1 No. 99
Harold Rosenbaum,
Appellant,
v.
City of New York, et al.,
Respondents.
_________________________________________________________________
2001 NY Int. 93
July 5, 2001
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
Peter A. Mahler, for appellant.
Tahirih M. Sadrieh, for respondents.
New York State Land Title Association, amicus curiæ. ROSENBLATT J.:
RPAPL Article 7-A provides a legal means of remedying dangerous
conditions in multi-dwelling apartment buildings. When a court
determines that a dangerous condition exists, it is authorized to
appoint an administrator to oversee rehabilitation of the building.
The 7-A Administrator can borrow money from the New York City Housing
Preservation and Development Agency to finance the repairs. Under the
statutory scheme, the City is able to secure these loans with liens
against benefitted buildings. In this case, we must determine whether
the City created liens enforceable against plaintiff. The subject
property is a 26-unit residential apartment building in the Bronx. In
May 1991, Civil Court found that a dangerous condition existed and
appointed a 7-A Administrator. The Administrator applied to HPD's 7-A
Assistance unit for a loan to rehabilitate the building, and after an
inspection of the premises, HPD approved a $160,000 loan in August
1991. HPD made the loan in increments but did not file in its public
record any purchase or work orders in connection with the loan. The
work was completed by February 1993. In the interim, ownership of the
property changed after a foreclosure sale.
The new owner, Symcam Ltd., held the building until it filed for
Chapter 7 bankruptcy. The trustee then put the premises up for sale.
In July 1993, plaintiff learned that the building was on the market.
He obtained a title report, which contained nothing regarding the 7-A
loan. In August 1993, plaintiff bought the building for $5000.
In May 1994, HPD filed a statement of account with the city collector
for the $160,000 7-A loan. The city collector then asserted liens
against the building in that amount. Plaintiff commenced this action
to discharge the liens, claiming they were void. He also sought
damages. Plaintiff argued that when he bought the building, the liens
SNIPPETS:
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
Tahirih M. Sadrieh, for respondents.
When a court determines that a dangerous condition exists, it is authorized to appoint an
The 7-A Administrator can borrow money from the New York City Housing Preservation and
Under the statutory scheme, the City is able to secure these loans with liens against
we must determine whether the City created liens enforceable against plaintiff.
The Administrator applied to HPD's 7-A Assistance unit for a loan to rehabilitate the
In May 1994, HPD filed a statement of account with the city collector for the $160,000 7-A
The Appellate Division modified, holding that there was a triable issue of fact as to
one-third of the tenants in a given building or the Commissioner of HPD can bring a special
Upon finding that a condition "dangerous to life, health or safety" exists, a Judge can
Section 778 further authorizes the 7-A Administrator to borrow money from HPD "for the
the statute provides that "uch lien shall be enforced in accordance with the provisions of
Subdivision further provides, however, that "no lien created pursuant to this chapter shall
Subdivision requires that HPD file in its own records any purchase and work orders it has
This appeal turns on how and when a 7-A lien is created and when a purchaser is put on notice
Prior to 1974, the City filed mechanics' liens to secure money it spent to repair dangerous
To afford the City greater protection, the City Council enacted section 27-2144, which
the legislation requires the City to place prospective good-faith purchasers on notice of
Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, summary
|
