Coop Flexibility
Started by CoopNoob
over 12 years ago
Posts: 0
Member since: Feb 2013
Discussion about
How flexible are Coop boards with their requirements? Specifically where financing is concerned. I'm considering purchasing an apartment where the Coop states that they require a minimum of 30% down. I could cover this, but I would prefer to retain more cash and I've already been approved for a mortgage that far exceeds what I would need for this property even if I only put 20% down. If all of my financials are in excellent condition, as is my history, how willing are Coops to relax their financing requirements in such an instance? (I realize the answer may be "not willing at all" or "it varies greatly from Coop to Coop", but I'm just trying to get a general idea). Thanks.
they are pretty rigid. this market has tons of buyers who can far exceed the minimum. remember you don't present your application in person. a board seeing a faceless application with 20% down would likely appreciate it for the opportunity to flex their ego and say no.
Everybody else (presumably) followed the rules. They're not going to give you an exception.
Maybe the rules were laxer when they bought in and the board has changed them in the interval. In a Groucho Marx "I would never join any club that would have the likes of me as a member" kind of way.
I'm not an atty, but am an agent who has been doing this for years -- and from my POV, any co-op that diverges from its stated rules is opening itself up to discrimination complaints the next time someone is rejected.
("You let that woman go to 20% down, but you tried to hold me to 30% and then rejected me ... it must be because I'm a man.")
ali r.
DG Neary Realty
Coop prez here. If you don't want to follow the rules, buy a condo. Our board would never selectively enforce a rule.
You are a noob. Didn't they say "minimum 30% down"? Exactly what do you think that means?
>oldgreyhair
about 1 hour ago
Posts: 81
Member since: Nov 2010
ignore this person
report abuse
Coop prez here. If you don't want to follow the rules, buy a condo. Our board would never selectively enforce a rule.
I think we should have a Co-op President-off of oldgreyhair and NYCMatt.
& CoopNoob if you are such a big shot that the bank loves you so much, why not step up and not be the biggest cheapstake deadbeat in the building?
Put the 30% down and pay it off to the level you want shortly after closing.
Another co-op board president here.
Let me get this straight: You are a stranger to me -- a "nobody" -- and you're already asking me for an exception to one of my building's most basic entry requirements?
This is taking entitlement to a whole new level of audacity.
OP, the thing with co-ops is that they are not real estate. The proprietary shares you hold are personal property.
So if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a mongoose. Residential co-ops are unique, I think, but owning one is like a cross between owning a car and owning private stock in the Salvation Army. Or something.
You're making an investment in a small not for profit company, and the executives have a right to decide what kind of limited business partners they want to have, and to manage their perception of risk of default in their business.
A co-op with a 30% down requirement is my idea of a good co-op, one I would like to invest in. There are probably people living in that building who would agree.
These board members are not going to relax their standards for you. They have no incentive to do so, and some significant disincentives. It is absolutely not happening.
What's more, the seller, if at all informed, will not accept you as a buyer because right now inventory is our region is extremely tight, at least for anything 1 or 2 bedrooms, and a buyer who might cause trouble with the board is completely unnecessary to deal with. It's a sellers market now.
Sounds to me like you're not comfortable putting 30% down, or perhaps not able to do so and still meet the liquidity requirements at closing--typically 1-2 years' worth of housing payments in liquid assets (preferably in the bank) but it could be otherwise.
If I were you I would move on to another new home, if possible.
"I've already been approved for a mortgage that far exceeds what I would need for this property even if I only put 20% down."
And I love how these people all invoke the "but I've been approved for a mortgage" argument.
I don't give a shit what Citibank says. Or Chase. Or Bank of America. In case you forgot, their lax lending standards are what contributed to the current fuck-up of the entire world economy. They are hardly a reliable barometer of whether YOU are a good credit risk.
These are the same banks who approved $800,000 mortgages for MTA bus drivers earning $36,000/year to buy houses in Queens and Brooklyn.
And yet in another breath, NYCMatt would tell this borrower not to pay down his mortgage faster.