Would-be condo renters feel boxed in | ajc.com: "After trying to sell her condo, Mozaffari leased it and was fined $25 a day by the condo association for exceeding the 25 percent rental cap. Then the tenant left after the building’s staff prevented his business associates from entering the unit. Without a renter, Mozaffari said, she might lose the condo to foreclosure. She already has lost a lake home to foreclosure.
“Where is the empathy, the compassion?” she asked. “They prefer to go by laws and regulations of a document printed five years ago.”
Mozaffari sought an exemption to the limit but was not approved. Such requests pose a dilemma for condo associations. Allowing waivers will help homeowners weather the recession and might curb foreclosures. But lenders and mortgage buyers, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, worry too many rentals will hurt a community’s stability."
---------------
This is why condo associations ban renting. And it isn't that Fannie and Freddie "worry." They just say "no."
4 comments:
Given these entities' diligence shortcomings over the past several years that have pushed them to the brink of insolvency, I have to wonder if these condo rental underwriting terms and conditions were enforced at all.
Hopefully, this type of revelation will start the end of the condominium experiment funded by federal dollars. They are nothing but flytraps ultimately resulting in economic death for the unlucky owner - who doesn't even realize what they bought until it is too late. Looking forward to more failures so that we can end the "new urbanism" trend that is ensuring downtown areas will be pure ghettos in a few years.
This is bull! I can make an educated guess on who "the auction trustee" is! Who said the board members are paying their maintenance? Is there any proof they are? My experience is that those facing foreclosure in this group are probably NOT deadbeats. They are probably being targeted for standing up for themselves. I would suspect these are those who cannot afford to be stolen from, expected fair play on the part of the developer, or have/had no clue this can be done to them. Were they even notified? Many board members and their associates in these groups, will make up fabricated offenses, file any type of creative charges imaginable to cover up for their wrong doing; whether it be they have stolen, taken out loans for personal gain, provided unnecesssary work to friends, at the expense of the entire association, fabricated assesments, etc...
This is very sad. Wake up AMERICANS!
This article is interesting in part because it reveals an inherent, forced discrimination among the residents. Apparently up to 25% of the condominium can be rented. This means that some have the right and others don't. Is there a rotation of who can and who can't - or is there a permanent right that some have and that others can never have? What a racket.
Post a Comment