Nassau County Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Brown struck down Nassau County’s $355 fee to verify a property’s section, block and lot due to it being unlawful and unconstitutional.

In Falk v. Nassau County, the Plaintiff alleged that Nassau County excessive fees for tax map certification letters (TMCLs) as issued pursuant to Nassau County Administrative Code § 6-33.0. These TMCLs are issued by the Nassau County Department of Assessments and must be filed with real property documents when submitted to the Nassau County Clerk for recording. Plaintiff alleged that the fees are excessive and not reasonably necessary to maintain the County’s real property registry and such fees are taxes as their purpose really is for general revenue. In this regard, the Plaintiff sought a declaratory judgment deeming Administrative Code § 6-33.0 unconstitutional because it is excessive and an unlawful tax.

Among other reasons, the court granted the Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and found the TMCL fees unconstitutional as it was established that its purpose was for general revenue purposes only and that the fee itself is “indisputably disproportionate to the cost associated with its issuance.” Further, the Court found that they are excessive and not tied to the County’s responsibility in maintaining its property registry nor were such fees assessed or estimated on the basis of studies or statistics.

Nassau County is expected to file an appeal to Judge Brown’s decision. Stay tuned.

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, Economic and Security (CARES) Act allows borrowers to request a forbearance on their mortgage. (You can read more about the CARES Act and mortgage forbearance requests in our article HERE.) As bankruptcy filings are expected to rise due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court system implemented a few system changes to their Case Management/Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) Database in relation to borrowers who have requested a forbearance. These changes are effective May 11, 2020.

Specifically, a new bankruptcy event, “Notice of Mortgage Forbearance” was created to docket such event on the CM/ECF database. In addition to clicking such event, a question was also added to ask, “is a Notice of Mortgage Forbearance being filed with this filing?” in relation to established events on Notice of Mortgage Change. This change has been made to prevent filers from choosing the “Notice of Mortgage Change” event when only a forbearance has been obtained.

As the Court works towards streamlining and implementing a more efficient process, readers are advised to contact their counsel to ensure that the Court’s bankruptcy process and its recent changes be followed to a T to prevent any delays or other issues with filings.

In Episode 42, Andrew and Lauren breakdown the cost/benefit analysis of whether you deserve a mortgage modification. We discuss foreclosure lawsuits, mortgage terms and what motivates a modification from your lenders perspective.

Major NEW Fair Housing Regulations are effective June 20, 2020 according to the NYS Board of Real estate meeting that was held on April 27, 2020.

On April 23, 2020, the U.S. Small Business Administration issued new guidance on the Paycheck Protection Program under the CARES Act, specifically concerning the SBA’s position on good faith certifications and limiting PPP funding to public companies.

All applicants and recipients of PPP funds should pay close attention to Question 31 of the SBA Guidance: 

Governor Cuomo has signed Executive Order 202.18 which extends deadlines for condominium offering plans, offering breathing room to developers. The deadlines for the following requirements have been tolled:

• Requirement of filing an offering statement or prospective within 15 months of date of issue of the letter from the attorney general stating that the offering statement or prospectus has been accepted for filing is tolled until May 16, 2020 (see Section 352-eeee(2)(a) of the General Business Law);

• Filing fees required at the time of submission and filing of each offering statement or prospectus also suspended until May 16, 2020 but payment must still be made to the department of law by August 14, 2020 (see Section 352-e(7)(a) of the General Business Law);

• Requirement of Sponsor’s preparation of a budget for the first year of condominium operation is tolled until May 16, 2020. However, the Sponsor must update the first year of operation, as necessary, within 30 days from expiration of Executive Order. The Sponsor shall not be required to offer rescission, to the extent the first year’s budget for operation does not increase by 25% or more during the pendency of the state of disaster emergency (see 13 NYCRR §§ 18.3(g)(1), 20.3(h)(1), 23.3(h)(1)); and

• Rule requiring a sponsor to offer rescission if the first closing of a unit does not occur within first year of operation is tolled until May 16, 2020, but the sponsor must update the first year of operation, as necessary, by June 15, 2020 (see 13 NYCRR § 20.3(o)(12)).

On April 12, employers were ordered to provide their staff with face coverings.

The Executive Order 202.16 provides:

For all essential businesses or entities, any employees who are present in the workplace shall be provided and shall wear face coverings when in direct contact with customers or members of the public. Businesses must provide, at their expense, such face coverings for their employees. This provision may be enforced by local governments or local law enforcement as if it were an order pursuant to section 12 or 12-b of the Public Health Law.  This requirement shall be effective Wednesday, April 15 at 8 p.m.

Employers must get their face coverings now!!!

Interestingly, the order does not require a specific type of face covering so it's conceivable that even a homemade option would satisfy the requirement. However, try to get N95 masks if you can - safety first. 

Do you need Medicaid and can’t wait for a 5-year lookback to qualify?

Then, consider Spousal Refusal, which with the Reverse Rule of Halves, represent 2 options to avoid the 5-year lookback requirements.

Spousal Refusal means that assets are transferred from the Medicaid applicant to such applicant’s spouse (the community spouse or the spouse not receiving Medicaid). Luckily, these transfers of assets to a spouse are exempt from the five-year look back period and thus, don’t trigger a penalty period.

Under Medicaid law, the community spouse can sign a Spousal Refusal which states that the community spouse refuses to make their income and resources available to the Medicaid applicant. This can be done especially when the community spouse may have assets over Medicaid’s allowable recourse limit or in excess of the income allowance.

In New York, Social Services Law §366(3)(a) provides that if the community spouse refuses or fails to provide the applicant with the necessary care and assistance, the medical assistance furnished to the applicant creates an implied contract with the community spouse. The cost of the medical assistance then may be recovered from the community spouse. However, this takes a lawsuit, which is often settled for far less than what was transferred, if the lawsuit is pursued in the first instance. Also, if repayment is pursued, the repayment rate is only based on the Medicaid reimbursement rate, which is significantly less than the private pay rate so there is very little to lose for a spouse to claim Spousal Refusal when they cannot plan in advance of the 5-year lookback.

Regardless, those needing Medicaid often have unique circumstances and everyone should get tailored legal advice on any strategy they seek to pursue before effectuating such strategy.

Medicaid provides a penalty period for the transfer of assets for less than its fair market value within 5-years of an individual’s application for Medicaid. The penalty is calculated by taking the amount of the transfer and dividing it by the average cost of one month of nursing home care in the region where the applicant resides.

A strategy used to maximize an applicant’s excess assets is the Reverse Rule of Halves. Essentially, this strategy allows the applicant to retain at least half of his excess assets and to become eligible for Medicaid sooner. When using this strategy, the Medicaid applicant gives 100% of their excess assets to a family member or multiple members. As this transfer may be a violation of Medicaid’s look back rule, a penalty period of Medicaid ineligibility will result. The family member, however, can return half of the gifted assets in installments back to the Medicaid applicant through a promissory note, so that the penalty period is also cut in half. The applicant, then, can use the returned assets to pay for care during the penalty period.

To utilize this strategy, the assets must be accessible either through a competent individual’s signature, joint ownership, or a Durable Power of Attorney. The return of assets will need to be done through a Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) compliant promissory note. To determine the value of assets that can be preserved with this strategy, the following factors are considered: 

On March 9, 2020, Executive Order 202.6 mandated non-essential businesses to reduce their in-person workforce by 50% and later, by 100%. Today, the Empire State Development (ESD) issued guidance on Executive Order 202.6 to further determine which businesses are considered essential.

What does the ESD Guidance mean for real estate professionals?

Through Executive Order 202.14 and effective from April 7, 2020 to May 7, 2020, the act of witnessing as required in signing a will, healthcare proxy, disposition of remains, recording of instruments regarding real property, power of attorney and living trusts may now be done through audio-video technology.

To do so, the following requirements must be satisfied:

• The person requesting that their signature be witnessed, if not personally known to the witness(es), must present valid photo ID to the witness(es) during the video conference, not merely transmit it prior to or after;
• The video conference must allow for direct interaction between the person and the witness(es), and the supervising attorney, if applicable (e.g. no pre-recorded videos of the person signing);
• The witnesses must receive a legible copy of the signature page(s), which may be transmitted via fax or electronic means, on the same date that the pages are signed by the person;
• The witness(es) may sign the transmitted copy of the signature page(s) and transmit the same back to the person; and
• The witness(es) may repeat the witnessing of the original signature page(s) as of the date of execution provided the witness(es) receive such original signature pages together with the electronically witnessed copies within thirty days after the date of execution.

Similarly, video notarization has been permitted since March 19, 2020 through Executive Order 202.7, which we blogged about HERE.

This is one major step closer to remote real estate closings and estate planning.

Now, the NYS legislature needs to make this permanent and not let Coronavirus innovation be a wasted opportunity.

By Executive Order 202.14, Governor Cuomo has permitted the use of this form for "any parent, a legal guardian, a legal custodian, or primary caretaker who works or volunteers in a health care facility or who reasonably believes that they may otherwise be exposed to COVID-19... [to] designate a standby guardian" for their children:

By Executive Order 202.14, Governor Cuomo enacted new penalties for violating Coronavirus Executive Orders, in addition to what we discussed in our blogs - Penalties for Keeping Your Real Estate Opened in Coronavirus Expanded and What Happens When You Ignore the Essential Services Executive Order. 

The new penalty order states as follows:

The enforcement of any violation of the foregoing directives on and after April 7, 2020, in addition to any other enforcement mechanism stated in any prior executive orders, shall be a violation punishable as a violation of public health law section 12-b(2) and the Commissioner of Health is directed and authorized to issue emergency regulations. The fine for such violation by an individual who is participating in any gathering which violates the terms of the orders or is failing to abide by social distancing restrictions in effect in any place which is not their home shall not exceed $1,000.

You've been warned. 

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, & Economic Security Act (CARES Act), signed into law on 3/27/2020, includes expeditious relief for America's small businesses through loans funded at $349 billion.

According to NYSAR, Empire State Development clarified that "[t]he following functions of real estate and/or realtors (sic) are considered essential: residential home and commercial office showings; home inspections; and residential appraisers."

Now that it's permissible, the question turns to whether real estate salespersons / associate brokers should be conducting showings?

This is the biggest ethical question for real estate brokers today.

Ironically, Lieb School is in the midst of creating a new CE course on ethical business practices, which is a required course for license renewal on and after 7/1/2021. We are now incorporating this situation into the course as a case study for our students to determine their own business ethics in real estate brokerage.

Unlike laws, business ethics refers to appropriate business practices on controversial subjects that are driven by moral concerns. Showing a house during the coronavirus pandemic is a practice that needs to be driven by your moral concerns.

When it comes to morals and values there is not a one size fits all answer to any question. This is the answer that I gave to a friend in response to his text requesting my take on the fact that "realtors were just declared essential services:"

It's not on the empire state development webpage so it's probably a responsive email to a clarification request from NYSAR. We got one today that my law firm can do in- person closings. That being said, we are trying to avoid them at all costs and have our office working remotely. It's good and bad that the clarification was issued. It's good that smart brokers are authorized to help people in need, but it unfortunately gives permission to the idiots in our industry to spread coronavirus and put their lives and the lives of others in jeopardy all for a dollar. I would not show a senior's house if they live there. I would not show an immunocompromised person's house if they live there. I would not do public open houses. I would limit my in-person contact to the extent necessary while always wearing PPE. If not for the business ethics that require it, at least for the fact that I refuse to bring coronavirus to my family. We will get through this, but we must be smart and pick health over money at each turn for money without health is useless. Stay safe my friend.

If you would like to further explore this topic, we have a special guest on our radio show this Sunday at noon on WRCN (FM 103.9) - www.listentolieb.com - iheart.com (LI News Radio).

Stay safe my friends.

On April 2, 2020 we received word from NYS Empire State Development that "[r]eal estate law practices are deemed essential if it is necessary to be in-person to do the work."

COVID-19 uncertainty is causing many people to rethink their wills and advanced directives.

With the acceptance of video notarization, which we blogged about HERE, many attorneys are advertising remote will execution ceremonies that remove the traditional requirement that the testator execute their will in a room with two witnesses and an attorney. The seeming ease of a remote will execution has caused a race to the bottom as attorneys compete on price for business. Things have gotten so desperate that I've seen an attorney advertise a will for $100.00. Is it too good to be true?