• Home
  • About us
  • Capabilities
    • Condo, Coop, HOA Counsel
    • Litigation
    • Business Law
    • Technology
    • Real Estate
    • Employment Law
    • Tax Audits
    • Family Law
  • Insights
  • References
  • FAQ
  • Inquiry
    • Payment
Colbert LawColbert Law
Colbert LawColbert Law
  • Home
  • About us
  • Capabilities
    • Condo, Coop, HOA Counsel
    • Litigation
    • Business Law
    • Technology
    • Real Estate
    • Employment Law
    • Tax Audits
    • Family Law
  • Insights
  • References
  • FAQ
  • Inquiry
    • Payment

Real Estate

Home Real Estate (Page 7)
Condos Collecting against Owners with Assets

Condos Collecting against Owners with Assets

New York condominiums have a variety of ways to collect amounts owed by unit owners. If demands and being nice do not cause owners to pay their obligations, then condo boards have tools available to cause owners to pay.

If the unit owner is renting the unit, the condo can send a notice to the renter and demand that the renter pay its rent to the condominium until the arrears are paid. Some renters comply after receiving the notice but others do not because they are fearful of retribution by their landlord unit owner (which is prohibited by law). The condo can escalate the matter and bring suit against the unit owner and the renter to force the payment.

If there are common amenities, condos may be entitled to withhold those amenities until arrears are paid. So lack of access to health clubs, pools, parking, etc. may be just the medicine that the unit owner needs to clear their arrears. Careful consideration of the condo governing documents and applicable laws should be done by an attorney to make sure the condo is within its rights to withhold certain amenities.

Condo governing documents also usually contain a provision allowing the board to escalate the payment of a whole years worth of common charges. Certain notices are required and then the entire remainder of the year becomes due and owing by the unit owner. Concerning over this happening could cause a unit owner to pay.

Under governing documents, condos typically have an automatic lien over the common charges and other amounts due by owners to the condo. To put the world on notice that the lien exists, condo boards usually record a common charge lien against the offending unit in the land records. They’ll need to do this if the board decides to foreclose that lien. After recording, sending a lien to a unit owner sometimes is enough to get them to pay or at least start a dialog about a payment plan if the board will allow such a plan. Some do with terms built into the agreement like interest on what is essentially a loan, a confession of judgment which means that the condo gets judgment if the owner defaults on the agreement without having to go through a full blown court proceeding, and other terms that are favorable to the condo.

Another route for a condo board is to bring a money judgment action against the non-paying unit owner. At the end of the lawsuit which can be in a variety of courts depending on the amount due, the condo can get a judgment for money. Having the judgment in and of itself could convince the unit owner to pay or enter into an agreement regarding payment. Judgments are good for 10 years so the likelihood of collection spans a long period of time. Unlike the common charge lien which is against the condo unit only, the money judgment can be used to go after other assets owned by the unit owner.

Collecting against a judgment could be as simple as looking at the last check that the unit owner wrote to the condo and serving a restraining notice against that bank. Unit owners who don’t want to pay and have done some research on collection, may have already closed that bank account. Some try to evade collection by paying with money orders or in ways that do not disclose a bank name and account number. There are restrictions on restraining notices that have to be followed. If the condo doesn’t know which bank the unit owner uses, there are strategies to find them. Once restrained, the bank account can be executed upon and if owned with others, turnover proceedings can be initiated.

Other avenues for collection include going after non-liquid assets such as brokerage accounts and stock ownership, or from a business owned by the unit owner (NY Marshals can place a levy on the business, stopping the unit owner from collecting draws, bonuses, interest without paying the debt to the condo).

If the unit owner is working, their wages can be garnished. A NYC Marshal can garnish up to 10% of the owner’s wages. Just faced with the possibility of garnishment and their employer learning about their debt may cause an owner to pay his or her arrears with the money they are keeping under a mattress.

Another approach to collection is finding other real property owned by the unit owner and making sure the money judgment lien is recorded against the property in the land records. It’s similar to a common charge lien on the condo unit (which has higher priority that money judgment liens). The money judgment lien can be placed on other real property and foreclosures of that property can be pursued.

If the unit owner transferred assets to others to evade recovery, there are tactics to reverse transfers that are fraudulent conveyances and seize the assets to pay off the amounts owed. If money is owed to the unit owner by others, we can cause that money to be seized from the others persons or entities.

Another target for collection is personal property. I can’t tell you how many times a board member advises, the person is in arrears but they are driving a brand new car. The car could be leased and thus owned by a leasing company, but if the car, boat, motorcycle, art, jewelry or other personal property of value is owned by the unit owner then it is fair game for collection.

If all of the above doesn’t produce money to pay the arrears, discovery can be taken to learn about assets or other ways that collection can be successful. We can serve written questions that must be answered under oath. We can obtain a court order that they appear for a deposition to answer questions about their assets or employment. We can subpoena documents from them or others related to their assets.

Navigating the above is tricky and should be done methodically by experienced counsel. What’s nice about condos is that the condo governing documents generally contain a provision allowing the condo to collect attorneys’ fees and costs of collection. So the time and effort needed to collect ends up being charged back by the condo to the unit owner and is collectible as provided in the governing documents. Once unit owners realize this, they often want to cut their losses and resolve in some way that is favorable to the condominium.

Local Law 97 – Affected Buildings bigger than 25,000 Square Feet have to Prepare

Local Law 97 – Affected Buildings bigger than 25,000 Square Feet have to Prepare

New York City Local Law 97 puts carbon caps on buildings bigger than 25,000 square feet — the city’s largest source of greenhouse gas emissions. Property managers and the boards they manage are faced with a looming deadline and the threat of thousands of dollars in penalties. The Department of Buildings’ rules for how this will work were only released in October and are still being finalized.

Complying with the law is likely going to be different for each building: The pathway is unique to each building, based on its age, finances, heating and cooling systems and state of maintenance. Buildings will have to comply. It is mandatory. Most affected building owners must comply with the law by 2024.

If owners don’t make a “good faith effort” to comply, as the DOB indicated so far, they could face fines of $268 for every ton of carbon dioxide emissions above the limit. The DOB has not yet defined what constitutes a good faith effort.

The first step for compliance is to figure out whether a building’s emissions would meet the imposed caps and to get a sense of what it would take to shrink those emissions. That means investing now in a study and report.

Building owners, condominium and cooperative board, and managing agents can start by reviewing the building’s classification and other relevant information to determine if the building is subject to the law. If the building is subject to Local Law, retaining an energy auditor now to commission a performance study to benchmark the building’s current emissions output and identify whether, based on the building’s current performance, it is anticipated that the building will be in compliance in 2024 and thereafter, is a good idea. This should be done in conjunction with professional management and counsel.

NYC Landlords may no longer be able to use Criminal Background Checks for Tenants – How about Coop and Condo Boards

NYC Landlords may no longer be able to use Criminal Background Checks for Tenants – How about Coop and Condo Boards

A controversial bill prohibiting NYC landlords from performing criminal background checks on prospective tenants – even those convicted of murder and other heinous crimes – is on a fast track to becoming law.

At least 30 of the City Council’s 51 members have agreed to back the “Fair Chance for Housing Act,” which is set to go before the Council’s Committee on Civil Rights for its first public hearing on Dec. 8th. Although there are still hoops to jump through, with the City Counsel support and Mayor Adams pledging to sign the bill into law, it seems as though it is inevitable.

The law doesn’t prohibit landlords from checking New York’s sex offender registry regarding prospective tenants. But the bill’s current language leaves landlords vulnerable to renting to people who committed sex crimes in other states because out-of-state sex offender registries are not addressed. The bill also doesn’t affect New York City Housing Authority complexes and doesn’t apply to two-family homes or homeowners renting out single rooms.

As for coops which are essentially landlords to their proprietary lessee tenants, the law seems to apply to them so far. So using criminal background checked to vet purchasers may not be allowed if the law passes. Condos on the other hand are not landlords/tenants, unless they own units for rent, and as such would not fall within the law, leaving condo boards in a position to continue criminal background checks. This is not law yet, but on the horizon.

Taking a Strong Position on Access Agreement Enforcement is Important

Taking a Strong Position on Access Agreement Enforcement is Important

`

Access agreements are routine in New York City construction. If the agreement is drafted properly with important provisions in the event of default including nonpayment is important. Escrows and upfront payment provisions are helpful as suggested in this article but a well crafted attorney fee provision in favor of the non-breaching party, and other provisions can be the difference between a difficult enforcement and an easy one. Properly crafting these access agreements so that these types of provisions are contained therein is imperative.

People Falling Out of Windows

People Falling Out of Windows

Tragic. It happens in high rises and even in shorter buildings more often than you may realize. When the news picks up the story, instant attention is brought to a building and the board and management need to spring into action and be proactive.

Legal thinkers will immediately assess liability and preventative work that can be done now that it has happened in your building and the board may be on notice of a dangerous condition that should be rectified promptly. The absence of window guards when required is an example. Even when such guards are not legally required in the applicable apartment it’s a good wake up call to take a look and make sure apartments that are supposed to have guards on windows actually have them. That any required notices are being sent and follow up documentation being collected.

Insurance for the coop, condo or HOA needs to be notified. The board has to plan for the worst and be concerned about the possibility of a lawsuit even if the board and management didn’t do anything wrong.

Notification of residents of the event and assuring them that the board and management are on top of it should be considered. How to address or not address the media attention? How to help neighbors in your building cope with the tragedy? How to make sure the attention of the event doesn’t impact the building in any further negative way and how to go on from here? These are all areas that experienced counsel and management can help the board navigate.

Read about the all too often tragedy on the upper east side of Manhattan (https://nypost.com/2022/07/16/nyc-man-falls-to-his-death-while-cleaning-windows-of-his-park-ave-high-rise/). Something as simple as window cleaning leads to tragic fall.

NY Condo’s Can  Now Legally have Owners’ Meetings by Means of Electronic Communication

NY Condo’s Can Now Legally have Owners’ Meetings by Means of Electronic Communication

The Governor signed into law on June 30, 2022, a change to the Real Property Laws that govern New York condominiums. Effective immediately, boards, in their “sole discretion”, irrespective of what the bylaws say, can decide to hold owners meetings solely or partially by “means of electronic communication”. The law says that “the platform/service” is the “place of the meeting” and that boards can decide to hold the owners’ meeting completely by means of electronic communication, or both at a physical place and also using a “platform/service” that allows means of electronic communication. in that case, the board would give the owners an option of participating at the physical place and/or electronically. The law is not effective retroactively. Electronic voting is certainly going to make a world of a difference in condominiums and achieving quorum may not be impossible anymore.

At the end of 2021, the New York Legislature changed the laws allowing business corporations (most coops) and not-for-profit corporations (most HOAs) to have virtual and electronic shareholder and member meetings. Those law changes went a bit further than this Real Property Law change. The BCL and NCL changes also provided that “[m]eetings conducted partially or solely by means of electronic communications in reliance upon this paragraph and any member’s electronic participation in such meetings shall be subject to those guidelines and procedures as the board adopts, provided the board shall implement reasonable measures to: (1) verify that each person participating electronically is a member or a proxy of a member; (2) provide each member participating electronically with a reasonable opportunity to participate in the meeting, including an opportunity to propose, object to, and vote upon a specific action to be taken by the members, and to see, read or hear the proceedings of the meeting substantially concurrently with those proceedings; and (3) record and maintain a record of any votes or other actions taken by electronic communication at the meeting. The law goes on to say that “‘reasonable measures’ with respect to participating in proceedings shall include, but not be
limited to, audio webcast or other broadcast of the meeting and for voting shall include but not be limited to telephonic and internet voting.”

So, unlike most coops and HOAs, condos arguably don’t have to satisfy these additional requirements that the lawmakers left out of the Real Property Law change.

Reasonable Accommodation and Modification Notice Requirement Looming

Reasonable Accommodation and Modification Notice Requirement Looming

The state Legislature passed a law in 2021 that requires qualifying housing providers — including co-op boards and landlords — to provide written notice to their shareholders and tenants of their rights to reasonable accommodations and modifications. The new law also required the New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) to promulgate regulations regarding its notice requirements. It has taken almost a year for the DHR to accomplish this, but they have finally provided their rules.

And the deadline is looming. The notice must be given to existing residents by June 17th, and within 30 days of occupancy for all future residents.

On May 18, 2022, the DHR issued new rules regarding the required written notice that a qualifying “Housing Provider,” (i.e., “owner, lessee, sub-lessee, assignee, or managing agent of, or other person having the right to sell, rent or lease a housing accommodation…”) will have to provide to their existing and new tenants regarding their right to request a reasonable accommodation or modification. As a reminder, a reasonable “accommodation” is a change in rules and policies necessary to afford a person with a disability an equal opportunity to use an apartment, such as permitting emotional support animals in no-pet buildings, or assigning a parking space to a disabled resident who may not be next on the waiting list. On the other hand, a reasonable “modification” is a physical change to the building, such as installing ramps, automatic doors and grab bars.

Housing providers that are required to provide such notice include all co-ops, rental properties and other community associations that are renting out residential housing. For example, a condo board or homeowners association is not subject to the notice requirement — unless it owns a unit and is leasing it for home residency. Commercial tenancies are not included under the notice requirement.

The following are the notice requirements:

• The notice must be in 12-point font (or other easily legible font).

• It must include the telephone number and e-mail address of the property manager or other person responsible for receiving accommodation and modification requests. 

• It may be sent electronically, by email, fax or other means. Links are acceptable provided the notice can be downloaded and printed. 

• It must be posted physically, but posting the notice does not satisfy the requirement to send the notice to all existing and future residents. 

• It may be sent along with other documents, such as leases and application documents. 

• If you have a community website, you must post the notice or a link to it on the homepage of your website.

Manhattan Appeals Court Decides that Attorney and Engineering Fee Reimbursement is Appropriate in RPAPL Section 881 License Matter

Manhattan Appeals Court Decides that Attorney and Engineering Fee Reimbursement is Appropriate in RPAPL Section 881 License Matter

The First Department issued a decision no February 15, 2022, clarifying that reimbursement of engineering and legal fees are appropriate components of consideration ordered by Courts when a building seeks a license to access a neighbor’s building under RPAPL Section 881. Here is the case. The Court ordered that an award of anticipated fees was not correct but that the ones incurred should be awarded. The Court also didn’t like escalating license fees as it saw them as punitive. The Court did modify the order by the lower court regarding the consideration granted and offers clarity for condo and coop boards negotiating license agreements for access with their neighbors in Manhattan. One particular provision the Court changed is not leaving the license open ended but rather limiting it to a period of time. For the condos that were being inconvenienced, it was the unit owners with rooftops or terraces that were being impacted which were awarded the license fees. This was based on a hearing before the lower court. The association as a whole is often impacted generally in addition to specific unit owner impact and thus arguments for a general license fee can be made. It is often helpful to work out an amicable agreement without court intervention but sometimes using the courts is the only way to reach a resolution. Having experienced people handle the negotiations, memorialization in an agreement or battle in court if needed is important.

Eviction got a Little Bit Easier but a Little More Complicated

Eviction got a Little Bit Easier but a Little More Complicated

On August 12, 2021 the United States Supreme Court issued a temporary injunction barring enforcement of Part A of the COVID-19 Emergency Eviction and Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2020 (the “Residential Moratorium”).   In Chrysafis et al. v Marks, 594 U.S. ____ (2021), the Supreme Court held that the Residential Moratorium’s hardship declaration mechanism, which “generally precludes a landlord from contesting th[e] certification [set forth in the signed hardship declaration form] and denies the landlord a hearing . . . violates the Court’s longstanding teaching that ordinarily ‘no man can be a judge in his own case’ consistent with the Due Process Clause,” and as a result enjoined enforcement of the Residential Moratorium. A copy of the ruling is available here. Thus, at least for the moment, residential landlords don’t have to serve the hardship declaration form together with pleadings and predicate notices as the Residential Moratorium had previously required.    However the landscape is still complicated because various New York State legislators have proposed extending the Residential Moratorium to October 31st. Such an extension, if enacted, would likely involve a different moratorium mechanism that complies with the Supreme Court’s ruling by providing some form of hearing in connection with a tenant’s hardship claims. More complication but at least due process. Even if New York State does not extend the Residential Moratorium, New York landlords may be constrained by the application of the federal CDC moratorium, which is also being challenged in court.   

On the commercial front, the COVID-19 Emergency Protect Our Small Businesses Act of 2021 (the “Commercial Moratorium”) contains a hardship declaration mechanism that is virtually identical to that contained in the Residential Moratorium. However, the Commercial Moratorium was not before the Supreme Court and its current status is not clear. Nevertheless, with the Supreme Court’s holding that the hardship declaration mechanism violates due process, it appears certain that the Commercial Moratorium will not be extended beyond August 31 in its current form, if at all.  

The bottom line is that the eviction landscape is still complicated and with politicians trying to make it difficult to evict and court’s moving at a slow pace, landlords need to be careful and aggressive in order to get what they need.

Westchester County Coops have to give a reason now for Rejections

Westchester County Coops have to give a reason now for Rejections

Westchester Coop Boards have new law to deal with. The parade of horrible litigation over rejections could result. A minefield of legal complication for boards and management to navigate.

The new local law amendment requires boards to provide a notice of rejection to the Westchester County Human Rights Commission with 15 days of notifying prospective buyers of a denial. It also requires coop boards to disclose their minimum financial requirements to potential buyers.

https://therealdeal.com/tristate/2021/06/30/westchester-compels-co-op-boards-to-justify-rejection-of-buyers/

  • 1
  • 2
  • …
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • …
  • 10
  • 11

Recent Attorney Publications

  • When Contractors Lack Licenses: Key Lessons for Condos, Co-ops, and HOAs July 25, 2026
  • When Bankruptcy Won’t Stop Your Foreclosure Sale: What Condo Boards and Management Need to Know About Repeat Filers July 22, 2026
  • When Repetitive Filings Cross the Line: Lessons from Fulton v. Yameogo July 21, 2026
  • Condominium Boards: Why Being Aware of First Mortgage “Standing” Can Protect Your Community’s Bottom Line July 13, 2026
  • Winning the Common Charge Battle: How Condo Boards Prevail Against Defiant Unit Owners July 2, 2026

Contact Us

Send us a note and we'll get back to you promptly.

OFFICES

  • Manhattan Office
  • 315 Madison Avenue, Suite 4032, New York, New York 10017
  • 646.880.3000
  • 646.880.3048
  • Westchester Office
  • 44 South Broadway, 21st Floor, White Plains, New York 10601
  • 646.880.3000
  • 646.880.3048
  • Connecticut Office
  • 55 Post Road W, 2nd Floor, Westport, Connecticut 06880
  • 203.349.8100
  • 646.880.3048

Latest Publications

  • When Contractors Lack Licenses: Key Lessons for Condos, Co-ops, and HOAs July 25, 2026
  • When Bankruptcy Won’t Stop Your Foreclosure Sale: What Condo Boards and Management Need to Know About Repeat Filers July 22, 2026
  • When Repetitive Filings Cross the Line: Lessons from Fulton v. Yameogo July 21, 2026
  • Condominium Boards: Why Being Aware of First Mortgage “Standing” Can Protect Your Community’s Bottom Line July 13, 2026

© 2026 Colbert Law LLC Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Highend Logo

Manhattan Office

  • 315 Madison Avenue, Suite 4032, New York, New York 10017
  • 646.880.3000
  • 646.880.3048

Westchester Office

  • 44 South Broadway, 21st Floor, White Plains, New York 10601
  • 646.880.3000
  • 646.880.3048

Connecticut Office

  • 55 Post Road W, 2nd Floor, Westport, Connecticut 06880
  • 203.349.8100
  • 646.880.3048

OUR EXPERTISE

When Contractors Lack Licenses: Key Lessons for Condos, Co-ops, and HOAs

July 25, 2026

A recent NYC Civil Court decision (Fortes v. Decorating and...

When Bankruptcy Won’t Stop Your Foreclosure Sale: What Condo Boards and Management Need to Know About Repeat Filers

July 22, 2026

For condominium boards foreclosing on unpaid common charges,...

When Repetitive Filings Cross the Line: Lessons from Fulton v. Yameogo

July 21, 2026

Community association boards—whether governing condos,...

Condominium Boards: Why Being Aware of First Mortgage “Standing” Can Protect Your Community’s Bottom Line

July 13, 2026

When a condominium unit owner defaults on their monthly...

Winning the Common Charge Battle: How Condo Boards Prevail Against Defiant Unit Owners

July 2, 2026

Condominium boards and property managers face a unique,...

When the Neighbor Builds: What Condo and Co-Op Boards Need to Know

June 29, 2026

Construction in New York City is a fact of life, but when a...

Succession Rights in Limited-Equity Co-ops: Practical Lessons from Mutual Redevelopment Houses v. Manyevitch

June 12, 2026

Succession disputes are among the most sensitive and...

The Post-Settlement Trap: What Fiondella Teaches Co-op Boards About Stipulations and Continuing Habitability Claims

June 9, 2026

For New York cooperative boards and managing agents,...

The Derivative Action Threat: Why “Limited Common Elements” Present Litigation Risks for Condominium Boards and Managers

May 16, 2026

A recent decision by the Appellate Division, First...

Governance and Rule-Making in the Modern Condominium

April 27, 2026

Reflections on 10MSW17D LLC v. Bd. of Managers of 10...

Don’t Delay: Why Timely Enforcement of Common Charges is Critical for Condo Boards

April 15, 2026

A recent decision from the Supreme Court of New York,...

RPAPL § 881 Licenses, and Why Fee Reimbursement Is a Core Deal Term

April 13, 2026

Boards and managers of condominiums, cooperatives, and...

The 432 Park Decision: A Masterclass in Risk Management for New York Condo Boards

April 2, 2026

New York condominium boards and management companies operate...

Protecting Your Building’s Integrity: Lessons from Board of Mgrs. of the 80th at Madison Condominium v. 1055 Madison Ave. Owners LLC

March 31, 2026

As a condominium board member or property manager, your...

Press Enter to search · Esc to close