NYT article about A/Cs in co-ops

Thanks for posting, Ali. This is an interesting one, and the comments especially so.

I'm sorry to say that pales in comparison to the battle I had with my previous Co-op board. Way too long a story to even get into, but as someone who's owned over 100 coops I've made myself a promise (which I most probably won't keep) to never buy another Co-op.

@30, yours is the worst tale of a co-op board I've heard, and I've heard a lot of tales. However, I agree with squid, the gold of this Times piece is in the comments. I do wonder what made the writer assume that she "deserved" the changes that she wanted to make -- it's not something that the listing broker would have promised, and any good attorney would have cautioned her not to assume Central A/C would be easy, even at the nearly $2mm price point. And multiple leaks -- that would try anyone's patience.

ali r.
{downtown broker}

I posted in the comments section! And it was along the lines of bemoaning the writer's sense of entitlement. I don't know why the NYT saw fit to print not just this piece but the two accompanying articles all relating to this conflict; the writer clearly has friends there, but I don't think they did her any favors by publishing her self-serving ramblings.

The idea of cooperative apartment living is just that - to live with others under the same roof in a cooperative way. Sadly, I agree with many here that coop living in our fair city is a corruption of the term. Where else but in NYC would it be considered acceptable to personally sue a neighbor simply because they disagreed with you over a capital improvement? To me, it's less about a sense of entitlement and more an uncaring attitude that leads people to so willingly exercise whatever legal privileges are available to them. This attitude embodies much of what is wrong with this city but may equally explain much of its success. Its "dog eat dog" and not for the squeamish.

The worst thing about coops is, like many a horror film monster, they never go away.

I think one of the things which is at the root of "evil Coop Boards" is Coop attorneys telling Boards that they can do "whatever they want to" at least half hoping that they will end up in litigation which the attorneys will profit from. This advice can be so bad that in the case of my prior Coop the firm (2 person) ended up disbanding after the one partner's "guaranteed win" ended up as a loss by summary judgment and cost the Coop double what they previously owed.

The article was not about "ACs in CoOps". The article was about the absurd situation which exists in New York City Coops, where the worlds worst people endure the worlds lowest quality of life and pay the worlds highest prices for the privilege. Nobody to root for here.

My cousin bought a condo in Ohio and she said it was the same power grabbing mentality during building meetings.

Only 12 units. I figured there had to be a flip side to this story.