Co op Boards Discriminating

You mean 1107 Fifth? The buyer and the board are quibbling over the terrace.

The board president's offer was rejected, as were others, and the board then accepted another applicant.

The case is slow going, but I'm posting as new stuff appears.

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/32755-why-i-hate-co-ops

@ NWT .. Thats the one !

Poor co-op owner with a terrace on Park Avenue. Needs our help desperately.
MIB, what is the reason for this owner being discriminated against?

@ Greenday ... still need that vaseline ? Its all about what COOP BOARDS FEEL THEY ARE ENTITLED TO.

andwin, are you a co-op owner? Meaning, have you been accepted at some point?

MIBC - Don't knock it - I do it all the time - AND without the aid of any lubricant whatsoever!

It's really a great meditative experience - think sensory deprivation tank ( with the exception of the olfactory system, unfortunately).

I mean c'mon now - how do you think I get my pearls of wisdom comment ideas for these very boards?!?

I highly recommend it to everyone.

http://www.vote29.com/newmyblog/archives/36513

@ Walrus ... LMAO

Thanks; I'm about to "enter the tunnel" for a session right now. In I go!

In McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, the Supreme Court first set forth the elements of what must be proved and how to prove it in discrimination cases. One of the points they made was that it the plaintiff is unlikely to find "smoking gun" evidence in these kinds of cases because people don't usually document their discrimninatory and actions and we can't read minds. Instead, the court said, circumstantial evidence is good enough to make the case. That is the standard for all these cases. Every once in a while, though, you do a find a smoking gun. Here's an article about one of those cases.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/04/business/eeoc-finds-race-bias-in-firing-at-wet-seal-store.html?_r=0

>Instead, the court said, circumstantial evidence is good enough to make the case.

Where is the circumstantial evidence?

SE, why?

MIBNYC
1 day ago
Posts: 289
Member since: Mar 2012
ignore this person
report abuse
@ greenday ... Why don't you link my post of the COOP prez that was screwing over a resident on 95 st and park i believe because the estate didn't sell to her because of a low
ball offer ?

So MIB, I understand the beef you have with the co-op board that isn't giving the poor poor Park Avenue co-op owner what she wants with her terrace, but what was what was your issue here: http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/34992-f-coop-boards when you linked to this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/realestate/co-op-board-presidents-tell-all.html

@ Greenday ... My beef with the COOP prez is because the COOP owner didn't want to get FUCKED over by the COOP prez offering her MILLIONS BELOW her asking price, she FUCKED HER OVER ANYWAYS BY making the PERSONAL TERRACE SHE HAD FOR 4 DECADES SUDDENLY A COMMON AREA. That shows you the ENTITLED ATTITUDE these COOP MUDAPHUKAS like to display and how they hide behind other ficticious rules and laws meanwhile you know what your true intentions were.

All else equal, co-ops sell at less per SF than condos. 116 posts later, hopefully everyone knows why.

@ Greenday http://youtu.be/-twUCEfzrDk

>All else equal, co-ops sell at less per SF than condos. 116 posts later, hopefully everyone knows why

But it's never equal

1)Condos are newer buildings, how many new co-ops being built vs condos?
2)Strict if any rental policies, the "investors" are a lost buying pool.
3)Much more challenging process for internationals, again shrinking the buyer pool.

>All else equal, co-ops sell at less per SF than condos. 116 posts later, hopefully everyone knows why.

Jason, is the theory is that it is cheaper to buy a co-op because they are better at keeping people out that owners don't like? Condo is more expensive because your neighbors are people you don't want to associate with?

"But it's never equal"

Ummm, we are making the same point. The hassles and restrictions of coops make them less-than. And your list leaves out the fact the discriminatory board review process limits buyers/sellers. I don't even just mean race - I mean all the times we have read in the press when extremely famous and/or wealthy people who have enough money to buy the unit cash and set aside many years of , maintenance are denied entry into exclusive buildings. For any reason.

or each of those hedge fund managers or Madonnas or Mariahs so denied, there are probably 100+ similar cases with less famous people.

I mean, all these years of posts with Matt makes me 100% certain that he would be a giant prick about letting people in to his bldg.

Every economist will tell you such discriminatory practices lead to sub-optimal economic outcomes.

Jason's point may be that discrimination means more affordable housing. Which we all know is sorely lacking in NYC.

Yes, less money going in and getting out. Works for me.

Even Madonna, with her entourage, paparrazi, etc., got into 1 W 64th. And only two lawsuits involving her over many years.

Re: I mean, all these years of posts with Matt makes me 100% certain that he would be a giant prick about letting people in to his bldg.

Chateau Pompous est tres exclusive!!!

>I don't even just mean race - I mean all the times we have read in the press when extremely famous and/or wealthy people who have enough money to buy the unit cash and set aside many years of , maintenance are denied entry into exclusive buildings. For any reason.

Yes some people want some semblence of control over who they will live with. Some people might not want to live next door to Katie Holmes because of paparazzi or psycho ex husband goons. It's not a yard and a fence over, it's the same front door.

On Matt.....it works both ways. Why would you want to live with Matt? Why find out after your married?

THe funny thing is, those who whine the most about "this system" have no intention of buying anyway.

Do improprieties happen? Sure..in everything. Do the cases you read about represent 50% of the time?
20% of the time? 5% of the time? or .001% of the time?

And a stat Ive been crying for many years to hopefully get on SE or UD, number of failed "in contracts" to close.
It probably hovers between 10% and 20%.

I'm quite curious as to the ratio of failed closing condo in contracts to failed co-op in contracts.
With all this "discrimination" you'd expect to see a substancially higher number for failed co-op closings.

Here's a condo/co-op comparison, same floor/exposure/size/vintage:

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/649473-condo-923-fifth-avenue-upper-east-side-new-york versus
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/822545-coop-880-fifth-avenue-lenox-hill-new-york

A million bucks is a lot to pay, just to avoid writing a few reference letters for friends to sign, and being able to rent it out, but there's no accounting for these things.

:)

Well let's not forget the inventory issue. THere are much fewer condo buildings on 5th than co-ops, as evidenced by 37 condos for sale and 99 co-ops. So if you must have a condo.....

Co-ops for sale
in All Upper East Side
On street: 5th ave
We found 99 listings on Fifth Avenue

Condos for sale
in All Upper East Side
On street: 5th ave
We found 37 listings on Fifth Avenue

And almost all of the 37 are those new ones way up north. And 995 is a co-op with condo rules.

We're back to the old story, where all co-op owners have to do to get almost all the advantages of a condo, is adopt condo-like rules. But they hardly ever do.

NWT, Almost every one of my building's meetings I jokingly bring up "we should go condo, condos are averaging 300 per sq ft more."
No one ever bites to carry the conversation to a more serious tone.

Right now a hot topic is the STAR rebate crackdown on primary residence and assessments against.

edit: on non-primary residence

MIBNYC, another one of your friends: http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/35306-i-make-almost-600k-and-i-aint-f-rich- "@shinny ... I actually know a stripper that purchased a condo here in the city for about $580k. She makes about 50k at her regualr job and made another $125k cash for a couple of years strippin. She paid for her place all cash. She didn't bother taking out a loan because of course the banks wasn't going to give her one. Also she kind of made sense i n saying why apply pay taxes on monay I made when they will suck 40% from you and the bank won't bother to give you a mortgage ?"

Is this one of the people who this co-op regulation law is supposed to protect?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/realestate/co-op-boards-to-buyers-nah-not-at-that-price.html?_r=0