Tell us what’s on your mind? 
- This topic has 2,108 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 hours, 13 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
AKAM president, attorney and each of board member who voted for this manager should be hold accountable personally to give managers position to someone without any managerial experience and/or without checking his background if background was checked but ignored. Are they ready to ruin their reputation? Let’s see.
The management company must be bonded and the employees must be bonded if they are handling hundreds of thousands of dollars each month. Do we have proof of this?
At the meeting we were presented with the new property manager, he was very defensive when asked what his qualifications for the job are. The name he gave us does not appear anywhere on the internet, except for a business listing in Huntington. This is very bizarre. Everyone comes up on the internet. If he truly has experience and references, he would have explained and not just say he has experience in thousands of buildings. Akam has put him on their books as an employee. We must make be sure that he/they are insured fully. The shareholders have the right to know the property manager’s legal name, references and work history. The board has to know that they are personally liable for any dereliction of duty for not properly vetting the management company and the employee of the management company that is being placed in the position of property manager. If our lawyer is advising the board on the hiring of the management company and the individual employee to be the property manager, the attorney can also be held personally responsible for negligence. The board members can be held personally responsible for not requiring copies of the appropriate insurances of the management company and insurance covering the employees who will be handling the affairs of the co-op, both on and off premises.
The vetting of the management company includes getting references from current and past clients.
Ms Z is not a shareholder, but did lead the effort to fire Jain and is now leading everything Board president - is broker - and attorney are maybe on Ms Z's payroll / employee I think that AKAM is Ms Z business contact and was chosen before the election We believe the new board manager is Ms Z business partner We think two board members quit because they saw corruption To replace the two open spots, the board voted in their friends. There is no one to check inappropriate behavior I think Ms Z motive is to make money + maximize profits 1st, help shareholders 2nd We have to hold them accountable!
His name is really Navid. He lied about his name. He has no experience in management whatsoever. At least Google doesn’t know any place he worked. Only jewelry company where he is only the worker and if you Google the address of that business you’ll see its garage. And yes, he is Ms Z’s boyfriend. He also helped to get (old manager) out and now got his place.
Thanks to the person who created this website. Very helpful.
The ONE VOICE Tenants Association will no longer allow blatant acts of NEPOTISM as was practiced by the former Board – or by the newly elected Board of Directors
noun: nepotism
the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.
When Carol Management built our buildings in 1954, they rented apartments to families and screened new applicants who they deemed compatible with the other renters in their buildings.
At that time, we were not just 6 separate residential buildings – we were a “community” occupying 6 buildings. It was a well kept and wonderful place to live and raise families.
By the time we became a cooperative we were neighbors. We were friends. We knew each others names. We went to church and synagogue together. Our children played and went to school together and we cared about the future of our community.
But that all changed with the former Board of Directors whose members were predominantly investors. They hid behind closed doors and hired a tyrannical manager to shield them from shareholder inquiries and complaints. Their underlying intent was to intimidate our friends and neighbors to leave our co-op and seek other housing. In addition, the manager and that Board strongly favored the resale of apartments to outside investors because it was the investor’s voted shares, and some collusion, that kept that Board and manager in absolute power.
THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN!
