Board requirements ... liquid assets

1-2 years of maitenance payments is minimum requirement of most coops.

Very building dependent.
How about, a fraction to several times the purchase price.
Sometimes it's to prove you fiscal worthiness other times it's to determine your worth still other time it's to determine you worth as a neighbor.
It's the reason I wear an ascot.

Purely out of curiosity--can you count some fraction of retirement accounts towards this requirement? (Does this vary by building as well?)

depends on close to 5th you go..West of Park, you get into the much stricter requirements and some coops can ask for 50% of purchase price in liquid post closing + strong d/i ratios.

East of Park, generally its <25% d/i ratio + at very least 2 yrs maint + mortgage in liquid assets post closing

I would restate Kw's rule as one to two years of "housing expenses" -- i.e., mortgage plus maintenance.

retirement assets really only count to break ties -- if building wants you to have two years' liquid post-closing, then you can't 'pro-rate' retirement monies towards that -- but if you are right at two years, and otherwise marginal, having $500K in retirement assets will tip the scale, while having $50K in retirement assets won't.

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

If you pay for your apartment in cash and have no mortgage would the board require less liquid assets?

front_porch: I wrote too quickly. Thanks for correcting what I meant. As for retirement assets, when I've sat on admissions committees, I couldn't care less about retirement beyond the fact that a prudent person should have retirement assets. But we never "count" them. If you pay all cash, I would want to know why--it actually sends up a yellow-flag in most coops that don't require an all cash purchase. Is your income fishy? Is someone buying it for you? What are the sources of your funds? Why are you doing this. I would not automatically be impressed by it--it would instead make me carefully scrutinize everything in the application to figure out where you were coming from. If you did an all cash purchase and didn't have 1-2 years ownership expenses in the bank I'd like to know what is going on. I care about you defaulting on maintenance payments and just because you owe no mortgage doesn't by itself assure me in any way that you'll be able to pay your maintenance. So in short, no. Paying cash doesn't change needing up to 2 years worth of apartment expenses liquid.

I just bought a coop in the neighborhood (lex and 80s) last year. After closing, they wanted liquid asset (in the bank, you can withdraw tomorrow) equals 2 years of monthly expenses (all mortgage payments, car payments, maintenance, student loans). Even if you paid all cash, like my neighbor did 2 months after I moved in, same requirement.

Thanks all. I was told by a broker that 1000 Park Avenue requires 1x value of property in liquid assets after downpayment of 50%. When I said that seemed unusual, the broker said "well, that is standard for Park Avenue coops'. When I went on to ask "who has that kind of money", she said "very few do, which is why I asked you about your financial situation". What I read between the lines was "you don't belong to old money". The conversation was short yet odd. Which is why I posted in the first place.

Ill repeat: "depends on close to 5th you go..West of Park, you get into the much stricter requirements and some coops can ask for 50% of purchase price in liquid post closing + strong d/i ratios."

Clearly some coops will ask for 100% of purchase price in liquid after closing. Its clear these bldgs are not only looking for who can afford to purchase, but are taking it to a deeper level and looking for a certain kind of buyer to join their 'club'.

I'm actually surprised you are surprised about the Park Ave requirements. Requirements of the building you describe are actually LESS stringent than many Park Ave coops.

a less oppressive ues bldg i owned in recently requires 40% down; then liquid assets (readily marketable securities) totaling 48 * (monthly maintenace + anticipated mo'ly mtge pmt)---no exceptions to this--cash buyer or 40% down buyer

any vaguely competent board would verify income and sources via the required 3yrs tax returns and 3 yrs bank/brokerage stmts--quick and easy---no room for "fishy" income sources if basic measures taken--

all cash a huge plus---always

not a praticularly complicated process--the board i was on turned this crap around in days

what's amazing is how long it takes many dullard, self-impressed boards to perform a simple due dilly on buyers; sometimes holding deals up for months

if the package is assembled properly, should take a hour of perusal, credit check, interview and done

but then so many board memebrs are complete losers with no lives

"but then so many board memebrs are complete losers with no lives"

Who are the gatekeepers of the building, thank you.

who have so little going on in their lives, that they get off on, and obsess that they are gatekeepers of the building, youre welcome

sv96, Park and Fifth are to a certain extent micro-climates that can have rules above and beyond typical UES/Carnegie Hill.

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

A lot of the Park and Fifth Ave coops as well as those on Sutton Place have requirements of 2-3x the amount of liquid assets after closing- and the % down is usually at least 50%.

I'm actually surprised to hear 1000 Park was only requiring 1x the value of the apt in assets after closing.

5thGen: my point exactly. I mean, who goes shopping at Hermes and then is shocked--just shocked!--at what they charge for a linen napkin.

"who have so little going on in their lives, that they get off on, and obsess that they are gatekeepers of the building, youre welcome"

I've decided I don't like your board package.

DENIED.

Next!

@NYCMatt: ditto. Someone obviously is not our kind of people. I'm sure he'll be happier living elsewhere.

I understand a board's ability to restrict certain potential buyers in the effort to maintain a certain "community" in the building, but what effect does this have on resale potential?

It seems that having strict board requirements would reduce the liquidity of the investment by severely restricting the population eligible to purchase. Would this translate into a reduced purchase price? Or does this added exclusivity drive up the purchase price?

effective, efficient management of a coop's finances and the creditworthiness of shareholders adds value to a coop--that a coop seeks reasonably to ascertain good character on the part of potential shareholders also adds value--where boards seek to effect agenda of their own, including stubborn, slow processing of simple due diligence, value is reduced for those buildings, and those boardmembers are doing a serious disservice to shareholders in those buildings---unfortunately there are many boards comprised of members of this ilk

"but then so many board memebrs are complete losers with no lives"

I've heard that some board VPs still use personal checks at the supermarket and still wartch tv on a 25 inch CRT.

"all cash a huge plus---always"

What if I'm a Columbian drug lord and I come with suit cases full of cash? Will this be a problem? How much money does it take to get the board to shut up and not ask any questiosn about the money?

>What if I'm a Columbian drug lord and I come with suit cases full of cash?

I hope you mean Colombian. And the answer depends on how much you promise to tip at Navidad.