Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.2026-06-11T17:09:18Zhttps://www.pck-law.com/feed/atom/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/sites/1203646/2022/08/cropped-site-identity-new-32x32.pngOn Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[What housing co-ops should know about the current buyer’s market]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559972026-06-11T17:09:18Z2026-06-11T16:30:58ZIn many parts of the United States, housing conditions have shifted noticeably in favor of buyers. Increased inventory, longer listing times and greater negotiating power have created what many real estate professionals describe as the strongest buyer's market seen in years. While this environment may create opportunities for purchasers, housing cooperatives sometimes face unique challenges in a buyer’s market. Understanding how changing market conditions can affect operations, governance and long-term planning is critical.
Things to keep in mind
In a buyer's market, prospective purchasers often have more options. Instead of competing for a limited number of available properties, buyers may compare multiple communities before making a decision. As a result, co-ops may find that attracting qualified purchasers requires greater attention to property maintenance, financial stability and overall community appeal.Boards should recognize that buyers are also likely to scrutinize financial records more carefully when they have numerous alternatives available. Reserve fund levels, maintenance fee histories, pending litigation, special assessments and major capital projects may all receive close attention during the approval process. Strong financial management and transparent governance can help distinguish a cooperative from competing housing options.A slower sales environment may also affect transfer activity. Units that might have sold quickly during a seller's market could remain on the market longer. This may result in more frequent requests for extensions, financing contingencies or price negotiations. Boards should ensure that transfer procedures remain consistent and compliant with governing documents while maintaining reasonable expectations about market realities.Buyer expectations may also evolve during a softer market. Prospective purchasers may place greater emphasis on amenities, building maintenance, governance practices and long-term planning. Co-ops that proactively address deferred maintenance and communicate effectively with shareholders may enjoy a competitive advantage.At the same time, boards should avoid making decisions based solely on short-term market conditions. When weighing the pros and cons of any major transitions, seeking legal guidance may be advisable given all that is at stake. Communities that demonstrate sound management, financial stability and a commitment to maintaining property values may be well-positioned to attract qualified purchasers even when buyers have more choices than they have had in many years.]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[What does “undue financial burden” mean?]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559942026-05-28T11:08:05Z2026-05-28T11:08:05ZUsing the undue burden test
Reasonable accommodations or modifications refer to policy and physical changes to a building to make it accessible for tenants with disabilities. While the Fair Housing Act (FHA) mandates you to provide these requests, your obligation has limits. You may set a boundary if a request creates an undue financial burden.
No fixed dollar amount defines an undue burden. Instead, enforcement agencies use a test to assess whether the request is excessively disproportionate to the co-op’s total operating budget. This evaluates:
The total expense of the request
The co-op’s overall budgets, reserves and revenue
The availability of grants or public subsidies to help offset the cost
Under the FHA, the financial burden for modification usually falls on the requesting tenant. However, if your building receives any federal financial assistance, different rules apply, and the co-op may have to foot the bill.
Exhausting alternative before declining the request
Before you decline a request, the FHA requires you to engage in an interactive process. This involves discussing the request with the resident. Together, you can find alternative, less costly solutions that still meet their needs.
Protecting your board from costly missteps
Rejecting a request based on undue financial burden carries massive legal risks. Consulting a cooperative housing law attorney can help you navigate this matter, which can assist you in protecting your community’s financial assets while properly fulfilling your legal civil rights duties.]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[Co-op compliance with the ADA’s parking rules]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559922026-05-25T18:40:51Z2026-05-25T18:40:51ZHow many accessible spaces are mandatory?
For co-ops with limited resources, adopting an assigned parking system can be the simplest way to ensure that there is accessible parking available to residents with disabling medical conditions. When parking is available on a first-come, first-served basis, the co-op likely needs to ensure that there are enough accessible spaces for all residents who may require specialized vehicles or more clearance to get in and out of vehicles.
The ADA imposes multiple obligations on housing providers and other businesses that offer parking. Generally speaking, the number of accessible parking spaces depends on the total number of parking spaces provided.
Typically, every parking lot should include at least one accessible parking space with an adjacent, wheelchair access space, known as an access aisle, which is at least 60 inches wide, that no vehicle should occupy. The accessible space should feature clear markings and be close to entrances or ramps. ADA rules even limit the slope of the parking space.
Larger communities that have multiple parking spaces may need to have several accessible parking spaces. A co-op with 76 to 100 parking spaces, for example, must have at least four accessible parking spaces. Overall, the general expectation is that roughly 2-4% of all spaces are accessible for those who need more space or who use a wheelchair-accessible van.
Adequate accessible parking is a critical component of regulatory compliance for housing co-ops. Reviewing current amenities and ADA requirements with a skilled legal team can help those running housing co-ops ensure their compliance.]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[When a corporate executive breaches their duty to shareholders]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559912026-05-20T12:07:08Z2026-05-20T12:07:08ZHow executives may violate shareholder rights
There are several unique forms of recourse available to shareholders when the misconduct or incompetence of company executives affects their interest in the business or the company’s finances. Shareholders have certain rights, along with responsibilities related to company oversight. Their investments provide capital that may facilitate business expansion. The decisions they make at shareholder meetings can affect the future of the company's operations. They can vote on key issues and receive dividends when the company is profitable.
In cases involving a shareholder freeze-out or squeeze-out, often initiated by executives who may have once been sole owners of their companies, shareholders can work together to take legal action and assert their rights. Freeze-outs often involve refusing to let shareholders attend meetings, denying them access to dividends or preventing them from exercising their right to vote on critical issues.
Shareholders typically have contractual rights that executives cannot violate with impunity. Attempting to freeze them out of their position to acquire their shares is a breach of duty and of the shareholder agreement. Proof of that misconduct may allow affected shareholders to take action and hold executives accountable.
Other times, when an executive has proven incompetent or incapable of effectively fulfilling their role at the company, shareholders can potentially take action. They can replace the people seated on the Board of Directors, who control executive employment for the organization.
Finally, shareholders have the option of pursuing a derivative action on behalf of the company. A derivative action is a lawsuit filed by a shareholder on behalf of the business against an executive. They seek to prevent transactions that could leave the company at a financial disadvantage or demand reimbursement from an executive who has cost the company money through embezzlement or self-dealing.
Each of these solutions is relatively complex and typically requires the support of an attorney familiar with shareholder disputes, derivative lawsuits and shareholder agreements. Shareholders who act promptly can place themselves in the strongest possible position to protect their rights and their investments.]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[Navigating co-op contract disputes involving groundskeepers ]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559902026-05-11T17:08:25Z2026-05-11T17:08:25ZCooperative housing communities often rely heavily on groundskeepers to maintain attractive, safe and functional outdoor spaces. From lawn care and snow removal to landscaping and seasonal maintenance, groundskeepers often play an important role in preserving property values and resident satisfaction.
Unfortunately, disputes involving groundskeeping contracts can quickly create tension between co-op boards, management companies and service providers. For example, many co-op contract disputes begin with disagreements over performance expectations. A board may believe that landscaping standards are not being met, while a contractor insists the work falls within the agreed scope of services. Complaints about missed snow removal deadlines, poor lawn maintenance, damaged property or inconsistent staffing can escalate rapidly, especially if residents begin voicing concerns to the board.
Why do these disputes arise, and how can they be resolved?
Groundskeeping agreements may contain vague terms regarding maintenance schedules, response times or quality standards. Without precise language, both sides may interpret obligations differently. For example, a contract may require “regular” landscaping services without clearly defining how frequently services must occur or what specific tasks are included.Payment disputes are also common. Groundskeeping companies may claim they performed additional work outside the original contract and expect compensation, while co-op boards may argue that the extra work was unauthorized. Conversely, a cooperative housing board may withhold payment due to dissatisfaction with services, which can trigger breach of contract claims or threats of litigation.Disputes involving insurance and liability can create additional legal concerns. If a resident slips on an icy walkway or a contractor damages common property, questions may arise regarding responsibility, indemnification clauses and insurance coverage. Resolving these disputes often requires a practical and strategic approach. Open communication between a board and a contractor may help clarify expectations and prevent misunderstandings from escalating. In some situations, mediation or negotiated amendments to the contract may preserve the working relationship while addressing ongoing concerns.Legal guidance can be especially important when disputes involve significant financial losses, potential litigation or allegations of contract breaches. A respected legal team experienced in cooperative housing matters can review vendor agreements, evaluate liability risks and help boards protect their co-op’s financial interests while minimizing disruptions to residents.
]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[The need for consistency when evicting non-paying co-op members]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559882026-04-30T17:32:57Z2026-04-30T17:32:57ZInconsistency can lead to discrimination claims
Both federal regulations and Michigan state laws require fair housing opportunities for people regardless of their protected characteristics. Factors including race, religion, age and national origin are among the characteristics that should not influence a person's eligibility for specific housing opportunities.
Co-ops should have written policies regarding evictions that they follow exactly in the event of consistent non-payment or similar resident issues. Failing to follow community standards, possibly out of compassion for a person going through significant hardship, could lead to allegations of discrimination when enforcing community standards in the future.
Selective rule enforcement is a common form of discrimination. Those making decisions about people's housing should not consider protected characteristics when deciding who can live in a co-op and when eviction is necessary. If a co-op has a history of offering some residents more lenience than others due to health challenges, advanced age or other personal challenges, such as divorce, those evicted later for justifiable reasons, such as non-payment, might assert that they are the victims of discrimination.
That may then lead to a protracted legal battle, financial losses, challenges with future evictions and reputation damage. While it may be difficult to choose to evict certain residents, especially if they have lived in the co-op for years, ensuring consistent and documented enforcement of the rules is important for the overall protection of the co-op.
Reviewing enforcement records, any pending evictions and co-op policies with a legal professional can help those operating a co-op avoid scenarios in which lenience and compassion result in future financial hardship. Appropriate actions can prevent claims of selective rule enforcement that could cause major headaches in the future.]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[3 options for co-ops dealing with service contract breaches]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559872026-04-22T11:56:23Z2026-04-22T11:56:23Z1. Contract rescission
A judge has the authority to terminate contractual obligations in response to a breach by one party. The failure to provide services as agreed upon with the co-op could be justification for the co-op to ask the courts to terminate the contract, thereby preventing the service provider from making claims regarding unpaid invoices. Contract rescission creates an opportunity to hire a different company to provide those services.
2. A request for damages
In scenarios where municipal authorities became involved, there could be fees or fines to address. On the other hand, the co-op may have incurred substantial expense hiring a service provider for immediate completion of the unperformed work or addressing winter slip-and-fall injuries.
A breach of contract lawsuit can result in a judge awarding damages based on the actual economic impact of the contractual default of one party. Provided that the co-op incurred costs due to enforcement actions, injuries or the need to hire a different professional to provide the services outlined in the contract, a judge may agree to award the co-op damages for the impact of the service provider’s nonperformance.
3. Contract enforcement
Judges can issue injunctions or orders of specific performance that hold service providers accountable for failing to fulfill contractual obligations. A court order may be more compelling than a contract and may convince a service provider to perform the work previously left incomplete.
Working with an attorney familiar with contract law and housing co-op regulations can help prevent contract breaches from snowballing into costly citations or reputation damage for a community. If the service provider doesn't uphold their contract, legal action may be necessary to appropriately resolve the situation.]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[Should a business voluntarily provide FinSEC with BOI details?]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559862026-04-12T22:24:59Z2026-04-12T22:24:59Zmultiple lawsuits challenging the CTA in different federal courts, and there have already been rulings limiting the scope of the CTA. The CTA essentially requires that businesses with opaque ownership structures report the identities of anyone with a beneficial ownership interest (BOI) in the company.
Those who hold a 25% stake or greater in a company without clear ownership are theoretically subject to requirements to submit their personal identifying information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). Failing to make the mandatory disclosures could lead to significant financial penalties and the risk of criminal charges.
A federal court ruling has officially halted the implementation and enforcement of the CTA. Should businesses make voluntary BOI disclosures even though the CTA is not yet enforceable?
Voluntary disclosures can prove beneficial
Many corporations, limited liability companies (LLCs) and other businesses have already submitted BOI information to FinCEN. Doing so does come with certain advantages.
First and foremost, organizations that voluntarily comply with the CTA do not need to consistently track the litigation related to the law to ensure compliance if it becomes enforceable. Companies that wait until the last moment to submit their BOI reports if the CTA goes into effect run the risk of failing to meet critical deadlines and facing significant consequences.
Companies that make preemptive disclosures are essentially already compliant with the law. Additionally, voluntary compliance is a good-faith action that indicates to federal regulatory authorities that those running a company value transparency and honesty. That may reduce the scrutiny imposed on the company, its subsidiaries and its financial transactions.
The focus of the CTA is largely to help eliminate financial fraud, money laundering and funding for terrorist organizations generated by domestic businesses. Although court rulings have declared that BOI reporting requirements only apply to companies with foreign owners, companies owned entirely by citizens or lawful permanent residents may want to make BOI disclosures voluntarily anyway as a means of showing they have nothing to hide.
Discussing compliance concerns with a business law attorney can help those who run or have invested in companies avoid financial and legal complications in the future. Voluntary BOI disclosure is one of several moves that may yield long-term benefits for successful companies and those who have invested in them.
]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[What should I know about the proposed Housing Fairness Act of 2025?]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559852025-11-04T20:01:20Z2025-11-04T20:01:20Z discrimination continues to pose a problem throughout the country. In an attempt to address this issue, lawmakers have proposed the Housing Fairness Act of 2025. The bill aims to promote equitable access to housing for all individuals, regardless of their background, by strengthening existing fair housing laws and introducing new measures.
What are the key provisions?
The proposed act includes several provisions that aim to address various aspects of housing discrimination. Two of the most important include:
Strengthening enforcement mechanisms: The act proposes to increase funding for fair housing enforcement agencies so they can conduct more thorough investigations and enforce penalties against discriminatory practices.
Testing for discrimination: The act would result in increased efforts to find instances of discrimination against a person attempting to rent or buy a home as well as those who are applying for or refinancing a mortgage based on the individual’s race, color, disability status, sex, nation of origin, or religion. Those who support the proposal state it would result in improved data collection and reporting so agencies can better find and address instances of discrimination.
These are just a few of the proposed provisions currently under consideration.
How will this impact housing?
If the proposal becomes law, it will lead to increased funding for the Fair Housing Initiatives Program and trigger additional enforcement against acts of housing discrimination. It will likely also result in increased reporting requirements for property owners. It is important to note that the proposal is just that, a proposal. It is not yet law. Property owners of cooperatives are wise to stay abreast of these potential changes while making sure their current practices are in compliance with current requirements to mitigate the risk of allegations of a violation.]]>On Behalf of Pentiuk, Couvreur & Kobiljak, P.C.<![CDATA[CTA updates every Wyandotte and Chicago business must know]]>https://www.pck-law.com/?p=2559842025-09-12T04:34:23Z2025-09-12T04:34:23ZWhat has changed under the new CTA rules
On March 21, 2025, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), the U.S. Treasury agency that monitors financial activity to prevent illegal activity, issued a new rule. The main updates are:
U.S. Companies Are Exempt: U.S.-formed corporations, LLCs, and other companies do not need to report ownership details. This applies to new and existing companies.
Foreign Companies Must Still Report: Foreign companies registering in the U.S. must submit ownership information unless exempt. They do not need to report U.S. owners.
Extended Deadlines for Foreign Companies: Foreign companies have 30 extra days from the rule’s release or their U.S. registration to file their first report.
These changes simplify reporting for U.S.-formed companies while keeping foreign-owned businesses accountable under the law.
How these changes impact local businesses
These updates reduce the reporting burden for domestic companies, especially small businesses in Wyandotte and Chicago. FinCEN estimates that removing reporting for U.S. companies could save about $21.7 billion in the first year.
Only U.S.-formed companies are exempt. Foreign-owned companies registered locally still must follow the rules.
Practical steps for Wyandotte and Chicago businesses
Even if your company is exempt, it is important to stay informed. Local businesses should:
Check your company type: Make sure your company qualifies for the exemption.
Confirm foreign ownership rules: Foreign-owned companies must follow BOI reporting.
Keep clear records: Maintain a simple list of owners for internal use.
Knowing CTA reporting rules helps your business avoid fines and focus on growth. Companies should check FinCEN updates regularly. Foreign-owned businesses should pay special attention. For more help, review FinCEN guidance or talk to an attorney familiar with CTA rules in Michigan and Illinois.]]>