Why haven't we gotten rid of Concord Mis-Management!

I have moved this 11/1/12 post up to the top of the blog FYI.  I am running for the 2013 Board and one of the 3 major things I want to get done is to get rid of Concord as our management firm.  Of course this depends on having a second likeminded Owner on the Board, without that then we will probably be stuck with another 3 year contract for the poor service that Concord provides

I would also point out that just prior to our Owners getting the 2nd member on the Board (ie: Turnover) the Developer controlled Board gave Concord this 3 year contract when all prior such contracts had been for one year.  At this Board meeting they also gave to the Developer prime office space in our Clubhouse with no requirement they pay anything for upkeep.

We really got screwed by the Developer and Concord.  We are stuck with the Developer but we can sure get rid of Concord!
============================================

First some info about who Concord Management, Ltd 'is', and this comes right from their own public information: Concord is one of 4 companies who work together to build and manage properties which are either apartment or condo complexes. Three firms work to build them and Concord then manages them. About 160 of them presently in 7 states with approximately 32-34,000 units in total.



What do you think of Concord Management?

See: http://www.atlantichousing.com/ourteam.html

Drop by these blog sites for more information on Concord Mis-Management:
http://concordsucks.blogspot.com/
http://northbridgesucks.blogspot.com/
http://concordmanagementltd.blogspot.com/
http://stoneharborsucks.blogspot.com/
http://nautiluscondosrules.blogspot.com/

In terms of size, Concord is insignificant in the property management area. A firm that had put in a 24 page plan for managing our community was international and manages over one million units. Until I approached them for information they had never heard of Concord. You can see their 2 year old proposal at the below direct link.   This firm or a similar professional firm should be managing our condo. See their proposal at: http://nccmanagementcompany.blogspot.com  also see: http://happiercondos.com/index.html

Here is additional information FYI:
Did you ever wonder why we are a condo? I have and I still don't know what happened as this was always intended to be a apartment rental community and various loans were taken out on that basis. 

Both our sister community in PCB, Stone Harbor and NCC were intended as 'affordable housing on the beach'. We were intended to be low income housing for workers at the hotels, resorts and posh condos in Panama City Beach. 

Somewhere along the line the developer decided to make the complex into a condominium, however, with the lack of sales and with 56 unsold units remaining the developer seems to have gone back to the idea of being an apartment complex and is renting out those unsold units and now 112 Owners find themselves owning units in a low income housing complex. Welcome to Nautilus Cove Apartments! Details at: http://nautiluscondosrules.blogspot.com/search?q=affordable+housing

Concord has NEVER had the best interests of the Owners in mind. As long as Concord is the management firm for Nautilus Cove we are still under the control of the developer.
 
I hope that in the next NCC election we will end up with 2 Owners on the BOD who will make sure that the contract with Concord Mis-Management will not be renewed in October of 2013. 

It is time for us to have a decent management firm running this complex and not one that is an in house shill for the developer.

Is this the Clubhouse at Nautilus Cove?

No, it is 'Spring Lake Cove', in Fruitland, Florida, one of 140 Concord managed properties and most are built exactly the same.

 

Do you wonder why Owners at NCC have such bad service from Concord?

It is because while they are paid by Owners to be our 'Management Company', they really represent the complex developer and work on his behalf in managing and renting out the 56 unsold units here.

Concord is one of 4 companies that build, rent and manage apartment complexes in 7 states. Most are carbon copies of each other. Take a look at our very down market sister community, 1.7 miles from NCC, it is called Stone Harbor and was build 2 years before our community and houses mostly section 8 and welfare occupants. 

That is happening here at NCC, we are sliding down market and soon we will look just as bad as Stone Harbor does now.

Here is what Atlantic Housing says about this 4 firm 'Development Team': 

"Atlantic Housing is the commonly used brand name for our family of companies working in a cooperative effort to develop quality multi-family communities . . . the members of our team include Atlantic Housing, Global Realty, CPG Construction and Concord Management. . . Concord Management is a leader in . . . multi-family and single family affordable rental housing communities."

Make no mistake - the developer still runs this complex and it is run by Concord to represent them and to rent out their 56 units of low income housing.  NCC is run for the developer's benefit and NOT for the benefit of the Owners. 

If you own a condo here then you own a condo in a low income housing complex.

Until we get rid of Concord Mis-Management we will continue to be under the thumb of the developer and the 4 company 'Development Team'. 

Our association dues are paying for Concord to manage and rent out the 56 unsold developer units. 

We need a Board of Directors which will get rid of Concord Management and get us a management firm that will represent the Owners here at Nautilus Cove and not be a shill of the developer.

==============================================

Also See the 24 page offer from the Continental management group, one of the umbrella companies of an International firm with over 1,000,000 managed units:  http://nccmanagementcompany.blogspot.com/

Concord Management - Problems with them continue

Regular readers of this blog might be aware of my opinion that both the Board of Directors, which really means the complex developers, and Concord Management are uninterested and unresponsive to the Owners here at Nautilus Cove.  The below outgoing email to the 'office' here at NCC summarizes the latest issue that both the BOD and Concord have chosen to ignore.

My initial phone conversations with the Concord Secretary Melissa Melvin on 7/15 raised issues she was uninformed on and I was told that the inquirys would  be forwarded to someone else and I would be contacted.  No one has contacted me.

Hopefully, when we finally have the 2nd owner member on the BOD we will quickly replace Concord with some other management firm.  Here is a copy of my email of today: 
=============================================

Sent to:  NautilusCove@ConcordRents.com


2nd Follow up to unanswered July 19th inquiry about Nautilus Cove Condo

On July 19th I wrote to you: "You were going to have 'someone get back to me' regarding several issues I raised with you last Thursday. So far I have not gotten any contact from Concord."


My inquiry of July 15th remains unanswered. I want to know as follows:

1) Were quarterly dues payments incorrectly deposited into the Developers account rather than into a Nautilus Cove Condo account. You will recall that I had sent you a copy of the endorsement on the back of my own check showing what I believed to be the incorrect deposit.

2) Why is there no Community Assn. Manager (CAM) at Nautilus Cove since approx July 7th.

I now further inquire as to whether Concord Management is going to reduce their monthly billing to reflect that your firm is NOT providing the required level of representation as required by the Management Agreement. I am concerned that we are being billed top dollar for a CAM and are only getting a secretary. So is Concord going to adjust their billing to reflect this lower level of service.

Please now keep in mind that unless I receive a timely and on point reply to the questions raised over two weeks ago that I will make a formal complaint to DBPR in Tallahassee and ask them to investigate the matter.

Bill Harris
Owner #708

FYI: An update to old business-

You might recall the below incident here at NCC, it was in the local papers, subject to a press release by the BCSO and reported further down on this blog at: http://nautiluscondosrules.blogspot.com/2008/08/developers-will-rent-to-just-anyone-to.html

Meth Lab Dismantled

"The Bay County Sheriffs Office Special Investigations Division dismantled a Methamphetamine Lab in Bay County yesterday afternoon, July 22, 2008.

Narcotics officers developed information that led to a search warrant on a residence at 1502 Lighthouse Road, Panama City Beach. Investigators discovered five children living within the home and an active methamphetamine lab in the cooking process in the closet and bathroom adjoining the master bedroom."

The developer got his unit back after filing some paperwork and you might be wondering what happened to the 2 adults. Both remain in custody with the next appearance set for a 4/28/2009 Pretrial Conference for Dunkley and one for Hammock on 5/26/2009. If you have the time or interest you can pull up their information at the below click on links:

HAMMOCK, DANIEL RAY Bond set at: $170,000

http://records2.baycoclerk.com/courtcaseweb/CaseDetail.aspx?caseid=1509790

(below charges are just from the NCC arrest)
TRAFFICKING IN METHAMPHETAMINE (893135 1f1)
MANUFACTURE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE (89313 1a2)
CHILD ABUSE (82703 1)
CHILD ABUSE (82703 1)
CHILD ABUSE (82703 1)
CHILD ABUSE (82703 1)
CHILD ABUSE (82703 1)
RESISTING ARREST WITH VIOLENCE (84301)
POSSESSION OF LISTED CHEMICAL- (893149)
POSSESSION OF LISTED CHEMICAL- (893149)

DUNKLEY, LISA CHRISTINA Bond set at $140,000, the charges are the same except for no Resisting Arrest charge.

http://records2.baycoclerk.com/courtcaseweb/CaseDetail.aspx?txt=Dunkley%2c+Lisa&ps=50&m=name&s=4&caseid=1509776

In theory, NCC condos when rented out by the management firm, require background checks on applicants. Private rentals by owners and their real estate agents do not require such checks, hopefully the realtors fronting for the owners will do so on their own initative but it isn't so far a requirement. It should be!

The potential for additional criminal enterprise here at NCC is great with such a very high ratio of renters to owners (3 to 1).

At the time of the rental to Dunkley and Hammock even the most minor internet check of county records would have revealed their criminal pasts plus Dunkley had been evicted from another rental complex the prior year.

Also see:
http://nautiluscovearrests.blogspot.com