? Invite the overflow from the Ronald MacDonald House that serves Sloan Kettering to stay as your house guests until you sell. (Friends of mine have stayed there.) The board will look like monsters of insensitivity if they tried to force them to leave - after all the kids and their families would be your guests. Wouldn't that make deliciously sensational headlines! "Selfish board at fancy Fifth Avenue condo to evict young cancer patients in their time of need" and "Not good enough for 1052 Fifth?". The scandal would get more air time than Pale Male, reporters would be camped out front and a lot of uncomfortable questions would be asked. Bet the board would love that.

This is the most corrupt, disgusting board in New York bar none. Right now as I type I know of a scenario where a seller has been blocked from letting their apartment be sold for over a year and a half. They have driven the price down through constant refusals, and there is some indication of nepotism and insider selling. It's more than interesting that one particular board member was interested in this place for over a year and the price has been driven down due to constant board refusals. You do the math. They have the absolute worst reputation, and it seems they simply do not care about the impact to the sellers.