Cooperative and Condominium

June 16, 2016

Waiving the Mortgage Contingency Clause- Should Purchasers in New York Take the Risk?

Sellers of real estate in New York perceive the current market as one with a tight inventory for desirable properties. In such a market, multiple offers may be available to a seller. In order to select one offer over another, a seller may demand that the buyer who intends to obtain a mortgage waive the standard mortgage contingency clause in the proposed contract. This post will discuss whether waiving the mortgage contingency is a risk that a buyer should take.

In a typical New York real estate contract, various contingencies (conditions) need to be met between signing the contract and closing. Some of the conditions usually include proof of clear title, a satisfactory appraisal , approval of the finances of the cooperative building and the like. If the conditions are not met, the downpayment will be delivered to the seller or the buyer, depending on the circumstances.

A mortgage contingency clause works as follows. After the contract is signed, the buyer is afforded a particular number of days to obtain their loan approval. If the buyer does not obtain the loan, he can show that the loan was declined and request the refund of the downpayment. During this period of time, the seller is required to remove the property from the market and is relying upon this particular buyer to close. If the buyer has a valid legal right to cancel the contract and receive the return of his downpayment, the seller has lost potentially two months in being able to market the property again. In New York, missing an opportunity to market the property during the Spring and Summer seasons could cause the property to be overlooked by buyers until the following Spring, because most contracts are signed in the Spring and Summer months.

May 13, 2016

New York State Landlord Prosecuted – Does this Sound Familiar?

By Weiss & Weiss

Recently in the news is the story regarding New York City landlord Steve Croman. Mr. Croman was arrested for allegedly harassing rent-stabilized tenants into leaving their apartments so that he could increase the rent for new tenants. Longtime readers of our blog will recall other posts which relate to the right to renew a lease, as well as illegal acts and evictions in New York State.

Unfortunately, the current rent system in New York State, and, more specifically, mostly in New York City, gives landlords an incentive to remove tenants, especially long-time tenants, who are paying artificially low rents due to the rent stabilization laws. Of course, this does not excuse harassing and threatening tenants, but it explains why a landlord may resort to these tactics to attempt to remove tenants.

The current rent stabilization system allows the landlord to increase the rent by a certain percentage when a tenant vacates. Although this percentage may vary, it is usually a twenty percent (20%) increase over the prior regulated rent. For example, if a tenant was paying $1,000.00 per month, and vacates, the new tenant may be charged $1,200.00. There may also be additional increases depending on the amount of time which has passed since the last vacancy, as well as increases if the landlord renovates the apartment in question. For buildings that contain more than 35 apartments, the landlord may collect a permanent rent increase equal to 1/60^th of the cost of the apartment improvement. If there are fewer than 35 apartments, the landlord may collect an increase of 1/40^th of the cost.

April 21, 2016

Is This Your First Time? Property Purchases in New York State

By Weiss & Weiss

It’s that time of year again. This author is not thinking about the chirping birds and blooming trees heralding the beginning of Spring. We are thinking about another sign of the season– the first time home purchaser. This post will address issues pertaining to the person buying a home, whether a house or a cooperative or condominium apartment, for the first time. Even if a person has owned a home in another state, real estate in New York is its own animal.

The most important aspect of our advice is that the first time homebuyer should surround himself with seasoned experts throughout the process. In addition, let the experts do their work without your interference. It is usually better for a first time homebuyer to work with a licensed real estate agent and to buy a property that is listed with a real estate agent, as opposed to buying a home that is listed for sale by owner. That way, the real estate agents will resolve many of the issues that commonly develop in a transaction. If both parties are not represented by real estate agents, then the buyer may not know how to best negotiate a favorable price. Comparable sales should also be evaluated to determine the proper price to be offered by a buyer. A real estate agent knows the area best, but also has the resources to locate the comparable sales data and to evaluate the data properly.

The first time homebuyer should also get his finances in order. He should become acquainted with a potential lender or mortgage broker prior to making offers. His offer is more likely to be accepted if accompanied by a pre-approval letter, so that the seller is comfortable with taking the property off the market for this buyer. In addition, the proposed lender or mortgage broker may note possible deficiencies in the buyer’s potential loan application, such as inaccurate credit concerns, the necessity of reducing debt and the like. Given the amount of the typical downpayment to purchase a property in the New York metropolitan area, first time homebuyers may need a gift from their parents or other relatives to pursue the transaction. The buyer should discuss this with the appropriate person in advance. Further, once the gift is made, the parties need to be prepared to show the source of the gift, such as copies of bank statements before and after the gift, from the parent and the child.

March 17, 2016

Fraudulent Conveyances of Real Estate in New York

By Weiss & Weiss

Occasionally, our clients inquire as to whether a real estate transaction could be considered a fraudulent conveyance. This situation can occur when an individual or entity transfers property due to a judgment or pending judgment, in an attempt to evade creditors. In New York, a judgment is a lien on real property for a period of ten years. After ten years, the creditor can move to have the lien extended for an additional ten years. Therefore, those who own real estate may have an incentive to transfer such property to prevent a lien from being placed on it, possibly for a twenty-year period.

New York Debtor and Creditor Law, Article 10, is the state law governing fraudulent transfers. It states that, first, when any defendant transfers property in an attempt to evade a judgment creditor, that transfer is considered fraudulent and may be rescinded in a court action. An important consideration in this evaluation is whether the transfer is made for consideration, that is, whether the person transferring the property received value in exchange for the transfer.

Let’s give a hypothetical situation to help clarify the law. A husband and wife own a house jointly. The husband alone is sued individually for a business debt, and a judgment is obtained against him. Before the judgment is entered by the Court, the husband transfers his one-half interest in his house to his wife, so that the house is solely in his wife’s name. The husband receives no compensation for this transfer.

March 10, 2016

Preserving Real Estate Assets for the Defaulting New York Homeowner

By Weiss & Weiss

It is not unusual for some of our clients to be presented with the following scenario. An owner of a single family house or apartment falls behind on his mortgage and his lender commences a foreclosure proceeding while a sale is pending. In an apartment scenario, the cooperative board pursues a maintenance default matter while a cooperative unit owner is actively attempting to sell the unit. These are not situations where a short sale is sought. Rather, significant equity exists. The anticipated sales proceeds will allow for the full payment of the balance of the mortgage loan or maintenance arrears due to the cooperative.

Another common component of these situations is that the lender or cooperative board is aggressively pursuing their claim, jeopardizing the owner’s ownership of the asset. For instance, if the lender forecloses on the mortgage, the homeowner will lose title to the property and have nothing to sell. If the cooperative default goes to its final conclusion, an auction of the unit (and eviction of the occupant) , the unit owner will likewise lose her ownership interest. These results should be avoided when the closing proceeds are more than sufficient to pay any outstanding amounts due. The goal of the attorney representing the homeowner is to encourage the lender or the cooperative board to delay its proceeding pending the sale of the property , at which time the lender or the cooperative will be paid in full for the monies owed. When a homeowner falls behind in payments due, he may claim to a creditor that he is trying to sell the home in an effort to stall proceedings. While it may be true that the homeowner is trying to sell the home, the following suggestions may make such a claim more credible to the creditor and convince them to delay the proceedings.

First, it is helpful to have a skilled attorney present this information to the creditor. Second, for sale by owner scenerios should not be used. Having a licensed real estate agent involved who has an active listing that can be shown to the creditor is convincing evidence that the home is actively for sale. Third, if there is a signed contract of sale with downpayment monies on deposit and also a loan commitment letter from the purchaser to deliver to the lender or cooperative’s attorney, such documents will show that the means to pay the past due balance will be imminently available. A new loan may be sought by the homeowner as another means to resolve the default. If these strategies are not effective, our attorneys may file an Order to Show Cause with the applicable Court, seeking a temporary restraining order curtailing the creditor’s right to pursue the activity until the sale occurs.

February 25, 2016

Mortgage Modifications in New York State

By Weiss & Weiss

Our firm is often called on to assist homeowners whose properties may be in foreclosure. This can occur when a person falls behind in their mortgage payments to a bank or other lending institution. Because of the high volume of such foreclosures in New York State over the past several years, additional safeguards have been added to the judicial process to protect people from losing their primary residence in a foreclosure case.

Prior blog posts have explained how New York State requires a mandatory settlement conference in most residential foreclosure matters. The main exceptions are cases involving a reverse mortgage, or situations in which the homeowner does not reside at the property being foreclosed, such as a second home or vacation house. Our attorneys will attend settlement conferences in Court to attempt to resolve outstanding foreclosures. Court referees, who meet with the parties in an attempt to resolve these cases, encourage lending institutions to offer mortgage modifications. The first step in the process is that the borrower must provide complete financial information to the lender (or, in most cases, their attorneys). This information usually consists of a standard Request for Mortgage Modification Form (RMA), copies of state and federal tax returns for the last several years, a hardship letter from the borrower explaining why they fell behind on their mortgage, proof of income, bank statements, and other financial records as the lender may request.

Once this information is provided, the lending institution will consider whether a modification is possible. Based on the borrower’s income and assets, as well as the value of the property in question, as well as the mortgage amount, the lender may offer a trial modification. The trial modification may reduce the interest rate on the original mortgage, and may also shift the past due payments to the end of the loan term, allowing a delinquent borrower to resume payments and have the property removed from the foreclosure process. In certain instances, the lender may even reduce the actual amount of principal owed on the mortgage.

February 11, 2016

Getting Engaged this Valentine’s Day?

By Weiss & Weiss

Are you planning to get engaged this Valentine’s Day? While legal concerns may not be particularly romantic, our firm offers the following legal advice pertaining to issues that arise upon marriage in this post. Legal issues arise whether it is a first or second marriage and may become more complicated if there are children from a prior marriage.

Estate planning matters should be considered. If you do not have Wills, it is prudent to consult an estate attorney to develop the appropriate estate planning documents. Wills, trusts, and health care directive documents may be drafted on your behalf. Even if you already have estate documents in place, the beneficiaries and fiduciaries could be different now that you’re engaged. The persons that you select to make health care decisions for you are also likely to change.

If you have children from a prior marriage, provisions should be included in your Will to include a testamentary trust . Your new spouse would be afforded the opportunity to use some of the assets during her life, with the balance left to your children from your prior marriage. Without such a trust, your spouse could remarry and leave monies that you intended for your children to someone else. Also, consider how your estate plan should address personal property. If there are family heirlooms that you would want your children to inherit, rather than your spouse, you should have your attorney specify the particular items in your Will.

January 22, 2016

Unlivable Conditions in New York Coops

By Weiss & Weiss

Many legal issues arise in New York relating to rental apartments. Disputes between landlords and tenants are extremely common, and have been discussed in many posts on this blog. Extremely prevalent are situations in which the living conditions of the apartment have deteriorated to the point where the apartment may not be suitable for an individual or family to reside at the premises.

When this occurs, legally, it is considered a breach of the “warranty of habitability.” Whether or not it is explicitly stated in a lease or other document, every dwelling place has an implied warranty of habitability, meaning that the responsible party must insure that the space is livable. Certain conditions which may cause an apartment to be unlivable are lack of heat (especially during the winter), water leaks causing flooding conditions, roaches and other vermin, and excessive noise. This is not an exclusive list, and other conditions may arise which could cause a landlord to be in breach of the warranty of habitability.

However, a question arises when the apartment in question is a cooperative unit. In such situations, the owner of the shares allocated to the apartment unit is usually the same person residing at the premises. In essence, they are both landlord and tenant. What happens legally when such a unit has severe problems which cause them to be unfit for human habitation? Our firm has been consulted by many clients in such situations. The first issue to be resolved is the responsible party for the conditions. Every cooperative has a proprietary lease, which is a document that defines whether the cooperative corporation or the unit owner is responsible to correct certain conditions. For example, a cooperative apartment may have windows which have deteriorated to the point that they no longer seal and keep cold air out of the apartment. The proprietary lease needs to be examined to determine whether the cooperative corporation is responsible for replacing such windows. Other conditions, such as excessive noise, or poor sanitary conditions at the building, may also be the responsibility of the cooperative corporation, rather than the individual owner.

December 11, 2015

Let’s Adjust: Calculating Amounts Due at New York Real Estate Closings

By Weiss & Weiss

Those people who are new to the real estate closing process in New York may not be aware that the amount delivered by the purchaser at closing is not as simple as the amount of the downpayment as subtracted from the purchase price. Adjustments are to be made for real estate taxes, vendors serving the property, and potentially remediating a seller-caused situation. Our real estate attorneys are experienced in making such calculations and in delivering the information to the parties in a timely fashion in order to prepare for closing.

The first adjustment to be made involves a credit to the purchaser for the amount of the downpayment. Another common adjustment is a $500.00 credit to the purchaser for the property disclosure statement. New York State law mandates that a seller complete a detailed questionnaire and deliver same to the purchaser. In the absence of the completion of such questionnaire, the purchaser is given a credit of $500.00 against the purchase price at closing. Certain sellers, such as estates, are exempt from the requirement to deliver a property disclosure statement and are not required to apply a credit at closing. Interestingly enough, it has become the custom for sellers to complete the disclosure questionnaire in upstate New York, while most sellers in the downstate area served by this firm typically do not produce such a statement. Our attorneys advise sellers concerning whether they should deliver such a disclosure in their specific situation.

Real estate taxes are another common source of adjustments between the parties to a transaction. In Westchester County, New York, the area in which our firm is located, there are two or three different types of real estate taxes, all of which cover different periods of time in the calendar year. For instance, County taxes cover the calendar year, January 1-December 31. School taxes cover the dates July 1-June 30. In those jurisdictions subject to Village taxes, the year is calculated from June 1-May 31. Even though the various real estate taxes cover particular periods of time, the taxes are not necessarily due on these specific dates. County taxes are due on April 1, with penalty for late payment being applied on April 30.

December 3, 2015

Landlord-Tenant Eviction Action in New York – Holdover or Non-Payment?

By Weiss & Weiss

Our firm frequently represents both landlords and tenants in eviction actions. Unlike many law firms who specialize in only representing landlords or only defending tenants, we recognize that valid legal issues and valid defenses may exist for both the party owning a given property and the party who may be renting the property. This blog post will discuss the basics of an eviction action, and may be viewed from the perspective of either a landlord or a tenant.

Eviction cases in New York State are classified as either holdover actions or non-payment actions. They cannot be both. When the landlord (who is usually called the “petitioner”) decides to file a petition for eviction in the appropriate court, the landlord’s attorney must decide whether the case is a non-payment action, or a holdover action.

A non-payment action is an action for eviction based on the tenant’s failure to pay rent as due. The rent due may be based on a written lease, or simply an oral agreement between the landlord and the tenant. For example, a tenant enters into a lease to rent a house for $6,000.00 per month. The tenant then does not make the rent payments as due. Our attorneys will usually advise the landlord not to proceed with a non-payment action until several months’ rent has accrued. The reason for this is that a tenant may always end a non-payment action by making payment. Once any and all rental arrears are paid by the defaulting tenant, the non-payment action will be dismissed by the Court and the tenancy will continue.