Elizabethan England RE prices

I hate to say this, but EACH of us, if we travel could bring back bedbugs. Moreover, many office buildings in Manhattan are now infested, so having to travel is less of an issue. As the poster on brownstoner who has eloquently spoken of remediation efforts made by him (her? sorry, forget the gender), it's not simply been the landlord's responsibility! And far more of the hassle factor has been on the back of the tenant who moved into the situation.

Posted by: Minmin at November 16, 2009 6:48 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

I don't think it would be enforceable either from a legal standpoint.

Posted by: Minmin at November 16, 2009 2:23 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

Thanks Dibs and Tyburg--I always thought that the box with the X was condemned, usually because buildings usually came down once that mark was on them.

Posted by: Minmin at November 13, 2009 2:58 PM in response to Big Turnout for 437 Waverly Auction

The mark on the front of the building indicates that the building is CONDEMNED. I'm not sure if it allows them to keep the frame.

Posted by: Minmin at November 13, 2009 1:11 PM in response to Big Turnout for 437 Waverly Auction

Weighing in on maintenance here: yes, apartments have shares allocated to them, and all things being equal larger apartments have more shares, and apartments on higher floors often have slightly more shares; also, other more intangible things may have been considered in the initial allocation: for example, if it's on the more desirable part of a building, if it has more of a view, etc. Once shares have been allocated, it's really hard to REALLOCATE given hoops one would have to go through to get approval to do so.

Maintenance: double edged sword: low maintenance may mean that residents get hit with (large) assessments for all capital work; high-maintenance may mean large staff or big mortgage. One of my friends told me about an apartment she saw: 2 br, very reasonable price, very low maintenance. What's the catch, I asked? 15% flip tax.

Posted by: Minmin at November 12, 2009 3:59 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 40 Clarkson Avenue, #4F

Maybe somebody tried to break in...

Posted by: Minmin at November 11, 2009 1:21 PM in response to Tenants Broke Entryway

I like the vision of Mrs. B. chasing him and beeping her horn! But seriously, glad everyone's ok, and definitely follow-up with the police and TLC, not just here on your site.

Posted by: Minmin at November 5, 2009 5:29 PM in response to Mrs. B Side-Swiped In The Heights

How about this? What if you and your other roommates simply wrote a check to John for 1/5 the rent. (Or if you want to be a little bit nice, 1/5 rent plus 10% to him for setting it up.) Since he has the lease, he's the one who's obligated to pay. It might backfire: you might be evicted, but this game of chicken might work.

Posted by: Minmin at November 4, 2009 7:28 AM in response to Sublet/Share Legal Issue

They probably wouldn't, but if the fee to the coop was worth the trouble (are they doing exteriors?) they might at least discuss it. Who knows? The commercial use clause might be the kicker though,

Posted by: Minmin at October 29, 2009 6:14 PM in response to Renting Your Place for Movie

Interesting CH5! What are the details? I also liked reading the selection of horror stories and good reports. Do you think you'll pursue it? I guess I think that in a coop, the coop itself does deserve a fee, since most buildings are for residences (only, or pretty close to it), and film shoots can be pretty disruptive.

Posted by: Minmin at October 29, 2009 12:28 PM in response to Renting Your Place for Movie

Wow~ I feel so sorry for the residents of the building; what an *ss the developer was, and the blithe disregard he had for any sense of right is just appalling.

Posted by: Minmin at October 28, 2009 11:51 AM in response to Mendel Brach Barred from Condo Business

Try Fairchild's, which is in Queens.

Posted by: Minmin at October 22, 2009 1:35 PM in response to Re-upholsterer for Old Settee

Could be stupid, could be smart like a fox. I'm assuming if the original poster doesn't like the piece of granite, he doesn't have to buy it, and s/he's only out a day trip during foliage season. I bought salvaged granite and had to have it "fabricated." (Ok, CUT). Some stone people wouldn't cut stone they hadn't sold, but I found a place to do it for $400. Not $2K. I think the company's name was Stone Werks. Absolutely no regrets!

Posted by: Minmin at October 20, 2009 7:11 AM in response to Cost to Fabricate Granite

Photographs nicely, but it's a walk-up! With small bedrooms. I think I'm with Sparafucile here. That 30 Ocean Parkway apartment was truly spacious and had a nice layout. Not as nice as the gazillion dollar 35 Prospect Park West apartment, though.

Posted by: Minmin at October 15, 2009 2:46 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 310 Windsor Place, #26

I may be wrong, but I think that only SOME of the apartments are being sold at auction without a reserve. If that's the case, those units are probably not the choicest ones.

Posted by: Minmin at October 14, 2009 11:27 AM in response to The Locale: Greenpoint Condo Auction

If you are looking at Ikea cabinets, don't forget to look at the Ikeafans website. Lots of people who are using Ikea creatively, and in general a really helpful group of posters too! They'll refer you back to Garden Web too. Don't let the deep pockets of some of the Garden Websters get to you: there are many others on the site with shallow pockets.

Posted by: Minmin at October 7, 2009 11:53 AM in response to Kitchen Renovation Neophyte?

I think that the New York Council of Cooperatives and Condominiums does something like that already, but their information may be mostly for coops in Manhattan. I guess that my advice is that you should look to them, or through Habitat, because you might find some of the info that you want.

Posted by: Minmin at October 7, 2009 11:50 AM in response to How To Compare Maintenance

Thanks. That was exactly the sense that I had. Kind of a shame, really.

Posted by: Minmin at October 1, 2009 5:21 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 30 Ocean Parkway, #1F

On the "overstaffing" issue. If the buildings were cooped under non-eviction plans, it's likely that they had a fair number of tenants who stayed on as renters. Presumably that number has gone down (way down...) over the years, but they are guaranteed any and all of the services that a building had when it was cooped.

Posted by: Minmin at October 1, 2009 4:51 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 30 Ocean Parkway, #1F

I've thought about that: it seems that buildings that are up to say 8-12 can keep maintenance down (I think it's the ratio of tax per unit, and the lower operating costs because they have less square footage, staff, etc); larger buildings 80-150 do seem more expensive; though the largest ones get a break because of larger economies of scale. This is anecdotal. Does anyone have evidence?

In my old coop the breakdown was:
Payroll 25%, Energy 13%, Insurance 4%, Taxes 30%, Financial 15%

Posted by: Minmin at October 1, 2009 4:49 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 30 Ocean Parkway, #1F

Building mortgage, not personal mortgage. Sorry for the misunderstanding. (Not all buildings have mortgages, of course.)

Real estate assessments are a bear, indeed!

Actually, since the building in question doesn't have a doorman, I do think the maintenance is a little high.

Posted by: Minmin at October 1, 2009 2:28 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 30 Ocean Parkway, #1F

On the maintenance question:

I'd actually be a little concerned 11217 and others if your maintenance doesn't go up SOME. Costs have been increasing. Taxes are going up, and coops are taxed more heavily than single-family dwellings. If maintenance stays stable for a LONG time, it COULD indicate a well-run building where costs have been kept down, but it could also indicate a building with a lot of deferred maintenance issues. There have been some recent news stories about buildings where shareholder's have found out that that is the case.

And one must remember that maintenance includes: heat, water and sewage, common area electric, taxes, mortgage, staff.

Posted by: Minmin at October 1, 2009 2:19 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 30 Ocean Parkway, #1F

Love it!
I'm taking up a collection.... (Or maybe I could just buy it and rent out rooms on the second floor: $1000 per room sound about right????)

With respect to the points by Minard Lafever and Traditionalmod about whether coop boards would turn down offers. I don't know how often it happens--I suspect not too often when the market is good--but most proprietary leases DO give the building the first right of purchase.

Posted by: Minmin at September 28, 2009 6:59 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 35 Prospect Park West, #14A and 15A

I'd also suggest taking your comment to the home forum at Garden Web.

Posted by: Minmin at September 25, 2009 2:59 PM in response to Trying Again - Countertop

I'm going to give advice a bit different than most of the other posters. A Corcoran type broker MAY in fact be able to get a higher price for the house than a local broker; however, if the price set by that broker is significantly higher than the neighborhood (even if it's in the "OK, that's reasonable" range of the Corcoran-shopper), your mother's house will sit. Time is money.

Price it right for the neighborhood; if you're going with a Corcoran type broker, maybe it can be pitched a little higher, but be realistic, especially now, if you need to sell it.

Posted by: Minmin at September 16, 2009 6:55 AM in response to Sunset Park Brownstone Broker?

Here's a sucky but different sublet horror story:

My cousin had a large rent-regulated apartment in Soho (I think Soho, may be wrong about that). When his mother suddenly got sick, he arranged to have a friend of another cousin move in for a few months while he took a leave from his job and went home to look after things. The friend had just moved to NY to accept a job; He did not gouge the subtenant; in fact charged less than the regular rent. Pretty much only enough to cover utilities and some walking around money since he wasn't working.

One month turned into three, but it looked like he would be able to go back to NY the next month or so. His damn subtenant TURNED HIM INTO THE LANDLORD IN EXCHANGE FOR GETTING THE LEASE REWRITTEN IN HIS NAME. I'm simplifying of course, but the end result is my cousin lost his mother and an apartment in the same year.

Posted by: Minmin at September 12, 2009 3:20 PM in response to Questions About Subletting

Prorated for the length of time the renovations will take (1 month? two? four?), and the reports of workers setting fires to buildings (bridges, etc), I'd say it will be money well spent. Definitely try to negotiate it down...Slopefarm's $6K seems "reasonable" under the circumstances.

Posted by: Minmin at September 10, 2009 1:05 PM in response to Renovation Insurance

Back again: I actually am a bit envious that so much of what counts for "ordinary housing" is out of the reach of many hard working New Yorkers with combined incomes of $130,000 or thereabouts.

I know a young couple (about 28), with professional jobs in upstate, making good but not fabulous salaries. They have a house in a decent neighborhood, reasonable commute for each, a small vacation house on a lake, two cars, and seem to be a lot happier than many of us. Did they get help from their parents? Maybe a little, but I kind of doubt it. All I'm saying is things are a little twisted here in the city; the recession is evening the playing field a bit more.

We own, but quite frankly, I want to see more leveling! (More chances for people to buy, yeah, probably without too much assistance from their parents, but I'm not going to begrudge these two sisters the opportunity their father has provided them.)

Posted by: Minmin at September 8, 2009 5:50 PM in response to Renters Become Their Own Landlords

Oh come on...give it a break. The father is using it as a write off. If structured properly (and if the girls are mature), it'll be a good situation for all of them.

Also, I think the sisters have a great opportunity to become adult friends here. I doubt they'll live together forever (heck, it already says they have different hours), but if they are close, they should treasure it. Family is important.

Posted by: Minmin at September 8, 2009 2:24 PM in response to Renters Become Their Own Landlords

...but maybe the skim coater's kid is studying rocket science at university....

Posted by: Minmin at August 28, 2009 5:49 PM in response to Skim Coating

Freddy--Is this a coop or a condo? If it's a coop, note that most lenders won't lend money to buildings that are less than about 75% sold. If you need a mortgage this building might not work at all. Coopfornow's experience may be the flip side of that: the seller might have seen two offers, one all-cash and just said, "All cash; no hassle." Keep us posted.

Posted by: Minmin at August 28, 2009 7:02 AM in response to Anyone info on 260 Ocean Pkwy?

60K??? Please tell me you added a zero. In response to your comment about the workers "needing to be licensed," I would say "YES" and "NO." Painting (and what is this but glorified repairs and painting) doesn't generally require an alteration/renovation request for most buildings, so probably no-one will check. What did P.T. Barnum say? (And people wonder why contractors often get a bad name?????)

Posted by: Minmin at August 28, 2009 6:58 AM in response to Skim Coating

Me too! This is just what I am looking for. I think it's perfect. How can I contact you?

Posted by: Minmin at August 19, 2009 3:52 PM in response to Complete Cherry Panelled Library F/S

You know what? I absolutely agree with BHO on this one. Unless you ABSOLUTELY love your apartment, go shopping for a new apartment if you can afford to. But it sounds as though swinging too full rents is a bit much at this time so it may not be an option. But it doesn't hurt to look.

Posted by: Minmin at August 19, 2009 11:58 AM in response to Landlord Problem

Is he even really a broker?

Check the NYC tenant law regulations concerning roommates. Here's the link:
http://www.housingnyc.com/html/resources/faq/roommates.html
In short, you may have a roommate!

I saw nothing on "broker's fees" but my feeling is that you do not even need to put the person's name on the lease if you don't want to. If you do, it seems as though it becomes a "vacancy" lease, and that might be his loophole. If he insists, pass it along.

Posted by: Minmin at August 19, 2009 10:30 AM in response to Landlord Problem

Seems odd. I would think it would be 1 vote per unit (as in many), but payment of bills according to the number of shares. That way shareholders would be equally responsible for decisions, but the shareholder who used more of the resources would pay more.

I think I'd pass on this one, unless there's something really fabulous about it. Denton's right too about financing. Might be tough.

Posted by: Minmin at August 15, 2009 11:32 AM in response to Safety in 2 Unit Coop?

A reserve of $150,000 in a ten-unit coop would be pretty high, but I agree that coops need healthy coops.

My advice, for what it's worth: contact NY Community Bank, get a line of credit (not as expensive generally as a coop mortgage) and generally far less restrictive in terms of penalties, etc.

If the repairs REALLY need to be done right away, start assessing people for the cost of the repairs, but make sure that people know why they are being assessed.

At least in a ten-unit coop people probably have a better sense of the actual costs involved in running a building!

Posted by: Minmin at August 14, 2009 6:56 AM in response to Underlying Mortgages

Not to be snarky, but we netizens can "see" even less than an inspector who will actually go inside the house. Inspectors are independent--except for their pay, they have no skin in the game. Of course try to find an inspector your friends/neighbors like, but they will sign off on it as they see it. I remember walking through an inspection with a friend. His report made her run...and this property was waterfront (bulkhead, but still).

You seem to have serious doubts even without an inspector. Don't discount them, either. Keep us posted.

Posted by: Minmin at August 11, 2009 1:32 PM in response to Settling and Sagging House

4 workable 14 foot clocks???...people just have to learn to read the time backwards, or scale themselves out around the front of the building.

Cool space, but not silly money cool space.

Posted by: Minmin at August 10, 2009 11:25 AM in response to All Along the Clocktower

Good luck!!!!!

Posted by: Minmin at July 24, 2009 6:13 PM in response to Bed Bugs and Rats

Rick's advice about soundboard is good, but I disagree...if the insulation is put inside the wall, the OP should get approval, if it's ON the wall, probably not. On a different note, a friend bought a place and discovered that her adjoining neighbors were noisier than she liked. She installed the sound board insulation and has been very pleased.

Posted by: Minmin at July 24, 2009 6:10 PM in response to Sound Permeating Walls

I was curious about the steel planters, too. How did the designer explain that as the choice?

Posted by: Minmin at July 23, 2009 2:17 PM in response to Prospect Heights Garden Build: Laying the Groundwork

Looks like he used the house as an ATM.

Posted by: Minmin at July 23, 2009 2:15 PM in response to Foreclosure of the Week: 549 Henry Street

I like this... It's going to be lovely, and you'll have vegetables too!

Posted by: Minmin at July 23, 2009 10:36 AM in response to Prospect Heights Garden Build: Laying the Groundwork

I think that the original poster probably has the answer. If the agent underestimated the taxes so grandly, there's probably a similar process going on with the utilities. You could ask the agent for the bills, but I doubt they are obligated to provide them.

Posted by: Minmin at July 13, 2009 2:39 PM in response to Verifying Purchase Expenses

In fact he may have thought you had the use of the spaces for storage, and is not deliberately misrepresenting you, but it is unfortunate. Does the lease say anything about storage? Are there any ways one can get out of a lease because of deliberate or unintentional misrepresentation so soon after signing? Can you renegotiate the price? Wow. I feel sorry.

Posted by: Minmin at June 26, 2009 1:44 PM in response to Real estate agent/misrep?

I agree with johnife. The super may actually be qualified to do the work, but given the fact that he's doing two jobs at once, he's probably not giving either the attention they deserve. I wouldn't want him for my super, and probably wouldn't want him doing work for me. Plus, in NYC, most coops have a LICENSED contractor rule. Check that. In a building I used to live in, building staff could do SMALL jobs that were outside of coop responsibilities, but it was more of a service/favor to shareholders. I think that's ok.

Posted by: Minmin at June 26, 2009 11:20 AM in response to Hiring a Super for Renovation?

PhFamily offers good advice...and definitely don't believe the realtor if s/he says the CCs will stay the same: COSTS GO UP! Figure that the salaries alone will go up 1-3% per year. Have your lawyer, and possibly an accountant look at the managing fees and utilities.

One thing you should try to determine is WHERE the super will live (in a building of 150, s/he must live in or VERY near the building) and how that apartment has been paid for....

Posted by: Minmin at June 21, 2009 6:51 PM in response to What are your monthly CCs?

Have you considered one of the floor units that simply vent out the window? They have come down considerably in price and they take up very little of one's window.

Posted by: Minmin at June 1, 2009 10:33 AM in response to Window AC - less than 18'' wide

Right, Serpentor, but if a probable buyer sees the chandelier, they would reasonably assume that it would come with the apartment. Therefore, any documents have to clearly indicate that the chandelier isn't staying with the apartment, but that's almost as easy as replacing the fixture itself.

Posted by: Minmin at May 15, 2009 12:53 PM in response to Reluctantly Selling Chandelier

Kevin Taylor, 646-342-9386. Located in Park Slope. Antique, mid-century modern, and contemporary upholstery and restoration. A fine craftsman.

Posted by: skyroolove at November 16, 2009 11:22 AM in response to Re-upholsterer for Old Settee

Not only unenforceable, but illegal to start off with. Will never hold up in court.

Posted by: CookieCutterBrownstone at November 16, 2009 2:38 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

It may be impractical, but why would it be illegal or unenforceable? If the Landlord adds the clause to a lease, and a new Tenant signs the lease with the clause, it's no different than any other legally enforceable contractual provision. The Landlord may want to clarify that Landlord will arrange for "bedbug remediation" or something to that effect, the "reasonable" costs of which will be deducted from the Tenant's security deposit if Tenant does not reimburse Landlord. I'm not sure why a Court would not enforce the provision, provided only that the costs of remediation are reasonable.

Posted by: CarrollGardened at November 16, 2009 3:28 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

This is an interesting idea....Just recently tenants have brought bed bugs into two of my properties. One paid for and arranged the treatment (voluntarily) and the other we paid for, though as we all know it's a huge imposition for anyone who lives where the BB are being exterminated, in terms of the work he had to do.

I also can't see how this clause, like any other in a rider, would not be enforceable. Why would it be less enforceable than a rider clause about separating recyclables or whatever?

Posted by: GoodProspect at November 16, 2009 4:02 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

Just like with any other vermin situation (mice, roaches, etc.) the landlord is required to provide extermination services, regardless of the source of the problem.

Posted by: babs at November 16, 2009 4:14 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

I'm no expert, but posters saying it's illegal or unenforceable may be thinking that would be the case if you were renewing a lease for a rent stabilized tenant, but that's not OP's situation renting out I assume 1 floor of a 2 family home.

I'd be curious to know how multiple dwelling law views the question. A search on the google turned up something possibly useful...
http://newyorkvsbedbugs.org/2009/07/13/bed-bugs-and-the-law-in-new-york-city/

Posted by: Bklnite at November 16, 2009 4:19 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

Whether or not it's legal, it seems pretty arrogant and illogical to me. So, your building has never had bedbugs. Who's to say that if it got them in the future, it was your automatically the tenant, and not you or your family, who brought them in!

Posted by: Puppimus at November 16, 2009 4:22 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

So, from Puppimus, 1 vote for you'd be a jerky landlord.

From my reading of the page I linked to above, OP as an owner of a 2 family house could do what he's suggesting. For an owner of a building with 3 or more dwellings it might be unenforceable.

"..In The New York State Multiple Dwelling Law...
Vermin are specifically mentioned in Section 80 which states in part:
§ 80. Cleanliness. 1. The owner shall keep all and every part of a multiple dwelling, the lot on which it is situated, and the roofs, yards, courts, passages, areas or alleys appurtenant thereto, clean and free from vermin, dirt, filth, garbage or other thing or matter dangerous to life or health.

My reading of this is clear, in a building of three or more apartments, the landlord is responsible for the eradication of bed bug infestations. If the infestation is caused by the tenant’s negligence, however, then the tenant is also responsible.
...
What constitutes tenant negligence? I don’t know. But unfortunately it’s not hard to imagine plausible scenarios. An interesting question, given the language of the statute, is whether the landlord is still responsible for bed bug eradication despite any tenant liability for negligence.

The NYS Multiple Dwelling Law seems clear and straightforward enough.

The New York City Housing Maintenance Code

The New York City Housing Maintenance Code, contrary to popular belief, applies to all dwellings, see Article 1, Section 27-2003. Confusion may have arisen because Section 27-2005 provides that:

Sec. 27-2005 Duties of owner

a. The owner of a multiple dwelling shall keep the premises in good repair.

b. The owner of a multiple dwelling, in addition to the duty imposed upon such owner by subdivision a of this section, shall be responsible for compliance with the requirements of this code, except insofar as responsibility for compliance is imposed upon the tenant alone.

c. The owner of a one- or two-family dwelling shall keep the premises in good repair, and shall be responsible for compliance with the provisions of this code, except to the extent otherwise agreed between such owner and any tenant of such dwelling by lease or other contract in writing, or except insofar as responsibility for compliance with this code is imposed upon the tenant alone.

My reading of this is that in the case of a one- or two-family dwelling there may be a (written) lease that assigns certain repair and maintenance responsibilities to the tenant."

Posted by: Bklnite at November 16, 2009 4:39 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

The bedbug problem is a growing menace in New York City.

I've known of cases where tenants have most likely brought in bedbugs but treated their LL's as though they were slumlords once the tenants found out they had them, even before their LL's had a chance to take care of the problem.

Is it "fair" in the grand scheme of things? However LLords are legally responsible for pests regardless of how they got there.

It's just another risk you take when you become a landlord, along with noise, non payment, fires and floods.

Maybe you can pay for one of those dogs to sniff their belongings for bugs the day they move in but I'm not too sure that will go down well.

Posted by: Crownlfc at November 16, 2009 5:30 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?

I hate to say this, but EACH of us, if we travel could bring back bedbugs. Moreover, many office buildings in Manhattan are now infested, so having to travel is less of an issue. As the poster on brownstoner who has eloquently spoken of remediation efforts made by him (her? sorry, forget the gender), it's not simply been the landlord's responsibility! And far more of the hassle factor has been on the back of the tenant who moved into the situation.

Posted by: Minmin at November 16, 2009 6:48 PM in response to Bedbug Clause in Lease?