Corcoran Found Negligent in Park Slope Condo Sale
What do you do if you’re trying to sell an apartment with water leaks but don’t want potential buyers to know? Just make sure not to show it on rainy days! That’s the tactic some Corcoran agents were accused of in a suit involving the sale of a condo unit at 357 4th Street in…
What do you do if you’re trying to sell an apartment with water leaks but don’t want potential buyers to know? Just make sure not to show it on rainy days! That’s the tactic some Corcoran agents were accused of in a suit involving the sale of a condo unit at 357 4th Street in Park Slope, and now the firm itself has been found “grossly negligent” and fined $35,000 by the judge in the case for failing to preserve and hand over emails that would allegedly confirm that Corcoran agents cancelled appointments on rainy days. Meanwhile, the case itself, which involves almost a million dollars in potential construction fixes and total damages of $5 million, continues on.
State Supreme Court Rules Corcoran “Negligent” [TRD]
E-mail Shows Couple’s Suit vs. Corcoran Group Holds Water [NYDN]
Snappy’s e-mail is the only one that makes sense here. If you read the article carefully, you will see that the couple is going after the sponsor to fix the leaks, which is as it should be. Corcoran was hit just for not turning over e-mails.
As to the armchair generals who claim that this couple should have spotted the problems before they bought (via an engineer’s report) or that these leaks are proof of shoddy construction, all I can say is that they have obviously never dealt with new construction.
Virtually all new construction, irrespective of quality, will have start-up problems. A new house is not like an automobile that is built in a factory. It must interact with the ground conditions, the sewer system system, etc.
Just as an example: after my condo was built, it was discovered that the basement spaces were experiencing back-up due to the undersized sewer system in the area. The Sponsor had to come back and install back-up prevention systems.
Finally, it is customary for a new condo and coop to hire an engineer to look at the common areas after they move in, for the reasons just discussed. Home inspectors are not engineers, and are not qualified to inspect these items. They only inspect the interior.
LOL Expert 🙂
Mr. B, you need to change the title of this thread. It is misleading and down right wrong in terms of what actually happened. Your title would lead one to believe that Corco was actually found guilty on the merits of the case.
The Plaintiff will be represented by the law firm of Snappy, Panda and Panda.
Oh Snappy! There you go with those fancy shmancy words and being all lawyerly.
Why can’t we just trash brokers, huh?!
Res ipsa locutor
Summary Judgment
Res Ipsa
Voir Dire
You need a fan yet, Dave? LOL
Thanks Snappy (and panda10 before that). That was exactly what I was looking for in my initial question at 9:37am.
Snappy, I get all excited when you speak in legalese like that.
I went to a Corcoran open house this past Sunday. The apartment was advertised as a 2 BR. This place wasn’t a 2 BR by any conceivable stretch of the imagination. It had a tiny little alcove next to the single bedroom, just big enough for a tiny little toddler bed (which is what it contained), with no door or closet. I was annoyed that they wasted my time, but lesson learned — brokers lie!