4 ms·

> Despite the inkling that the investor might want him out, Mr. Fellman, 57, was confident that things would be fine, since he legally owned the property, and t

> Despite the inkling that the investor might want him out, Mr. Fellman, 57, was confident that things would be fine, since he legally owned the property, and the condo declaration required that 100 percent of owners would need to be on board for the condominium to be terminated. > But the Scully Company didn’t stop there. Since it owned all the other units, it was able to take over majority control of the condo board, and it voted to lower the threshold of owners required to terminate down to 80 percent. Then, in February 2021, the Scully Company voted to terminate the condominium, which meant the Fellmans would be legally obligated to sell their unit to the company. That must be so stressful to deal with. Is that legal to lower the threshold like that?

Kon-Peki 4y ago
If the state condo laws say it is, then yes. This is in Florida, not exactly known for such a great body of condo law. But even in places like New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, etc - with a long, long history of condominiums, this is going to be allowed. All the condo units but one were owned by the company. That’s a huge red flag, to the point that you’d never be able to get a federally-insured loan to buy in this building. Generally anything less than 50% owner-occupied can’t be financed - you’d have to pay cash, your real estate attorney will tell you to run away, etc.
- marc_abonce 4y ago
  > All the condo units but one were owned by the company. That’s a huge red flag, to the point that you’d never be able to get a federally-insured loan to buy in this building. Generally anything less than 50% owner-occupied can’t be financed - you’d have to pay cash, your real estate attorney will tell you to run away, etc. Of course, but in OP's story the owners bought the condo years before the real estate company had come in to buy all the other units. So I agree that this would be a red flag but unfortunately this red flag still exists even if the condos are fully owner-occupied at the time you buy them.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Kon-Peki 4y ago

If the state condo laws say it is, then yes. This is in Florida, not exactly known for such a great body of condo law. But even in places like New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, etc - with a long, long history of condominiums, this is going to be allowed. All the condo units but one were owned by the company. That’s a huge red flag, to the point that you’d never be able to get a federally-insured loan to buy in this building. Generally anything less than 50% owner-occupied can’t be financed - you’d have to pay cash, your real estate attorney will tell you to run away, etc.

marc_abonce 4y ago
> All the condo units but one were owned by the company. That’s a huge red flag, to the point that you’d never be able to get a federally-insured loan to buy in this building. Generally anything less than 50% owner-occupied can’t be financed - you’d have to pay cash, your real estate attorney will tell you to run away, etc. Of course, but in OP's story the owners bought the condo years before the real estate company had come in to buy all the other units. So I agree that this would be a red flag but unfortunately this red flag still exists even if the condos are fully owner-occupied at the time you buy them.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]