The seminar highlighting the new FHA changes and regulations was attended by over 150 property managers, trustees, developers and attorneys and viewed by over 400 via webcast.  The seminar was conducted by MEEB's Stephen Marcus along with guest speakers Glenn Montgomery of Brownstone Insurance, Patty Raymo of Mortgage Master, Inc., Orest Tomaselli of National Condo Advisors, Inc. and Philip Sutcliff of Project Support Services.  For a copy of the FHA Guideline click here.  For a copy of materials handed out at the seminar click here. To purchase the video of the presentation and power point slides click here. 

For additional information or questions regarding the new FHA requirements, please contact Stephen Marcus at smarcus@meeb.com.

________________________________________________

SJC RULES ON RIGHT TO CHALLENGE BANK SEIZURES

The SJC recently ruled in Bank of NY v. Bailey, 460 Mass 327 (2011) that in a summary process action a person cannot be evicted post-foreclosure until the bank or lender seeking the eviction makes a prima facie showing that it holds legal title to the property and followed the proper foreclosure procedures. This follows SJC's recent decision in U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Ibanez, 458 Mass 637 (2011).  Ibanez has raised considerable questions regarding foreclosure title due to late recorded or unrecorded mortgage assignments.  The decision is being touted as a major victory for housing rights advocates, who see this as a way to help more people stay in their homes, even if they have not paid their mortgages.  

DISCOVERY RULE APPLIED TO CONDOMINIUM MOLD SUIT

The Appeals Court has ruled that a condominium unit owner's negligence claim, based on alleged toxic mold infiltration resulting from roof leaks, should not have been dismissed as untimely even though her complaint was filed more than three years after the first instance of a leak. The plaintiff unit owner maintained that her negligence claim was tolled by the discovery rule.

The Appeals Court agreed in a case of first impression in Massachusetts, noting that other jurisdictions that have addressed the issue have applied the rule to such cases. "We agree with the foregoing cases that without some indication of a hazardous contamination, the plaintiff could not have been aware that she was being exposed to toxic mold, regardless of when the leak began," Judge Elspeth B. Cypher wrote for a unanimous court. "Contrary to the defendants' argument, it is not a certainty that all water infiltration will eventually evolve into toxic mold," the judge reasoned. "To conclude otherwise would encourage, and possibly even require, a plaintiff to preemptively file suit the moment water starts to infiltrate a dwelling or other building, before any mold or mold-related injury has even occurred."

The case makes it difficult for condominium lawyers to ascertain when (if ever) the statute of limitations on water claims begins to run.  Taken to its logical extreme, this case could allow unit owners to resurrect expired claims, based upon future manifestations of harm (i.e. water to mold), despite the fact that the original cause occurred years ago.  It is possible this issue will be taken up by the Supreme Judicial Court, so stay tuned!

For a copy of the decision click on Doherty v. Admiral's Flagship Condominium Trust.