Condo Board Review Process

I was on a condo board for 10 years. We had the managing agent do a background check for the buyer and verify that the references were from "real" people. The board looked over their finances also, especially verifying the sources of income. What we were really trying to do is identify people that might compromise the security and safety of the other residents. Fortunately, 99% of the people submitting condo applications were fine and were okayed immediately. The other 1% took up a great deal of a board's time.

It is very difficult for a condo to reject a buyer. The Board only has 30 days to process the application also.

However, if you suspect that the buyer is engaged in illegal activities or doing something unsavory, the Board can keep asking them for documentation piecemeal to discourage them from trying to complete the purchase. You can also stress the enforcement of particular house rules and bylaws that you suspect buyer will violate (eg pets that are not permitted, no musical practice/singing during certain hours, carpeting regulations, after midnight noise regulations, etc.). If they have something to hide, they usually go away.

We had someone who bought through the sponsor, thereby bypassing board review. He had a non-stop stream of "guests" arriving between midnight and 5 AM, none staying longer than 30 min. Obviously something shady was going on so we spoke to the local police precinct. They told us to set up a guest log similar to what was required in office buildings after 9/11. Guests had to show a photo id, sign in (signature verified), and specify the time in and time out. To avoid discrimination charges, the guest log had to be used 24 hours per day, and described as needed for security/insurance reasons due to 9/11. All of a sudden, the "guests" between midnight and 5 AM dropped off to a trickle. The owner sold the apartment.

"They told us to set up a guest log similar to what was required in office buildings after 9/11. Guests had to show a photo id, sign in (signature verified), and specify the time in and time out. To avoid discrimination charges, the guest log had to be used 24 hours per day, and described as needed for security/insurance reasons due to 9/11."

Jelj, I'm glad you were able to handle your difficult tenant, but if I had been on your board, I would have been 100% against this discriminatory policy. Signing in is fine, but you're basically denying entry to anyone who isn't carrying photo identification -- something that is not required in the USA, still nominally a free country.

Did you actually deny entry to guests who weren't carrying "their papers", or did you have the tenant come down to sign them in, as office buildings do?

As everyone knows, all the 9-11 villains had photo IDs. Using this disaster as a backdoor way to oust an uncooperative tenant is despicable.

"you're basically denying entry to anyone who isn't carrying photo identification -- something that is not required in the USA, still nominally a free country."

What does the USA still being "nominally a free country" have to do with requirements to enter private property?

How many office buildings in Manhattan can YOU enter without showing photo ID anymore?

"As everyone knows, all the 9-11 villains had photo IDs."

To which "villains" are you referring?

The Muslims who were the distraction, or the white Christian men who really masterminded the whole operation?

This is why you shouldn't live in a condo or co-op in NYC, you might get a nut like Triple_Zero on the board:

>Jelj, I'm glad you were able to handle your difficult tenant, but if I had been on your board, I would have been 100% against this discriminatory policy. Signing in is fine, but you're basically denying entry to anyone who isn't carrying photo identification -- something that is not required in the USA, still nominally a free country.
Did you actually deny entry to guests who weren't carrying "their papers", or did you have the tenant come down to sign them in, as office buildings do?
As everyone knows, all the 9-11 villains had photo IDs. Using this disaster as a backdoor way to oust an uncooperative tenant is despicable.

Matt, the "free country" point is that Americans are not required to carry government papers as a matter of daily routine. The residents' apartments are their private property, but somehow they aren't allowed to let people who aren't carrying government ID papers in to visit them? I don't think even the Soviet Union was that bad.

I've visited office buildings in Manhattan and while the employees have badges, nothing is demanded of invited visitors. I was met by the people I was visiting, and was given a badge marked "GUEST". A hassle, but still reasonable. I'm assuming that in Jelj13's building, this ID thing is for unannounced and unexpected people, and that the residents can still bring guests in with them when coming in together off the street, and come down to meet invited guests in the lobby. If they're really turning away _accompanied guests_ who didn't have the foresight to bring ID, then I don't know what to say because that's just outrageous.

"The Muslims who were the distraction, or the white Christian men who really masterminded the whole operation?"

Oh, boy. I'm not even stepping into this.

>I've visited office buildings in Manhattan and while the employees have badges, nothing is demanded of invited visitors.

Challenge you to find many Class A office buildings in Manhattan where there is no ID requirement.
And even so, so what?

And Americans do carry identification as a routine.

We found little benefit to contemplating a condo. More expensive, nearly as much paperwork, but possibly actually less effective at keeping out the unwanted.