IN A FORECLOSURE PROCEEDING, IT IS AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE THAT PLAINTIFF BANK FAILED TO COMPLY WITH 24 CFR 203.604 BY HOLDING A MEETING BEFORE ACCELERATING THE DEBT (SECOND DEPT).

The Second Department, reversing Supreme Court in this foreclosure action, determined the bank’s motion for summary judgment should not have been granted because plaintiff did not demonstrate compliance with 24 CFR 203.604 which requires a meeting before acceleration of the debt:

… [T]he plaintiff moved, among other things, for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendant, to strike the defendant’s answer, and for an order of reference. In opposition, the defendant argued that the plaintiff was not entitled to accelerate the debt because it failed to comply with, inter alia, 24 CFR 203.604, a HUD regulation requiring a meeting prior to acceleration. * * *

… [T]he affirmative defense alleging a failure to comply with 24 CFR 203.604 was pleaded with the particularity required by CPLR 3015(a). Here, the plaintiff failed to establish that it complied with that regulation or that it was exempt from complying with it … . Accordingly, the court should have denied those branches of the plaintiff’s motion which were for summary judgment on the complaint … . U.S. Bank N.A. v Ali, 2026 NY Slip Op 05823, Second Dept 10-7-26

Practice Point: Here the bank’s failure to demonstrate it complied with 24 CFR 203.604 by holding a meeting before accelerating the debt precluded summary judgment in this foreclosure action.​​