Faulty Towers: Complaints About Condos on the Rise
Lawsuits against developers and complaints over construction defects at new condos have increased greatly, according to the Times, and are likely to skyrocket over the next couple years. The reasons for the uptick in unhappy owners are obvious—condo fever resulted in plenty of rushed, problem-plagued buildings but at the same time developers were more likely…
Lawsuits against developers and complaints over construction defects at new condos have increased greatly, according to the Times, and are likely to skyrocket over the next couple years. The reasons for the uptick in unhappy owners are obvious—condo fever resulted in plenty of rushed, problem-plagued buildings but at the same time developers were more likely to fix problems in flusher times—and tied to a three-year statute of limitations on suing developers for negligence. The article zeroes in on one Brooklyn building, the Broadway Arms in Williamsburg, above, where owners filed suit against the developer. The condo has had leaky roofs, unstable balconies and a faulty ventilation system. Owners in the building, according to their lawyer, have filed suit because they want to to protect their investments: “They want to make sure they get the value they were promised for their units when they bought it.”
Your New Condo Leaks? Join the Club [NY Times]
B — yikes. “water cannon”. Do I understand you right that for 5K per Million dollar condo, you could have everything all wrapped up, and even after almost doubling their money, the owners would rather spend about the same amount to sue a bankrupt developer? BTW what’s holding back the C of O?
Antidope;
Yes, we hired a well-know architectural engineering firm (begins with “R”) to assess our problems, and they provided the estimates of what it would take to fix them. This was one of my first acts as president of the condo.
JTB;
It was never clear what exactly happened with that incident. At that time, the 2nd Street tower was mostly still a steel skeleton, and it seems that somehow all of the rainwater was channeled within the skeleton so that it impinged like a water cannon against the exterior of our 2nd street wall. Our wall had not been thoroughly water-proofed, because we were expecting the 2nd Street tower to abut aginst it. Alas…..
antidope which building was that?
benson — what happened, did the new development break a wall or a pipe or something? I could totally see those basements flooding. the outdoor space is shaped like a giant drain for the courtyard. It sounds like you are totally reasonable. People are insane.
“The Broken Arms”
Please learn how to spell “asinine.”
people get touchy about their homes.
i don’t know any details of your building, actually, just what i saw with my own two eyes. and from discussions on the street.
that said, i presume your new condo bldg had issues, like mine. and that owners were split on how to proceed, like mine. did you get an independent engineer to review the building? did you get contractors to price out the work? is that how you came up with your numbers?
at any rate, the train has left the station. doesn’t matter the entity Boymelbust is, well, broke. so i agreed with you in the end, time to call off the attys.
dibs/fsrq – assinine comments.
fsrg- that was you??!! I wondered whatever happened to david. You were a lot of fun 🙂
DIBS – assinine comment
Antidope;
Well obviously you are talking to the owners who pressured me to resign, and I think they are giving you their spin.
Well, here are a few facts that can be checked, as they are a matter of public record, since you obviously know what I’m talking about:
-the flooding in the lower duplex’s was one of the two start-up issues that I mention above, and was resolved (as i also said above). The Sponsor installed back-up prevention systems in each of the lower duplexes. There has not been a flood in more than three years.
-the flood due to the 2nd Street tower had NOTHING to do with the SPONSOR of our condo, which is what I was talking about above. Obviously one of the principals of that 2nd Street tower was also one of our sponsors, but from a legal point of view, they were a separate entity. Hence, the issue had to be resolved via our building insurance, which it was over two years ago. Our insurance company made a claim against that 2nd street tower construction company, and we received a large settlement to repair the damages.
Actually that latter situation perfectly illustrates my point in how unreasonable folks can be. Despite numerous explanations that the legal entity behind the 2nd Street tower was NOT our sponsor, and therefore it could NOT be resolved through the AG’s office (which handles prospectuses) folks would not hear of it.
That was a very tumultuous time, and I became personally unpopular in my condo because of it. I still stand by my story above.