LIEB BLOG

Legal Analysts

Thursday, June 16, 2016

How To Renew Your New York State Real Estate License (NYS Salesperson, Broker, Associate Broker)

The Department of State, New York (DOS) regulates NYS Real Estate Licenses. License Renewal must be completed online through the DOS eAccessNY Portal. 
(Trade Organizations / Clubs / Schools DO NOT regulate licensees)

Helpful Tips: Licensees are required to complete 22.5 continuing education credits within a 2 year license renewal period.

New York Real Estate Salespersons and Brokers are regulated by the Department of State, New York (DOS) and are required to complete 22.5 Continuing Education credits within a 2 year license renewal period.  License renewal dates can be found on the New York State Real Estate License (look for license expiration date). 

As of 01/01/2017, Licensed NY Real Estate Salespersons and Brokers must take the following Continuing Education courses in their renewal cycle:

  • 3 Hours of instruction pertaining to Fair Housing and/or Discrimination in the sale or rental of real property or an interest of real property
  • 2 Hours of Agency Disclosure for the initial two-year licensing term and at least 1 hour of Agency Disclosure in subsequent renewal cycles. 
If you are grandfathered in, the new continuing education requirements do not apply.  

  • Draw your attention to this paragraph "The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to any licensed real estate broker who is engaged full time in the real estate business  and who has been licensed under this article prior to July first, two thousand eight for at least fifteen consecutive years immediately preceding such renewal."

When renewing your real estate license through the DOS portal, you will be asked if you have completed your continuing education requirements. If you mistakenly answer "No", the DOS will not renew your license. Instead, answering "No" will automatically prompt an audit. The audit will require you to provide the DOS with all of your original course completion certificates.

Wednesday, June 08, 2016

Brand New Lieb School CE | Deceptive & Misleading Advertising | 3 Credits



Deceptive & Misleading Advertising

Instructor: Andrew Lieb, Esq., MPH

Credits: 3 CE Hours
Date Offered: 7/14/16
Location Offered: Newsday Training in Melville

Summary: This 3 hour real estate brokerage continuing education course maps out the rules to advertise property in the State of New York. Did you know that real estate salespersons, associate brokers and brokers cannot just say whatever they want in real estate advertisements? Moreover, agents can’t be forced by their clients to manipulate the true description of property while marketing. In this course, you will learn that there is no freedom of speech in this regulated industry. In fact, the New York State legislature empowered the Department of State to enforce advertising regulations and such regulations are actually enforced.

After taking this course, you will be able to recite, with precision, the do’s and don’ts of real estate advertising. Instead of passing this integral function off to your team members or 3rd party vendors, you will know the importance of actively managing every aspect of promotion and mastering this craft. You will learn what you can and cannot include in advertisements. We will go over team advertisements, classified advertisements, mail, telephone, websites, e-mail, business cards, signs, billboards, flyers, for-sale signs, photographs, web-based promotion and more.

We will review court cases of deceptive and misleading advertising and you will understand the consequences of such action. We will discuss advertising statutes, regulations and opinion letters from the Department of State so that agents can advertise right up to the limit of what is permissible while complying with the laws of the State of New York.


Friday, June 03, 2016

Fair Housing Initiatives Launched on the Federal and State Levels

Andrew Lieb, Esq. takes a look at the most recent Fair Housing Initiatives.

Click here to read the full article published in The Suffolk Lawyer.

Thursday, June 02, 2016

STAR Credit Program Undergoes Two Critical Changes

The New York State School Tax Relief (STAR) program has changed. Rather than working with the local assessor, as was required in the past, homeowners will now need to register with New York State in order to apply for the program. Additionally, qualifying homeowners will receive a rebate check in the fall of every year rather than receiving a reduction directly on their school property tax bill.

There are two types of STAR benefits:
  • Basic STAR: At least one owner must use the property as a primary residence and the total combined household income of the owners and owners’ spouses who use the property as a primary residence must be $500,000 or less.
  • Enhanced STAR: At least one owner must use the property as a primary residence, all owners must be 65 years or older, and there must be a total combined household income of all owners (not just those who reside at the property) and any owner’s spouse who uses the property as a primary residence of $84,550. All owners do not need to be over the age of 65 if they are spouses, registered domestic partners or siblings so long as at least one owner is at least 65.
Starting this year, qualifying homeowners must register with New York State, which can be done online here or by phone at 518-457-2036, in order to apply for the STAR program. If the homeowners qualify, they will receive their STAR credit as a rebate check each September.

If homeowners are already receiving a STAR exemption and purchased their primary residence prior to May 1, 2014, they do not need to re-register to continue qualifying for the exemption, and they will continue to receive the exemption as a reduction on their school property tax bill. Only those who purchased their primary residence after August 1, 2015 or did not apply before the 2015 STAR application deadline are affected by these changes. 

Homeowners can check your local assessment roll to see if they are already receiving a STAR exemption. Understanding how the STAR credit program works and what changes have been implemented can help save time and money into the future. 

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

New Making Home Affordable Handbook Released: Program to End in 2016

The U.S. Department of Treasury recently released Supplemental Directive 16-04 (Making Home Affordable Program – Handbook for Servicers Version 5.1).  This Supplemental Directive announces the release of Version 5.1 of the Making Home Affordable (“MHA”) Handbook (the “Handbook”).  This newest version of the Handbook consolidates the “sunset” provisions provided by the U.S. Department of Treasury in Supplemental Directive 16-02 (MHA Program Termination and Borrower Application Sunset) and Supplemental Directive 16-03 (MHA Program Termination and Borrower Application Sunset II) into one location for ease of reference.

Distressed homeowners who are facing foreclosure must submit their request for mortgage assistance under the MHA program by December 31, 2016.  After that date, lenders will no longer be required to comply with the MHA guidelines set forth in the Handbook.  This will leave many distressed homeowners with few remaining options and most will face the possibility of foreclosure.

The MHA program was announced in 2009, by the Obama Administration, as a relief to distressed homeowners.  The MHA program’s objective is to provide guidelines to lenders to modify the terms of eligible mortgages so that “at-risk” homeowners would be able to reduce their monthly mortgage payments and to avoid foreclosure.  According to the most recent MHA Program Performance Report, during the last 7 years, the MHA program has only helped 2.5 million of the 7 to 9 million homeowners that were identified as “at-risk” by the Obama Administration in 2009.  This means that the remaining 4.5 to 6.5 million “at-risk” homeowners who do not submit their request for borrower assistance by December 31, 2016, will be faced with foreclosure.

Congress’ decision to abandon the MHA program seems misguided because of the time and resources it has invested in the program.  Most importantly, the termination of the program on December 31, 2016, leaves up to 6.5 million “at-risk” homeowners scrambling to submit requests for assistance of face the possibility of foreclosure. 

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Saving on Real Estate Brokerage Commission

You may think that you can save money in real estate by not using a Buyer’s Agent. On the contrary, it is often argued that there is no savings because the secondary benefits of using a Buyer’s Agent surpass any costs of such a Buyer’s Agent. Nonetheless, the only factor that can actually save you money in brokerage commission in a real estate transaction is if it’s a Direct Deal.

Read the full article by Andrew Lieb, Esq. here.

Monday, May 16, 2016

Agency Disclosure Simplified - A Must Read

Finally, an article that simplifies this extremely complicated agency disclosure topic.

Buyer’s Agent. Seller’s Agent. Direct Deal. The terms may sound familiar, but do you or your clients or customers really know what they mean? That knowledge is essential for all sides in real estate dealings, particularly in understanding commissions and not violating license laws.



Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Making Home Affordable Program to End in 2016

The U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury) recently released Supplemental Directive (SD) 16-03 (MHA Program Termination and Borrower Application Sunset II) to the Making Home Affordable (MHA) handbook, containing “sunset” provisions for its MHA program. The release of this Supplemental Directive signals that there will be no further extensions of the program.

The Making Home Affordable program was announced in 2009, by the Obama Administration, as a relief to distressed homeowners. The MHA program’s objective is to provide guidelines to lenders to modify the terms of eligible mortgages so that “at-risk” homeowners would be able to reduce their monthly mortgage payments and to avoid foreclosure. According to the most recent MHA Program Performance Report, during the last 7 years, the MHA program has only helped 2.5 million of the 7 to 9 million homeowners that were identified as “at-risk” by the Obama Administration in 2009. This means that the remaining 4.5 to 6.5 million “at-risk” homeowners who do not submit their request for borrower assistance by December 31, 2016, will be faced with foreclosure.

SD 16-03 provides the following modifications to the MHA handbook for winding down the program:
  • All borrower requests for assistance under MHA must be submitted by December 31, 2016;
  • On December 1, 2017, MHA Help and the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) Solution Center will no longer accept new cases, nor escalate cases to servicers;
  • All cases that have been escalated prior to December 1, 2017 must be resolved by May 1, 2018;
  • After December 30, 2016, servicers will no longer be required to assign relationship managers to borrowers;
  • Effective May 1, 2018, servicers will no longer be required to follow Section 3 of Chapter 1 of the MHA Handbook; however, the Treasury suggests that servicers continue to follow the best practices that have been established by MHA;
  • After September 1, 2016, servicers are no longer required to satisfy the Reasonable Effort standard set forth in Section 2.2.1 of Chapter II of the MHA handbook; and
  • Servicers will not be required to suspend a scheduled foreclosure sale if a borrower submits an Initial Package after December 30, 2016.
After continuously developing and expanding the MHA program over the last 7 years, it is surprising that Congress has refused to extend its life. Since 2009, the Treasury has issued 5 versions of its MHA handbook and has issued over 80 Supplemental Directives, including SD 16-03, refining the guidance it has provided to participating servicers. Congress’ decision to abandon the MHA program seems misguided because of the time and resources it has invested in the program. Most importantly, the termination of the program on December 31, 2016, leaves up to 6.5 million “at-risk” homeowners scrambling to submit requests for assistance or face the possibility of foreclosure.

Thursday, May 05, 2016

Real Estate Brokerage Regulatory Updates - 5/3/16 NYS Board of Real Estate meeting summary

On 5/3/16 the NYS Board of Real Estate continued its mission of optimizing the regulation of real estate brokers in our state by holding its meeting in NYC, Buffalo and Albany. To remind real estate brokers and salespersons, the public is welcome at these meetings where the public can bring comments from the floor. It's encouraged that Lieb School students attend these meetings to have your voices heard. 

"[T]he Board has general authority to promulgate rules and regulations affecting real estate brokers and salespersons in order to administer and effectuate the purposes of Article 12-A of the Real Property Law."

A complete video of the meeting is available on youtube.

In summary, the following was discussed:

  1. Enforcement activity report;
  2. Equalizing points for salespersons seeking a real estate broker's license for acting on the selling and listing sides of deals;
  3. Updates on the continuing education topics of agency and diversity;
  4. The new broker's curriculum; and
  5. Fair Housing regulations, which were passed.
Most interestingly, the enforcement report claimed that while 317 complaints were fielded by the Department of State from January through April of this year, only 2% were referred to the Administrative Department to pursue charges. Agents should translate that statistic as meaning that while a lot of complaints come into the Department of State, a lot of effort is exerted in weeding out the legitimate complaints from the lot. This is quite reassuring. 

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

10 Secrets to a Perfect Summer Rental

Summer rentals got off to a great start this year, yet there are still people looking to secure that ideal getaway, and there are still East End homeowners who could quickly become landlords for the season. In each issue of Behind the Hedges, I offer insights and information about the legal side of Hamptons real estate. Here’s one that is particularly valuable and bears re-sharing this time of year, when we need to remember: with every great summer rental comes great responsibility. The secret to success for both landlords and tenants is to set clear expectations before the rental period gets underway. If either party has false expectations, the summer can end with anger, arguing and possibly court. Before renting, discuss these topics and then have an attorney draft a lease accordingly.

Read the full article by Andrew Lieb, Esq. in Behind The Hedges.

Mold Licensing Law for Assessment, Remediation, and Abatement

On January 1, 2016 the amended Article 32 of the Labor Law became effective thereby making it “unlawful for any person to engage, advertise or hold themselves out as a mold assessor, remediation contractor, or abatement worker unless they have a valid mold license, issued by the commissioner, for the type of work they will be performing. Individuals who do so may be subject to a civil penalty.”

Read the full article by Andrew Lieb, Esq. in the Suffolk Lawyer.

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Lieb at Law is expanding and searching for a Real Estate Attorney to join the collaborative team!

Real Estate Attorney

Lieb at Law, P.C., is seeking the next Attorney to help raise the bar and lead our profession in a collaborative, inspiring and technologically advanced setting. The firm offers an environment that supports personal and professional growth without micromanagement or dogmatic resistance to fresh and innovative ideas. Driven attorneys who prove their competence are quickly rewarded with responsibility and opportunities beyond that offered for similarly experienced attorneys at major firms. Competence trumps experience and career growth is limited only by your own ability, ambition and desire to learn and evolve. Career advancement includes partner-track.

We are looking for a potential star that is intellectually driven, who does not cut corners, has a fresh approach, thinks outside-the-box and can provide tangible fact-driven support. Our firm motto is ‘no case; no statute; no talk’. This means that fluff will not get you very far at Lieb at Law, P.C. We challenge you to provide supporting anecdotal evidence of why you would thrive in a collaborative firm that consists of 6 Attorneys, 3 Law Clerks, 2 Business Managers and 1 Paralegal.

This role will start off working across all aspects of the firm’s real estate practice inclusive of foreclosure litigation, mortgage default workouts, real estate transactions, landlord / tenant transactions and evictions, land use and business transactions. Then, the candidate is charged with developing their personal niche as their carrier evolves.

This position is located in Center Moriches, which is in Suffolk County within the Riverhead / Westhampton Area. Clients span across Long Island, New York City and Westchester.

Compensation: Commensurate with experience, includes full benefits package.

About The Firm: Lieb at Law’s mission is to serve as an indispensable strategic advisor to our clients, helping to minimize risk while maximizing profitability, and aggressively litigate with leading solutions. The firm’s transactional team ensures that contractual language is driven by qualitative data from the litigation field. Lieb at Law’s work product is a derivative of embracing education and technology. Lieb at Law is fully committed to our technology-based collaborative approach and believes that this operational model drives our success.

Beyond utilizing legal research platforms to enable immediate access to the most recent case law and publications, the firm’s systems include cloud-based file and time management software with additional proprietary programs. As a result, Lieb Attorneys have instantaneous access to client records anywhere, even on their smartphones in court and at closings.


To Apply:
Email Cover Letter, Resume and Salary Requirements to careers@liebatlaw.com



- See more at: http://lawjobs.com/job/real-estate-attorney-center-moriches-new-york-164526#sthash.EkMA9Mye.dpuf

Monday, April 04, 2016

New HUD Guidance - The Intersection of Disparate Impact Discrimination and Criminal Background Checks

Last year, the Supreme Court ruled that disparate impact discrimination claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. For a refresher, read my blog post about the decision here. In sum, landlords may be liable for discrimination if the effect of a facially neutral housing action has a disproportionate impact on a protected class.

Today, the office of general counsel to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development issued a memorandum offering guidance regarding the potential discriminatory effects of taking an adverse housing action against a tenant based upon their criminal history. A link to the memorandum can be found here. The logline for this memorandum is that HUD believes taking an adverse housing action based upon criminal history may constitute discrimination on the basis of race or national origin because of its disparate impact on those protected classes.

The memorandum examines the three-step burden-shifting test a court would analyze in a claim brought by a tenant who alleges they were discriminated based upon their criminal history. The stated purpose of the memorandum is facially neutral, addressing “how the discriminatory effects and disparate treatment methods of proof apply in Fair Housing Act cases in which a housing provider justifies an adverse housing action… based on an individual’s criminal history.” The practical effect of the memorandum, however, is that HUD has armed plaintiff’s attorneys with a new theory of liability that all landlord’s should understand.

The three-step burden-shifting test requires that a plaintiff first prove that the complained of practice has a discriminatory effect. If the plaintiff is successful, the defendant must then prove that the challenged practice has a legally sufficient justification. Finally, if the defendant proves a legally sufficient justification, a plaintiff must then prove that there is a less discriminatory alternative available. The HUD memorandum examines each question and attempts to offer guidance in turn.

Discriminatory Effect

HUD submits that national statistics stand for the conclusion that “[n]ationally, racial and ethnic minorities face disproportionately high rates of arrest and incarceration. Without drawing its own conclusion, HUD posits that these statistics, along with other evidence, could provide sufficient proof for the legal position that taking an adverse housing action, such as refusing to enter or renew a lease based upon criminal history, has a disparate impact on African Americans or Hispanics.

Legally Sufficient Justification

If a plaintiff is successful in proving that an adverse housing action on the basis of criminal history has a discriminatory effect on racial or ethnic minorities, a defendant would then be compelled to provide a legally sufficient justification for the action. In analyzing this factor, HUD acknowledges that “resident safety and protecting property are often considered to be among the fundamental responsibilities of a housing provider”. However, HUD does push back by requiring that a defendant submit evidence supporting the conclusion that a policy of discriminating on the basis of criminal history furthers the stated purpose of protecting residents and property. That is, a landlord cannot blindly rely upon this justification in every situation. HUD suggests that landlords consider each potential tenant on a case by case basis instead of having a blanket policy of refusing to lease to anyone with a criminal history

For example, HUD submits that the existence of a prior arrest, which does not carry a subsequent conviction, “has very little, if any, probative value in showing that he has engaged in any misconduct. An arrest shows nothing more than that someone probably suspected the person apprehended of an offense.” HUD concludes that “because arrest records do not constitute proof of past unlawful conduct… the fact of an arrest is not a reliable basis upon which to assess the potential risk to resident safety or property posed by a particular individual.”

Moving further, HUD submits that even a criminal conviction does not automatically create a legally sufficient justification. “A housing provider that imposes a blanket prohibition on any person with any conviction record – no matter when the conviction occurred, what the underlying conduct entailed, or what the convicted person has done since then – will be unable to meet this burden [of proving a legally sufficient justification].” HUD suggests that a “housing provider must show that its policy accurately distinguishes between criminal conduct that indicates a demonstrable risk to resident safety and/or property and criminal conduct that does not.”

Less Discriminatory Alternative

If a landlord proves a legally sufficient justification for the challenged policy or act, the plaintiff may still prevail by proving that a less discriminatory alternative exists. Here, HUD offers no substantiated guidance but submits that the analysis must be performed on a case by case basis. The only suggestion proffered by HUD is that a landlord may consider delaying a criminal history investigation until after a tenant has already qualified financially.

Conclusion

In the end, HUD has taken an aggressive position that all landlords must remain cognizant of when making housing decisions. When forming a policy of utilizing criminal background checks, a landlord should ensure that their policy is “tailored to serve the housing provider’s substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest and take[s] into consideration such factors as the type of the crime and the length of the time since conviction.” A landlord who has no evidence that its policy or action is grounded in nondiscriminatory justification will be vulnerable to complaints. 

At the very least, HUD has made it clear that blanket prohibitions on any person with a criminal history will face legal challenges based upon the Supreme Court’s upholding of the disparate impact theory of discrimination.

Monday, March 28, 2016

Top 10 Real Estate Laws of 2015

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Notice to all Real Estate Brokers and Salespeople from the Department of State, New York

Monday, March 14, 2016

Real Estate Brokerage Regulatory Updates - 2/26/16 NYS Board of Real Estate meeting summary

On 2/26/16 the NYS Board of Real Estate continued its mission of optimizing the regulation of real estate brokers in our state by holding its meeting in NYC, Buffalo and Albany. To remind real estate brokers and salespersons, the public is welcome at these meetings where the public can bring comments from the floor. It’s encouraged that Lieb School students attend these meetings to have your voices heard. 

"[T]he Board has general authority to promulgate rules and regulations affecting real estate brokers and salespersons in order to administer and effectuate the purposes of Article 12-A of the Real Property Law."

A complete video of the meeting is available on YouTube.

In summary, the following was discussed:
The following pending regulations have moved forward and have one more required round of approval prior to being published in the State Register for public comment:


Pending Regulations:
1) Commingling of principal funds
2) Compensation of brokers
3) Additional license safety course
4) Changing the amount of hours from a course from 60 minutes required to 50 minutes required
5) Advertising regulations
6) Updates to the broker approval course

Next, the meeting shifted to a focus on Fair Housing in furtherance of the Governor's Fair Housing Initiative from February of this year. In support thereof, 19 NYCRR 175.17 was proposed to be amended and unanimously approved by vote. The new amended regulation will both broaden the protected classes to include all Federal, State, and Locally Protected Classes and clarify that a violation of Fair Housing, as determined by any local agency or a court of competent jurisdiction, shall be presumptive evidence of untrustworthiness in real estate brokerage wherein the Department of State may revoke a license. 

In all, the meeting's apparent goal was to increase awareness and enforcement of Fair Housing, to alert agents about upcoming educational awareness and outreach planned by the Department of State, and to renew the State's focus and attention onto discrimination through a collaboration between the Department of State and the Department of Human Rights.