Thanks for the replies. When I assisted my Mom in buying her coop, she paid cash. Even so, she had to go thru hoops. The process was rather invasive with demands about all her financial records, which I refused as they simply were not relevant. Seems the man that ran the board was a bit of a snoop and in his retirement, but the rest of the board happily voted her in.

Was that a coop in NYC?

The board cannot mandate the sale price, but they can turn down a buyer who does not offer what they feel is a correct price. This can be distressing to a seller, who might be willing to accept a low price in order to close the deal quickly, for whatever reason. (Maybe it's an estate sale and the sellers want to unload the place fast, so as not to be compelled to pay thousands in maintenance each month...just speculating here)

Of course, the board does not have to reveal that the reason for the turn down is too low a price. They don't have to give a reason for rejecting a buyer. Imagine that a buyer endures several rejections and never knows that the reason for these is that his clothes are hideous! (Just joking, but it could be anything....speculation is always rife..)

What I find really invasive is that boards will often ask to pore through the financial records of anyone who plans to live in the apartment, even if he or she is not the buyer.

So if a man goes up before a board, and that man has a live-in girlfriend, chances are good (in some buildings) that she will have to submit tax returns going back a few years, and subject herself to all the related snooping, even though she is not a prospective owner.

Well, look at it this way: If the buyer's live-in girlfriend has mountainous debt, it might be considered that the buyer may help her lower her debt or has even co-signed (or shows the potential and inclination to co-sign) a loan for said live-in debtor. This could have a potentially negative impact on the buyer's financial status.

Again, it's all about the money, whether it's maintaining the right atmosphere or security (or whatever they're trying to maintain) for increased property values.

As an aside: I was surprised to see the large number of short sales and foreclosures available on the West coast of Maui, Hawaii when I checked the Prudential site today.

The reason people choose to live in co-ops is that they want to be able to choose their neighbors. this ranges from the most obvious things - like financial stability and criminal record to less obvious things - like the size of a dog (yes, many buildings have weight limits) - to just getting the feel of what someone will be like as a neighbor.

In most middle class buildings people are turned down only for obvious reasons. Since I've been on my board we have only turned down 2:

A guy who wanted to pay all cash (in the restaurant business) - and we discvovered to be not paying court mandated child support (no, we didn;t want him as a neighbor -besides the potential financial/legal issues of being a co-owner with him)

A well-to-do couple who claimed they wanted a small apartment as a pied a terre - but turned out to be buying it for a 17 year old daughter who was about to start Columbia - who would have lived there with an unnamed roommate (no - we didn't want to have to be their parents - or have all-night parties, but mostly because the parents lied and when they finally came clean the "resident" was more than 40 minutes late for the interview).

And yes, it is routine to want to interview all residents (esp those that might become co-owners) along with the actual purchaser. Perhaps they were asking bout the finances of the girlfriend because 1) his finances were marginal and they wanted to be sure that she was self-supporting, or 2) they wanted to know if she was a really expensive girlfriend that would give him financial problems.

But - that information goes through the management agents and the board/interview committee - it is not public to everyone in the building.

However, the financial background check is stringent - since we need to know not only that the owner can NOW afford to pay the maintenance on top of their other bills, we need to know they have a strong job history, have a career that will allow them to find another job if they lose theirs and that they have significant savings to fall back on if necessary. And this isn't being nosy - it's simply fiscally responsible when considering new co-owners.

What you call 'jumping through hoops', I call good business practice. We have a difference of perspective, not experience.

ditto nytraveler.

If I did not agree in theory, I guess I would not be living in a coop myself! I think many owners would agree that the process (what I referred to as the "hoop jumping") can be a big pain; that does not mean that they refuse to submit to it.

The board requires 6 letters of recommendation. The agent, who has a big stake in someone getting accepted by the board, tells you to make sure that those letters come from people with "good" addresses!

I know. As I said earlier: My kids have assumed these arbitrary reasons for rejection were simply excuses used so laws would not be obviously broken.

Also, a good realtor would make sure the live-in didn't owe child support, the 20 year old was not going to be the real tenant, and the letters all came from those who had the 'good addresses'. Welcome to the reality of NYC home ownership.

I think I'll remain a renter. While my wife is perfectly respectable, I can't imagine any board giving me a pass.

People on the boards of not-for-profits are very important. Just ask them. There are always six people who do all the work and then they become indignant, defensive, officious, and tyrannical when not they are recognized. I am not sure why they expect to be treated otherwise.

Our building may go condo and one reason is the smell test and who would administer it and who would pass it.

Most of the coops in NYC re middle class - not luxury buildings where the tenants are fanatics about their right, quiet etc. And most buildings use the same sort of standards (besides financial and criminal check) as one would with neighbors moving into the house next door. You want people who are respectable, reasonable and won;t be neighborhood PIAs (as in keeping 3 pit bulls in the yard,) etc. Truly weird or extremely eccentric is all people are trying to weed out.

The difference is that when you buy a house in a neighborhood, the HOA doesn't get to pick and choose who moves in. Definitely no access to financial records and personal information. ;)

"I like Fidel Castro, and his beard." -- Bob Dylan

Yes, but in a co-op you're actually living in the same building, sharing public areas and common walls.

And in a coop, you don't own your apartment--you own shares in the corporation and own the entire building together.

Yes. Exactly. Nothing like "as one would with neighbors moving into the house next door."

Sure, you'd want "people who are respectable, reasonable and won;t be neighborhood PIAs (as in keeping 3 pit bulls in the yard,) etc. Truly weird or extremely eccentric is all people are trying to weed out."

But that doesn't happen elsewhere. Even if a neighborhood has an HOA, they don't vet the prospective buyers as the board in a coop does. Not the same at all.

And from today's Times, this most timely story, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/ny...l?ref=nyregion, in which Sheik Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr al-Thani, the prime minister and foreign minister of Qatar and a member of that country’s royal family, had his offer of 31 million dollars for two co-op apartments on Fifth turned down.

Thrill to the conflicting rumors why!