U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-16-2012, 07:09 PM
 
Location: New York City
559 posts, read 1,070,863 times
Reputation: 388

Advertisements

Price floors leave many New Yorkers stuck in apartments | Best Places To Live In NY - New York Daily News

I don't understand the above situation. Can't the seller just make a side-agreement with the buyer? I, seller, will hand over the coop to you for the X minimum price that the buyer has set. On the side, however, I, seller, will wire transfer to you the difference between X and what you and I have actually agreed as the price of the coop.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2012, 08:11 PM
 
10,131 posts, read 18,114,434 times
Reputation: 10763
You could probably pull something like that, though it's likely fraud of some sort.

In this case, he could also threaten to just walk away and let the unit get foreclosed. Then they have an unsaleable share AND no maintenance fees coming in.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 12:15 AM
 
Location: New York City
4,036 posts, read 9,915,869 times
Reputation: 3751
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanintllctl View Post
Price floors leave many New Yorkers stuck in apartments | Best Places To Live In NY - New York Daily News

I don't understand the above situation. Can't the seller just make a side-agreement with the buyer? I, seller, will hand over the coop to you for the X minimum price that the buyer has set. On the side, however, I, seller, will wire transfer to you the difference between X and what you and I have actually agreed as the price of the coop.
Most co-op bylaws require board approval for ANY transaction. Your own children can't inherit your unit without board approval. You would leave yourself open to fraud charges.

Also, The problem with this private scenario is taxes. You can't transfer large sums of money without enormous tax liabilities.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 03:47 AM
 
98,742 posts, read 97,876,029 times
Reputation: 72843
depends on the co-op bylaws.. our kids need no approval to live there even if we dont nor does the board have to approve them inheriting it. spouses and children need no approvals in our building.

it varys from co-op to co-op as per their bylaws as to whether kids need approval to inherit.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2012, 01:25 PM
 
Location: NYC fulltime & Lewes, DE partime :)
35 posts, read 60,279 times
Reputation: 26
Something similar happened a friend who was selling his studio in Manhattan. The board would not approve his buyer but the board would not say why.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2012, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Manhattan
24,758 posts, read 34,743,211 times
Reputation: 12285
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanintllctl View Post
Price floors leave many New Yorkers stuck in apartments | Best Places To Live In NY - New York Daily News

I don't understand the above situation. Can't the seller just make a side-agreement with the buyer? I, seller, will hand over the coop to you for the X minimum price that the buyer has set. On the side, however, I, seller, will wire transfer to you the difference between X and what you and I have actually agreed as the price of the coop.
That is the only approach that makes sense. Running aound like a chicken without a head like the article recommends, gathering co-op voters to change bylaws, bank appraisals, etc. is just plain silly and impractical. Might as well say "sue the board in court" which could probably be done with $10,000 and 2 years to waste.

It could work like: You pay $213,000 and I will rebate you $20,000 for "closing costs" and "necessary upgrades."
But the secondary contractual agreement would be done privately. What the Board doesn't know won't hurt it.
Seller might take a $5,000 hit and buyer get a $5,000 windfall to cooperate, but the deal would get done.

People tend to operate sanely unlike some co-op boards (or magazine writers.)

Last edited by Kefir King; 03-18-2012 at 11:24 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2012, 01:26 AM
 
Location: New York City
559 posts, read 1,070,863 times
Reputation: 388
And I don't think it would be "fraud" as someone wrote above. It's because these days, it's pretty easy to prepare a derivatives transaction that would achieve the goal described below, while remaining completely legal.

Or how about something simpler than derivatives. I sell the apartment to you for 230,000. Then, on the side, you sell me a peck of corn (which cost you zero cents) for 20,000.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kefir King View Post
That is the only approach that makes sense. Running aound like a chicken without a head like the article recommends, gathering co-op voters to change bylaws, bank appraisals, etc. is just plain silly and impractical. Might as well say "sue the board in court" which could probably be done with $10,000 and 2 years to waste.

It could work like: You pay $213,000 and I will rebate you $20,000 for "closing costs" and "necessary upgrades."
But the secondary contractual agreement would be done privately. What the Board doesn't know won't hurt it.
Seller might take a $5,000 hit and buyer get a $5,000 windfall to cooperate, but the deal would get done.

People tend to operate sanely unlike some co-op boards (or magazine writers.)
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2012, 03:35 AM
 
98,742 posts, read 97,876,029 times
Reputation: 72843
many times folks try to do the reverse.

the try to make the sale price look as low as they can and then take money under the table.

flip taxes,transfer taxes ,capital gain taxes etc all benefit showing the sale price as low as possible.

many co-ops have right of first refusal .. get the actual price low enough by working under the table deals with your buyer and the building may snatch it away from you and you really will end up with that low price.

co-ops have no problem doing this as they have lines of credit in place . its alot lot tougher to do in a condo though.

Right of First Refusal / Featured Articles from Our Print Magazine / 2010 March / Publication Content / Home - Habitat Magazine

Last edited by mathjak107; 03-19-2012 at 03:48 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 03:37 PM
 
3,244 posts, read 5,016,333 times
Reputation: 2548
The Board's concern may be to protect the financing of the remaining owners. Appraisals are based on "comps": comparable sale prices for similar units. If some people paid $223K for their units, their mortgage is based on that price. With the traditional 80% guidelines restored, an owner can finance a max of $178,400. Some may have financed more, as some 90% & 95% loans were made, just a couple of years ago! If the prices for the comps drop to $175K, an appraisal will max the 80% available on a re-financing at $140,000. So, the effort to protect remaining owners is done in good faith, despite the efforts of realtors to move properties & lawyers to drag the Board into lengthy lawsuits. Sad for the 10% trying to sell, but a majority of the other 90% probably want the floor.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 05:39 PM
 
Location: Manhattan
24,758 posts, read 34,743,211 times
Reputation: 12285
Quote:
So, the effort to protect remaining owners is done in good faith
Preserving artificial price supports so that your apartment LOOKS like it is worth more than market price is NEVER done "in good faith."
Preventing someone who needs DESPERATELY to sell from selling does not represent "good faith" but rather good old fashioned bad faith greed.

Good faith would be "I don't want to sell at that price." BAD FAITH is "I won't let YOU sell at that price."

All these maneuvers do is to make sure the market is not allowed to operate, to keep Supply and Demand from getting houses sold at the market price.

I wonder if these provisions have been tested in Court?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top