Rental of the Day: 197 Spencer Street 2BR

BHO, I’m thinking your post is tongue-firmly-in-cheek. These buyers have been screwed in every way possible. In their case, I would consider a strategic default self-defense, you know, as in justifiable homicide.

It’s not just installing sprinkler heads here, jennyF – if you’ve ever been in these apartments, you’re familiar with the style of the fire stairs that open directly into the apartments. I don’t disagree with you, that Certificates of Occupancy may have been issued incorrectly to other buildings in the past; as I said, the hold up here is more the zoning violation than anything. Nor do I disagree with you that people maybe weren’t as up to speed on what they should have been looking for when conducting due diligence; we’ve all learned a lot from this and other horror stories out there. However, the people who knew all along what was going on were the developer and the brokers – both of which should be held responsible. And if the Developers Group didn’t know enough to check out a new construction project thoroughly before taking the listing, then they should be charged with incompetence.

Babs,

You have absolutley no idea what you are talking about with regards to the legal issues of this and the other 3 Spencer Street buildings. Before you comment you should really have your facts straight. Otherwise you are just contributing to the problems that already plague the owners of these units. It is very easy to comment on ‘should have, could have’ when you weren’t ever in that situation.

In a nutshell the DOB is mostly at fault. They revoked approvals that they originally granted. They approved the plans as they were submitted & the approved plans were built. Several buildings in both Brooklyn & Manhattan have almost identical layouts (elevator & fire doors opening directly into apartments). There is an absolutely identical series of buildings on Skillman that have had their C of O for 2+ years. Almost ALL the owners had inspections prior to closing & none of the current issues were brought up. The DOB is a horrible agency who got pissy when they got caught screwing up & then compiled a laundry list of ‘issues’ that they claim they originally missed. 6 months after all the owners closed. Its quite common for the DOB.

And, BTW, good luck 5 years ago attempting to do a little ‘legal due diligence’ by researching special zoning variances received for new constrution. The city couldn’t even keep track. Now? Sure – everyone knows what to look for & ask. But then? All the loopholes were still being exploited and no one knew what was going on. Dozens of buildings in the city were built & received their C of O’s with the ‘We’re building faculty housing for a Yeshiva!’loophole. The 72 owners here just happened to purchase in a development where someone finally noticed.

I hardly consider adding a couple of sprinkler heads a big deal especially when there are already many in a unit. Last time I checked none of the pre-war co-ops were sprinklered anyway. I also don’t think that most bathrooms in co-ops or condos in NYC have blocking already installed behind the walls so that grab bars (for handicapped accessibilty) can be added. These are 2 of the largest issues preventing a C of O for these buildings.

I think new construction still closes with just a TCO provided at least 60% of the units are in contract. However, TCO or not, an outside inspection of these places would have revealed the numerous fire code and safety violations that would make a permanent C of O difficult, while a little legal due diligence would have found that the buildings were erected using a spurious zoning exemption for a “community facility” – in this case student/teacher housing for a local yeshiva (this exemption is no longer allowed, but plenty of other abusive ones are still trying to sneak by) – which is the real big reason the City won’t give a permanent C of O.