Safety in 2 Unit Coop?
I am considering buying a unit in a 2-unit brownstone coop. Are there any special concerns with purchasing in such a small coop? I would have 45% and the other unit 55%, but the rules stipulate that neither owner can over-vote the other. All costs are split 50/50.
I am considering buying a unit in a 2-unit brownstone coop. Are there any special concerns with purchasing in such a small coop? I would have 45% and the other unit 55%, but the rules stipulate that neither owner can over-vote the other. All costs are split 50/50.
It would be like meeting a stranger on the street and deciding to buy a house with them.
I personally would avoid it, not so much for the financial issues regarding the building, but for the forced intimacy, i.e. you might not like them, but they’ll know every detail about your personal, professional and financial life.
I wonder how a 2-unit coop came into being, anyway. I’m guessing a landlord go into financial trouble and let his tenants buy him out. But why not just sell the building?
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.
The majority/minority thing here is meaningless. Most likely the 55% owner has the garden, or some other special amenity. Having said that, you’d definitely want to make sure you are good friends with the other guy.
Have you tried to get financing? I thought it was pretty difficult to get in a sub-4 unit coop. After all, if the other guy stops paying his maintenance, that’s a lot for you to suck up.
They may say that neither can outvote the other, but there are other disadvantages to having the other owner a majority owner. You may have equal say in common voting matters but be the odd one out when the other owner can simply point to a document which states what they as majority owners can do without needing a vote. I’m just being hypothetical there, but expenses and voting are but two aspects of the big picture.
Might be some good reason for it, but if you don’t know what that reason is yet, I’d have a real estate lawyer look it over before proceeding.
I don’t understand what it means to have a minority share if all expenses and votes are divided equally. Seems to me to be a potentially unpleasant situation if you don’t get along with the other co-oper.
Shouldn’t the costs be split according to the % of ownership – 45%/55%?