Plaza 400 Board

"Doubtful that board even read through the entire application."

So you allege.

***
"Very questionable as to whether the Board is fulfilling its fiduciary responsibility."

The truth may sting, but I'm sure the board feels it's doing just that by keeping you OUT.

***
"Board seems to feel that they can act in an arbitrary and abusive way with impunity."

Sour grapes.

***
"My advice—think carefully about whether you want to live in Plaza 400."

MY advice: get over it. And take an honest appraisal of your application to figure out what turned the board off. Otherwise you're likely to be setting yourself up for another rejection by a different board.

i agree with matt...i just got into a building where the board is "difficult" and i had a great agent who filled out a board package and it went extremely smooth and the interview was more a welcome to the building nothing else...i think you may want to reexamine your package and make sure all your finances are in order. no board turns you down for no reason...

also if they dont want you then you shouldnt give them your money

9 times out of 10, once a board has agreed to meet with they have already approved. most turn downs happen before the interview process. so the "Board turned us down without even asking us for an interview or calling any of our references." comment is not something you should get hung up on. Oh yeah - and calling references.......who does that? that is the silliest thing that is ever required for a board package, job interview, etc. would anyone ever provide a reference that said the you're was a douche bag?

Never sold in Plaza 400, but I have sold on Sutton Place. Those East Side boards can be tough.

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

I appreciate your comments and could elaborate and address the issues raised. Suffice it to say that co-op boards wield a great deal of power and some use that power responsibly and others do not. My post is intended for the benefit of people in the market to buy and I leave it them to them to decide how much weight my experience should have in their decision making process.

I have sold in Plaza 400 many, many times and if the board turned you down it was probably something to do with your financials or possibly the price was too low endangering the value of the building.

"Oh yeah - and calling references.......who does that?"

I do, actually.

"My post is intended for the benefit of people in the market to buy and I leave it them to them to decide how much weight my experience should have in their decision making process."

No.

Your post was intended as a way to vent, to publicly give a black eye to a co-op board who you feel somehow "wronged" you, and you came off sounding like a spoiled, petulant child.

I realize your pride has been bruised. Grow a set, take an honest appraisal of your picture, and learn from this experience.

Matt, how many are in a "set"? How long does it take for them to grow?

>"Oh yeah - and calling references.......who does that?"
>I do, actually.

What kind of questions do you ask? Any funny stories to report?

I have to say I do not blame OP for wanting to vent. A decade ago, I wanted to buy a coop in Lower Manhattan. I obtained the financing and then was turned down by the coop board (after a meeting). Presumably, they found my debt level to be too high at that time. Though I went on to buy a house on Fire Island for $200,000 more than I would have paid for the coop. I was approved and eventually sold the house for $200K profit, so I do not feel too bad. I also managed to pay all my debts with no late payment or non-payment issues, maintaining a high credit score over the years. (Note: front_porch's comment above indicates that certain boards play it more conservatively or whatever, so some boards are harder to pass than others in a "subjective" manner.)

I did resent not getting any feedback from the coop board as to the actual reason for rejection. And, to be honest, while I was there waiting for the board member to interview us, I was going to use the bathroom in the coop common area but it was disgusting. Looked like it had gotten clogged for awhile and literally "sh.." was about to flow out of the toilet bowl. So I had to deal with an arrogant and unfriendly coop board member and the "double standards" they communicated. In contrast to the "high" standards they placed on the applicant, the board certainly did not reflect the same high standards in the upkeep of their building's own common areas.

I swore off coops after that experience and I am so happy to have the relative freedom of living in a condo in NYC.

>Though I went on to buy a house on Fire Island for $200,000 more than I would have paid for the coop. I was approved and eventually sold the house for $200K profit, so I do not feel too bad. I also managed to pay all my debts with no late payment or non-payment issues, maintaining a high credit score over the years.

Congratulations

> I was going to use the bathroom in the coop common area but it was disgusting. Looked like it had gotten clogged for awhile and literally "sh.." was about to flow out of the toilet bowl. So I had to deal with an arrogant and unfriendly coop board member and the "double standards" they communicated. In contrast to the "high" standards they placed on the applicant, the board certainly did not reflect the same high standards in the upkeep of their building's own common areas.

You are a superior Human. Congratulations again.

"What kind of questions do you ask? Any funny stories to report?"

I found out quite inadvertently that an older couple from Long Island was planning on buying a unit in our building to use as a dormitory for their college-aged kids attending Columbia and NYU. They told us they were looking to "downsize" and move back into the city. Not so, said one of the wife's references, who insisted the "Joneses" were not leaving Long Island at all, and confirmed the "dorm room" scheme.

Why would they allow one of their kids to go to NYU, even if they punished this lesser child by forcing him or her to commute from Washington Heights to Washington Square?

I don't know. We rejected them before I had a chance to ask.

bfrattini and others have said that the board could have rejected my offer because they thought the price was too low. This is exactly the sort of action that lends itself readily to a misuse of authority.
1. I would imagine that the Plaza 400 Board is composed of a typical cross-section of the people living in the neighborhood -- dentists, CPAs, doctors, head hunters, business owners, etc. They have no special knowledge about the future performance of the economy. Therefore, why should they presume to substitute their judgment as to what transaction price should be acceptable to the seller? Economists who specialize in the topic are routinely way off the mark in their forecasts of real estate prices. It’s entirely possible that 6 months from now the price at which the transaction could be done is significantly lower than the price that was rejected by the board. In fact, if this board prevented a transaction in 2007 because they judged the price was too low, then without a doubt the seller would have been badly hurt because prices declined significantly over at least the next 3 years.

2. The best policy is to leave apartment valuation to market forces. In the short run it may appear to a board that they did the right thing in having a minimum selling price, but in the long run an honest appraisal of the situation almost always shows that the costs of trying to repeal the laws of supply and demand far outweigh the benefits.

3. The power to reject a price agreed to by the owner of an apartment is easily abused. For example, in rejecting an offer does the board act consistently? If the transaction involves a broker who lives in the building or a seller who is a neighbor, do they tend to be more willing to overlook a “low” price? In the worst case scenario, does the board informally let their favorite brokers and neighbors know the reserve price below which they will not accept the deal?

4. Finally, the board doesn't pay a price for being wrong about its judgment of apartment values. All the risk is put on the owner of the apartment, who in a down market like we've recently experienced could lose hundreds of thousands of dollars because the transaction was prevented by the board. Therefore, if a board wants to perform the role of market prognosticator they should assume some of the risk of being wrong. This would at least make them think twice before telling owners that they can’t sell their property. With an estate sale the situation is even worse because no one on the board has to worry about running into an apartment owner in the elevator and hearing pointed complaints about the board’s presumption and high-handedness.

In the end, the basic question is this: is it legal to have a reserve price? If it is not, a board shouldn't resort to subterfuges in order to informally enforce a reserve price. Similarly, it is not legal to discriminate on the basis of race. Therefore, responsible and ethical boards don’t resort to subterfuges to discriminate on the basis of race.

If it is legal to have a reserve price, then a great deal of aggravation and expense would be avoided if the board announced that it had a reserve price. In that case, the prospective buyer could decide if he wants to assume the risk of entering into a negotiation with the owner of the property and a third party; i.e., the board. To be clear, it would not be necessary for the board to publish the price, they would merely need to let it be known that there is a reserve price.

In closing, I don’t think that I’m proposing anything that is radical or even unreasonable. All I am saying is that a board should be consistent, transparent and should not try to control a market that is subject to the laws of supply and demand.

OMG!

Vgoldber59, get thee immediately to the nearest bar and down 5 shots of whiskey.

Maybe then it'll kill that bug that's up your ass, and you'll get relief enough to move on.

As an aside, for anyone who has followed this discussion, I haven’t responded to Matt because anyone who has made close to 7000 postings over the past 4 years (and responds within minutes anytime of the day or night), is either a crackpot or a paid shill. Therefore, if you have an interest in this issue, I suggest that in order to keep the discussion on topic you do as I do, and ignore his juvenile rants.

Vgoldber59, you're cute.

You get rejected by a board and spend all this time bitching and moaning and constructing elaborate arguments and rebuttals for something that IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE.

And you say I'M the one with "juvenile rants".

Priceless.

How's your condo search going?

I haven’t responded to Matt because anyone who has made close to 7000 postings over the past 4 years (and responds within minutes anytime of the day or night), < Goldberg

Didn't you know MATT gets a INSTANT TEXT ALERT anytime someone opposes his views or talks negatively about CO-OPS ??

I started another discussion on this board about a similar topic. As a seller I question the board's legal right to dictate the price. My original question asked who overseas co-op boards. As on this board I got a lot of rants from people but no direct answer. Who overseas co-op boards if anyone????

To be fair, 7000 posts in four years amounts to like 2 a day. Which doesn't really qualify as pathological posting. And while Matt's delivery can be a bit abrasive, he's almost always reliable for an answer when someone asks a question. Which is the whole purpose of this discussion.

I have no idea why the board turned you down. As someone who is looking for an apartment, I'm fearful of the same thing happening to me. But, at the end of the day, that's how coop's work. They owe the potential buyer nothing, they owe the shareholders everything. It's fine to be upset and confused. I'd feel the same. But to identify the building in the heading of the thread with a sharp commentary about how they turn people down willy-nilly is a pretty aggressive move. I'd reckon a guess that the people who own apartments in that building--and might want to sell them someday--aren't so stoked to be represented on a public forum in a way that could drive buyers away. And I also reckon you knew that when posting.

At the end of the day, it's totally your right to post whatever you want based on your experience. But you can't throw something that pointed out and not be accepting of dissenting feedback.

"Who overseas co-op boards if anyone????"

And I answered it several times.

Co-op boards, like the boards of other corporations, are "overseen" by a patchwork of local, state, and federal authorities and agencies, as well as the New York City Department of Housing.

"And while Matt's delivery can be a bit abrasive, he's almost always reliable for an answer when someone asks a question."

Thank you, unsure, for your diplomatic comments.

What can I say? I quite appreciate your point of view.

Maybe what people should do so other don't go thru paying a lot of money for rate locks, mortgage commitments, lawyers fees etc before getting rejected on price is to post the experience that they had about each building and the reason or no reasons for the rejections then if you see a building with a lot of price rejections we will know which ones have that (reserve price).

It's nice in theory, but rejection--by mere virtue of what it is--is rarely considered objectively by the person being rejected. I'm living proof of this. Ask the last guy who dumped me. So, unless a board were willing to state the reason for the turn down, it's all conjecture on the part of the rejected.

aalsberg, unless a board member specifically tells the applicant "you've been rejected based on price", it's all speculation.

I also think it's smart to troubleshoot for oneself. Before I even make an offer, I am very straightforward about my finances. I have good liquidity, great credit, and moderate income that is steady but partially derived from freelance work. If a building isn't going to be cool with that, I want to know. There's no point shielding that stuff until a package is submitted.

If you can prove that the freelance work is steady (a track record of at least five years), being a freelancer shouldn't be a problem, particularly if your freelance income isn't your sole income.

And of course, good liquidity, great credit, and solid income mean nothing when you're trying to buy an apartment that's out of your reach.

With a coop you can be burned both ways. If you are trying to buy, the board can turn you down. If you are selling and have an interested buyer the board can turn the buyer down and you are stuck with the apartment until an approval comes through. There was a coop that was priced at $70,000,000 (?, Hotel Pierre?) that the coop board turned down numerous buyers. The poor sap who owned that property had to hold that property for years before the board approved a buyer. I am not saying the board did anything wrong but his is something you have to accept when buying and then selling a coop.

I doubt that any "poor sap" who owns any property worth $70 million would have a problem holding his finances together while he tries to sell that property.

VG, looking at the listed prices in the building, they don't look markedly different from recent closing prices. I think it's just as likely that something in the application was the culprit. What was your post-closing liquidity?

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

>2. The best policy is to leave apartment valuation to market forces.

You don't live in the co-op, you can't pass their standards, yet you know the best policy for them. What are your credentials?

I'm hoping that's the attitude toward the freelancing...It's been a consistent 20% of my income for a decade. But, naturally, I assume some boards won't love that. I suppose "afford" is somewhat subjective. Everyone seems to differ of what that means. I'd be going in with 30 percent down and an 18 month reserve of total living expenses (not just mortgage, maintenance). And I always math my housing (mortgage and maintenance) at 25% of my income (no additional debt). I've been in the same apartment for 15 years (cheap, stabilized, allowed me a lot of saving). My big issue--at my price range (which is low end, "starter" apartment)--is that I can't compete with parents buying for kids. All cash is just not an option for me and it seems to be what I'm usually up against. The self-esteem dip I feel when competing for an apartment with a 22 year old is another matter. Where I come from, you're beyond fortunate if your parents get you through college. They do not, as a rule, buy children homes outright in my neck of the woods. But. That's neither here nor there.

Unsure, let me try to reassure you.

If it makes you feel any better, most boards look very unfavorably upon parents buying for kids. They could have more money than God, but many boards, once they find out the kid isn't financing the place on his own, will reject the application.

I wholeheartedly agree that, if a minimum price is required by the board, it should be disclosed at the beginning. It would save EVERYONE -- from buyer to seller to brokers on both sides, to attorneys on both sides, to even the boards themselves -- a TREMENDOUS amount of time, effort, money and headaches. This is a small, simple, basic piece of information, which if known, would create a lot more good, than bad if known.

Just my opinion, but I still have not seen a case in which a minimum price has been kept secret, and all parties benefited from this lack of information.

Bravo Sonya_D

Sonya spoke and drops the MIKE !!! MATT HIDES HIS HEAD IN THE SAND !

Vgoldber59: I am curious if the broker who was representing either you and/or the seller was already well versed in this specific building and its normal package requirements? Because if one (or both) of the brokers was/were, I would be surprised that they wasted their own time (let alone yours) when they reviewed your package prior to submitting it on to the board.

You're suggesting here that (assuming one or both of the brokers was well versed in this building) the brokers were equally stunned by the board's rejection, based on the fact that you supposedly offered a squeaky clean and fabulous package. Are both brokers as surprised as you seem to be?

Haha, thanks MIBNYC and aalsberg :)

But to his defense, and while NYCMatt does indeed end up being wrong in many instances, I don't believe what I said here QUITE **necessarily** disagrees with what he's posted in this thread. NYCMatt hasn't, I don't BELIEVE, said anything to the effect of: "co-ops can, do, and should keep minimum price requirements secret and to themselves." He just mentioned that they don't disclose this information, and this is of course pretty common knowledge. And yes, I concur with this -- co-ops do keep, for the most part, their minimum monetary requirements for a unit, if there is one, to themselves. What they actually do and what they SHOULD do (to make the process easier for everyone) is different though. My belief is that this one element could, if known by the parties concerned, make the entire process A LOT more streamlined, easy, and cost-effective for everyone.

Happy belated July 4th everyone!! :)

Vgoldber59: I would also add to my query two posts above - was your liquid net worth 2.5 X the purchase price of the unit you were buying? In addition, maintenance PLUS all other building expenses (e.g. parking, gym, pool) cannot exceed 25% of monthly income in that building. You met those two requirement cleanly, with no questions/problems?

Thanks, Sonya, for your intelligent answers. It would make sense to me too if the board would set a bottom line amount on an apartment but wouldn't that be considered price fixing? I thought we lived in a "free market" society where the market determines the price and not board members. We had our apartment on the market last year at a higher price and not one offer. Lowered the price and we got 3.

@ Kaydee ... did ask MATT'S PERMISSION to put your apt on the market ?? He's gonna be mad !

sry typo kaydee...DID YOU ASK

It sounds as if the Board at Plaza 400 did enough due diligence to realize that approving Vgolber59 was not a good decision for the current shareholders. His/her arrogance is obvious.

Sooo some of the so called CO-OP experts here are saying to buy a co-op for about a mil to get pats the board you have to have assests of about 3 mil ?

Some more, some less. In the other Plaza 400 thread a poster says that board requires a net worth of 250% of purchase price. (Another poster says there's no fixed percentage.)

The idiotic thing about these board members is that some of them reject applicants that are worth several times more than them. Some of these boards members hardly work anymore, retired and bought there apt back Goetz and Son of Sam was smoking people here in new york. So there one true assest is that manhattan coop.

There's no way to know, as their finances can be checked only if they do a cash-out re-fi, and that's almost unheard of. So there they are, racking up decade after decade of tax-free rent-savings income and stashing away what they haven't spent on their winter and summer places.

My building 20 years ago was mostly doctors, lawyers, shrinks, opera conductors; a typical UWS mix. For the last ten years buyers have been much more likely to be finance types, so there's definitely been a shift in income.

Anyway, the poorer and more risky the old-timers, the more the board has to up the ante for the new buyers.

MIBNYC: "...Sooo some of the so called CO-OP experts here are saying to buy a co-op for about a mil to get pats (sic) the board you have to have assests of about 3 mil ?..."

It this case, yes. And it's not that unusual, either.

In some co-ops (white glove fifth avenue type co-ops) the demand is all cash (no mortgage allowed) + a multiplier of 5 to 10 times the price of the unit in liquid cash reserves after the purchase price is deducted for board approval. Nothing new about that. You're acting as if this is news to you.

And that's precisely why you seem to be an idiot, and a liar. This is common, and long standing, knowledge.

@GRACE JONES .. I ain't talking about white glove fifth ave STRAPON and nobody else was either. My point is maybe about half of board members are made of OLD SCHOOL people that purchased back when WHITE PEOPLE were afraid to walk the streets of new York cuz a BERKOWITZ WAS SMOKIN THEM. They may have had a career back then when you could purchase a grand apt at the Ansonia for 100k but can no longer pay with ease the 7-8k in maintenance NOW and THESE are folks that serve on many boards going thru NEW applicants finances. WHY ??

MIBNYC: Umm, you couldn't purchase a "...grand apt..." - or any apartment, for that matter - in "...the Ansonia for 100K..." when "...Berkowitz was smokin them..." because the building was always a rental until it turned condo in 1990, fifteen years after Berkowitz was captured. That's why.

You really don't know anything about anything, do you?

Do you actually live in NYC at all?

"The idiotic thing about these board members is that some of them reject applicants that are worth several times more than them. Some of these boards members hardly work anymore, retired and bought there apt back Goetz and Son of Sam was smoking people here in new york. So there one true assest is that manhattan coop."

Examples, please.

poor matsonjones, reduced from irrelevance to nothingness.

@GRACE JONES .. The Ansonia was a example you fuckin idiot.

@NYCMATT ... Since you are a person that hardly admits to anything that does happen outside the guidelines whats the point of giving you a example ? One way of balancing this coop board bullshit would be if you can only be a member of the board if you are just as qualified as the applicants for apts. ya'll power hungry idiots would drop like flies.

sma10022 “It sounds as if the Board at Plaza 400 did enough due diligence to realize that approving Vgolber59 was not a good decision for the current shareholders. His/her arrogance is obvious.”

Your observation is an ad hominem attack and doesn’t address any of the issues I raised in my post about reserve prices. Of course, that’s obvious, but apparently with some people it’s necessary to state the obvious.
In opposition to what I mentioned, can it really be your position that a board use illegal criteria to judge applicants; that a board should resort to subterfuges to effectuate its prejudices; that a board act as if it possessed Olympian knowledge which neither it or anyone else could have about future real estate prices? Finally, can you really believe that a board should be able to impose a cost on a property owner which he could not recover if the board’s decision is incorrect?

Again remembering that some people have to be told the obvious, just because some of my thoughts are in the form of questions please don’t construe that you need to respond.

>In opposition to what I mentioned, can it really be your position that a board use illegal criteria to judge applicants;

What illegal criteria are you talking about? This should be brought to the attention of the State

> Finally, can you really believe that a board should be able to impose a cost on a property owner which he could not recover if the board’s decision is incorrect?

What property owner are you talking about?

Vgoldber59 ...

They still don't want you.

You aren't a qualified buyer.

Deal.

@Goldberg ... don't feel bad. You probably were turned down by old spineless motherfuckers that don't make 1/8 of what you make now and are holding on to a lil power by being on a board and holding on to apts they bought back in THE honeymooner days

@gOLDBERG... And their only income is the SS check

Co-op boards have been making small people feel big for many many decades. And it's not just about voting on applicants. Co-op boards are a hilariously self-selecting lot.

Actually, East SIDER, co-op boards are elected by the shareholders.

That's how it works.

Do you live in NYC?

Hey MATT ... do co-op boards go thru a CAVITY CHECK like you do to applicants or are they just part of the HOMEBOY NETWORK of the retired,livin on SS mudaphukas in the building ?

MIBNYC ... I think you'd better check YOUR cavity. Seems like there's an errant hair jammed up there, causing you some discomfort.

While I'm sure there are some good apples in the bushel, I have found that co-op boards are indeed self-selecting in the sense that they have a remarkable tendency to be sprinkled with petty, vindictive, controlling types. I'd love to see a pie chart of aggregate board compositions city-wide...bet there would be some mighty big slices representing crabby elderlies, the "self-employed," and just all around busybodies, ruling over their post-war, 1980s era conversions with an iron fist and specious decorating choices. A fascinating anthropological phenomenon, to be sure.

And yet, they are all voted into office by their fellow shareholders.

So who are YOU to tell that building they shouldn't be board members?

Of course they were voted in MATT. Who else would want the lousy job ? Well they really don't get paid for it.

I too was in contract at Plaza 400. Our financial resources were far in excess of what was required by the board, we were all-cash buyers, we had a relative living in the building, and the manager was thrilled with our board package. She said she would schedule our interview for the following week. Two days later she called our broker to say the board had declined to interview us. We have since purchased another, much more spacious apartment in a building that welcomed us. After a total renovation, we have now moved into our new apartment 9 months after the Plaza 400 rejection. The apartment at Plaza 400 still sits on the market, after several price reductions at a time when market prices are generally moving higher. That owner is very elderly and needs to leave. I feel sorry for that owner, who has been so ill-served by the Plaza 400 board. The apartment at Plaza 400 also needs some serious work. Most people cannot see the potential. It's a tough sell.

I am a broker and have sold in the building before. The posts saying that the board requires 2.5 times liquid assets after purchase are absurd and coming from a sore looser. This is not Park Ave. or Fifth Ave. Please STOP scaring buyers because you were rejected. This is a very reasonable board and they have very reasonable requirements. Roya

Any information on the board? I heard that the requirements are high and many apartments stay on the market for a long period of time because buyers are consistently being rejected.