CONNECTICUT – Connecticut Supreme Court Clarifies Condition Precedent for HOA Foreclosure Actions

DSNEWS.COM:  Connecticut Supreme Court Clarifies Condition Precedent for HOA Foreclosure Actions
By Kendall Baer
August 16, 2016

Adam L. Bendett is President and shareholder of Bendett & McHugh, P.C. He is currently the Managing Attorney for the Connecticut Foreclosure Group and oversees many of the operational functions of the firm.  He has represented lenders and mortgage servicers in mortgage default matters for over 26 years.

On April 26, 2016 the Connecticut Supreme Court issued a decision in The Neighborhood Association, Inc. v. Jill M Limberger, et al, 321 Conn. 29, which held that pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat.  §47-258(m)(1)(C), prior to any foreclosure action of an  homeowners’ association (HOA) commenced on or  after July 1, 2010,  the HOA must have either (1)  had  a vote to authorize the individual foreclosure; or (2) had a collection policy adopted as a rule, with notice to unit owners and a minimum ten day comment period as required under the Conn. Gen. Stat. §47-261(b).  If neither one of these two criteria are met, the HOA lacks subject matter jurisdiction in its foreclosure action. In  Limberger, the HOA’s foreclosure action was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction despite the HOA having adopted a “standard collection policy” because the HOA’s Executive Board had not provided notice to the unit owners prior to adopting the policy pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §47-261(b).

HOW LIMBERGER AFFECTS PENDING AND FUTURE HOA FORECLOSURE ACTIONS

In Connecticut HOAs are given a super-priority lien in the amount of nine months’ worth of common charges and expenses (in addition to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs) over first and second mortgages. Accordingly, an HOA   typically names as a defendant in its foreclosure action the first and second mortgagee of record, in addition to all other subordinate lien holders.  For this reason, a mortgagee will often take title to a property through protecting its interest in the HOA action, by either bidding at the HOA foreclosure action, or more typically, redeeming the priority debt of the HOA on its assigned law date after a judgment of strict foreclosure. This firm has been in conversations with several of the major title insurance companies about how Limberger affects insurability of title for a property acquired through an HOA action.  Two of such companies have confirmed they will insure title if either (1) the HOA specifically pleads in its complaint that it has complied with Conn. Gen. Stat. §47-258(m)(1)(C) ), including, when  applicable, the notice provisions of  Conn. Gen. Stat. §47-261(b); or (2) the HOA executes an affidavit specifically setting forth its compliance with said statutes.  A third title company has responded to date that they will require the affidavit. Therefore, at this time, it is recommended that in pending HOA cases, the mortgagee obtain an affidavit from the HOA’s counsel establishing compliance with Conn. Gen. Stat. §47-258(m)(1)(C) ), including, when  applicable,  the notice provisions of  Conn. Gen. Stat. §47-261(b),  and also confirm, and if necessary, require that  compliance with these statutes are  specifically plead in the HOA complaint  as well.  Read more:

Posted on August 17, 2016, in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Comments Off on CONNECTICUT – Connecticut Supreme Court Clarifies Condition Precedent for HOA Foreclosure Actions.

Comments are closed.