Facing foreclosure? Petroff Amshen LLP is a New York consumer rights and foreclosure defense law firm. We find the defense in your file and take it to court.
Free case review. Confidential. Representation is by application.
Quick AnswerIn a Decision and Order filed October 7, 2026, Justice Naita A. Semaj of the Supreme Court, Bronx County, granted our client summary judgment dismissing the foreclosure complaint of Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, the loan servicer that brought the case. Ocwen's own papers showed that the 90-day pre-foreclosure notice went to our client and the other borrower in a single envelope, and the court held that this "fails to comply with RPAPL 1304." Ocwen's own motion, for summary judgment, a default judgment against the defendants who had not appeared and a referee, was denied as academic. Petroff Amshen LLP represented our client.
Ocwen sued our client and others to foreclose in the Supreme Court, Bronx County. Ocwen moved for summary judgment against our client, which would have decided the case in its favor without a trial. It also wanted a default judgment against the defendants who had not appeared and a referee to compute the amount it claimed was due. Our firm opposed all of it.
In our experience, summary judgment is the usual way banks win foreclosure cases. A referee's appointment is the next step toward a sale. That is where Ocwen was trying to take this case.
New York won't let a lender start a foreclosure on a home loan until it has mailed a 90-day pre-foreclosure notice under RPAPL 1304. The lender has to prove it followed the statute to the letter. Close doesn't count.
When a loan has two borrowers, the appellate courts have said that mailing the notice in one envelope addressed to both of them doesn't comply. The Second Department said so in Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Yapkowitz, and the First Department, whose decisions bind the Bronx courts, followed it in US Bank N.A. v Maioriello.
Ocwen's own submissions showed that's exactly what happened here. The 90-day notice went to our client and the other borrower in a single envelope.
We opposed Ocwen's motion and cross-moved for summary judgment of our own, asking the court to dismiss the complaint because Ocwen hadn't strictly complied with the notice law. Every piece of proof we needed came from Ocwen's paperwork.
Ocwen pushed back with an affirmation opposing our cross-motion and a reply memorandum of law. The envelope was still the envelope.
Justice Naita A. Semaj agreed with us. "Mailing the 90-day notice in a single envelope addressed to both borrowers fails to comply with RPAPL 1304," the court wrote. "To maintain a residential mortgage foreclosure action, plaintiff must demonstrate its strict compliance with the requirements of RPAPL 1304."
Because our client had "successfully demonstrated that plaintiff failed to comply," the court held that our client was "entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint." Ocwen's own motion was denied as academic.
In a Decision and Order filed October 7, 2026, the Supreme Court, Bronx County:
From the court's Decision and Order filed October 7, 2026.
The record, in order: what the law requires, what we argued, and what the court held on each point.
When a borrower raises the 90-day notice, the lender has to prove, as part of its own case, that it followed RPAPL 1304 to the letter. If its own papers show it did not, the borrower can ask the court to dismiss the complaint. That is what we did here.
The court relied on US Bank N.A. v Maioriello, a 2022 First Department decision, which cited Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Yapkowitz, a 2021 Second Department decision. The First Department's decisions bind the Bronx courts.
Ocwen and our client each asked for summary judgment. Once the court granted our client's cross-motion and dismissed the complaint, Ocwen's motion had nothing left to decide, so the court denied it as academic.
Courts hold lenders to strict compliance with the 90-day notice law. The proof usually sits in the lender's own motion papers, in the affidavit of mailing and the copies of what was sent. If your loan has two borrowers, such as spouses or a parent and child, check whether each of you got a notice of your own.
It's easy to assume the bank's paperwork must be in order. After all, the bank has the lawyers and the forms. Don't assume it. In this case the defense was sitting in the papers Ocwen filed to win.
I could not recommend a better group than Petroff Amshen. If you find yourself in a situation that requires the assistance of attorneys, this is the firm.
After years of battling in court, thousands of dollars in legal fees, and quite a few subpar attorneys, we found Petroff and Amshen, who delivered winning results. They're incredibly easy to talk to, making the whole legal process feel less intimidating.
An effective firm with a minimum of fuss. When you need attorneys who actually do the work, you need these guys on your side.
Petroff Amshen does not take every case. Submit the application and a licensed New York attorney will review the matter directly. The case review is free and confidential.