Signs of a dysfunctional condo association [DC]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Talk to owners

This, plus high turnover of units.

OP here: what is the high turnover? Condos are meant to me transitional arrangements ...for example for single people of families with no kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have owned two different condos and have many friends who have owned condos as well.
Red flags:
Self-managed
Fees too low
Special assessments (indicates fees may have been too low to cover upkeep, poorly managed, or similar)

Also, look at upkeep of the building. Clean? Well maintained? Not a guarantee there’s nothing wrong if it’s clean, but can be a red flag of other deferred maintenance if you see obvious signs of wear and tear or neglect in the common areas.

Agree, 100%, I have toured a condo where the building looks neglected: old smelly carpet, chipping paint in the halls and outside, the doors of the trash area do not close and all rotten - could not believe the owner of the condo is asking 750K for one bedroom plus den

OP here, I think I know the conod ...my real estate agent actually told me that the owners are fighting with each other for some insurance money

[Anonymous]

Self management if a red flag as there should be an outside mediator where conflicts arise. I live in a dysfunctional condo association -everyone has his/her own agenda and any negotiations are pointless. The building looks neglected and noone really cares even the owners of the unit that is currently on the market.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have owned two different condos and have many friends who have owned condos as well.
Red flags:
Self-managed
Fees too low
Special assessments (indicates fees may have been too low to cover upkeep, poorly managed, or similar)

Also, look at upkeep of the building. Clean? Well maintained? Not a guarantee there’s nothing wrong if it’s clean, but can be a red flag of other deferred maintenance if you see obvious signs of wear and tear or neglect in the common areas. [/quote
]
+1 I would not even tour the condo if the building has signs of wear and tear , I don't want neighbors who can tolerate the neglect and care less about the value of their property

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

I wouldn't want to buy a condo and live with a number of them rented out if there are only 6 units. Living next to renters in a condo can be a nightmare when you are a condo owner. Plus I think it affects the value of the property somehow, but I could be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

OP here: why low fees is a red flag? for such small condo associations tthe expenses are small- no gyms/pools/gardens/ etc, no staff on call ...I would say the opposite if the condo fees are large- where the money are going to?

There is likely no build up of reserve funds for when something very expensive goes wrong and needs to be fixed (and it will). You need to have a very healthy reserve fund for repairs and unforeseen expenses. Otherwise you can end up with huge special assessments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

I wouldn't want to buy a condo and live with a number of them rented out if there are only 6 units. Living next to renters in a condo can be a nightmare when you are a condo owner. Plus I think it affects the value of the property somehow, but I could be wrong.

Agree, but there is no much control over the number of rentals. Any condo at any time can become rental unless the by-laws prohibit that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

OP here: why low fees is a red flag? for such small condo associations tthe expenses are small- no gyms/pools/gardens/ etc, no staff on call ...I would say the opposite if the condo fees are large- where the money are going to?

There is likely no build up of reserve funds for when something very expensive goes wrong and needs to be fixed (and it will). You need to have a very healthy reserve fund for repairs and unforeseen expenses. Otherwise you can end up with huge special assessments.

OP here How big the reserve fund should be then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

OP here: why low fees is a red flag? for such small condo associations tthe expenses are small- no gyms/pools/gardens/ etc, no staff on call ...I would say the opposite if the condo fees are large- where the money are going to?

There is likely no build up of reserve funds for when something very expensive goes wrong and needs to be fixed (and it will). You need to have a very healthy reserve fund for repairs and unforeseen expenses. Otherwise you can end up with huge special assessments.

Also, choosing to keep fees low now and run special assessments in future is effectively borrowing from future owners.

Current owners don’t pay. Future owners do, when something goes wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

OP here: why low fees is a red flag? for such small condo associations tthe expenses are small- no gyms/pools/gardens/ etc, no staff on call ...I would say the opposite if the condo fees are large- where the money are going to?

There is likely no build up of reserve funds for when something very expensive goes wrong and needs to be fixed (and it will). You need to have a very healthy reserve fund for repairs and unforeseen expenses. Otherwise you can end up with huge special assessments.

Also, choosing to keep fees low now and run special assessments in future is effectively borrowing from future owners.

Current owners don’t pay. Future owners do, when something goes wrong.

OP here: I think I like small reserves and shifting the responsibility to future owners as I do not intend to live in the condo for more than 6-8 years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

I wouldn't want to buy a condo and live with a number of them rented out if there are only 6 units. Living next to renters in a condo can be a nightmare when you are a condo owner. Plus I think it affects the value of the property somehow, but I could be wrong.

Agree, but there is no much control over the number of rentals. Any condo at any time can become rental unless the by-laws prohibit that

Which makes the case that OP should read the bylaws. Rentals should be limited to 25% of the units at any one time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have owned two different condos and have many friends who have owned condos as well.
Red flags:
Self-managed
Fees too low
Special assessments (indicates fees may have been too low to cover upkeep, poorly managed, or similar)

Also, look at upkeep of the building. Clean? Well maintained? Not a guarantee there’s nothing wrong if it’s clean, but can be a red flag of other deferred maintenance if you see obvious signs of wear and tear or neglect in the common areas. [/quote
]
+1 I would not even tour the condo if the building has signs of wear and tear , I don't want neighbors who can tolerate the neglect and care less about the value of their property

I toured the place where the trash area was disgusting...what kind of animals live there? and their condos are in 600-700 k range

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

OP here: why low fees is a red flag? for such small condo associations tthe expenses are small- no gyms/pools/gardens/ etc, no staff on call ...I would say the opposite if the condo fees are large- where the money are going to?

There is likely no build up of reserve funds for when something very expensive goes wrong and needs to be fixed (and it will). You need to have a very healthy reserve fund for repairs and unforeseen expenses. Otherwise you can end up with huge special assessments.

Also, choosing to keep fees low now and run special assessments in future is effectively borrowing from future owners.

Current owners don’t pay. Future owners do, when something goes wrong.

OP here: I think I like small reserves and shifting the responsibility to future owners as I do not intend to live in the condo for more than 6-8 years

The point is the current and past owners have shifted responsibility to you (the new owner) when there is a low reserve fund. Good luck getting through 6-8 years when the reserve fund is already low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

OP here: why low fees is a red flag? for such small condo associations tthe expenses are small- no gyms/pools/gardens/ etc, no staff on call ...I would say the opposite if the condo fees are large- where the money are going to?

There is likely no build up of reserve funds for when something very expensive goes wrong and needs to be fixed (and it will). You need to have a very healthy reserve fund for repairs and unforeseen expenses. Otherwise you can end up with huge special assessments.

OP here How big the reserve fund should be then?

This is something you should be able to research as a prospective homeowner. Or ask your agent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of rentals. Low condo fees.

I wouldn't say "a lot of rentals" is a red flag at all. Low condo fees I agree with.

I wouldn't want to buy a condo and live with a number of them rented out if there are only 6 units. Living next to renters in a condo can be a nightmare when you are a condo owner. Plus I think it affects the value of the property somehow, but I could be wrong.

Agree, but there is no much control over the number of rentals. Any condo at any time can become rental unless the by-laws prohibit that

Which makes the case that OP should read the bylaws. Rentals should be limited to 25% of the units at any one time.

OP here:upto 25% percent of rentals - is it the rule for DC or something?