• 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

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

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

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

Posted by Joseph Colbert, Esq. Boards, Business, Condo Coop HOA, Litigation, Real Estate

When a condominium unit owner defaults on their monthly common charges, the board’s primary tool for recovery is filing and foreclosing on a common charge lien. However, condominium boards routinely run into a frustrating roadblock: the priority of the first mortgage. Under standard real estate law, a bank’s first mortgage typically takes priority over a condo’s common charge lien. Because bank foreclosures can end with the bank taking back the property at auction—or with no surplus funds left over after the bank’s debt is paid—condominiums don’t get paid and have to resort to other tools to recover against the foreclosed unit owner.

But it doesn’t always have to be a dead end.

While challenging a bank’s mortgage priority is not a routine or mandatory requirement for every foreclosure, sophisticated condominium boards should be aware that it is a viable legal possibility. By understanding the mechanics of bank foreclosures and engaging experienced legal counsel, boards can evaluate whether a bank’s claim to primary priority is actually valid, or if the condo’s common charge lien has a chance to step into the winner’s circle.

The Power of Priority: A Possibility Worth Investigating

In a typical foreclosure scenario, a bank’s first mortgage must be satisfied before any junior liens receive a dime. If a unit goes to a foreclosure auction and the sale price doesn’t exceed the bank’s loan amount, there is no “surplus,” and the condominium board doesn’t get back from the foreclosure. There are other ways to get paid but the foreclosed unit is no longer available to secure the unit owner’s debt to the condominium.

However, a mortgage is only enforceable if the entity bringing the foreclosure action has the legal right to do so. In real estate litigation, this is known as standing. To have standing in a mortgage foreclosure action, a bank must prove that it was the actual holder or assignee of the underlying promissory note at the exact moment the lawsuit was commenced.  

Because banks frequently bundle, sell, and transfer mortgages through complex securitization pools, critical paperwork—like the original note, assignments, and powers of attorney—is sometimes misplaced or improperly executed. If a bank files a foreclosure action but cannot prove it legally held the note on day one, its foreclosure can fail. For a condominium board, if a bank cannot establish standing, its priority claim is compromised, opening up the rare but powerful possibility that the condo’s common charge lien could move into the primary position to collect what is owed.

A Lesson from the Courts: U.S. Bank N.A. v. Speller

A decision from the New York Appellate Division, U.S. Bank N.A. v. Speller, perfectly illustrates just how heavily litigated and technically demanding the issue of a bank’s standing can be.  

In the Speller case, U.S. Bank commenced a mortgage foreclosure action against individual unit owners. The defendants raised the affirmative defense that the bank suffered from a lack of standing. The trial court initially agreed with the defendants, taking the drastic step of dismissing the bank’s complaint entirely.  

While U.S. Bank ultimately won on appeal by bringing in meticulous testimony from a third-party note custodian and producing pristine business records to prove they physically possessed the original note at commencement, the case highlights a critical lesson: a bank’s standing is not a foregone conclusion. The bank had to endure a full trial and a subsequent appellate battle just to prove it had the right to foreclose.  

The Crucial Role of Experienced Counsel

Navigating the intersection of condominium law and mortgage foreclosure litigation is highly technical. It is not something a board should look into without guidance, nor is it a strategy to deploy blindly in every case. Instead, this is a tool for your legal arsenal to be evaluated with experienced counsel.

An experienced condominium attorney can help your board by:

Evaluating the Risks and Rewards: Reviewing the bank’s initial filings to look for glaring chain-of-custody gaps or missing note endorsements.

Determining Feasibility: Assessing whether a bank’s potential standing issue is weak enough to warrant a formal legal challenge, ensuring the board does not waste community funds on fruitless litigation.

Protecting the Association’s Interesets: Keeping a watchful eye on the bank’s foreclosure timeline and ensuring the condo is positioned to capture any unexpected surplus if the property does sell.

When a bank takes back a property because there are no external buyers at an auction, the condominium is usually left holding the bag for months or years of unpaid common charges. While you cannot challenge every first mortgage, simply being aware that a bank’s priority depends entirely on its legal standing changes the dynamic. By working closely with experienced counsel to spot these unique opportunities, condominium boards can aggressively protect their communities’ financial health and ensure they aren’t leaving money on the table.

U.S. Bank N.A. v. SpellerDownload
Share

About Joseph Colbert, Esq.

With offices in New York and Connecticut, we are ready to handle your legal needs. We have been representing condo, coop and HOA boards, businesses and individual clients for over twenty five years.

You also might be interested in

Condo, Coop and HOA Boards have to Comply with the Corporate Transparency Act Now or Face Significant Federal Penalties

Condo, Coop and HOA Boards have to Comply with the Corporate Transparency Act Now or Face Significant Federal Penalties

Sep 13, 2024

The Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”) is a federal law that[...]

FROM THE COURT TO THE BOARD – New York Courts Grapple with Condominium Disputes

FROM THE COURT TO THE BOARD – New York Courts Grapple with Condominium Disputes

Feb 9, 2025

New York City’s skyline is dotted with condominiums, each housing[...]

Court gives Wiggle Room for Condo Declaration and Bylaw Amendments Done Incorrectly

Court gives Wiggle Room for Condo Declaration and Bylaw Amendments Done Incorrectly

Dec 4, 2019

Amending condominium declaration and bylaws can be difficult; particularly if[...]

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