Hi Ward,
I actually linked to the court case in my reply, but I see it was hard to tell. It's
BARRY v. OC RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, LLC.
It appears that there was a court decision regarding allowable repair expenses that were added on to the redemption amount, and an appeal which upheld the addition of the expenses. For my purposes, it was also helpful in detailing all of the expenses that we are entitled to make and which would be reimbursable with the redemption amount if the previous owner did attempt to redeem the property. I was not able to find this information anywhere else, only vague references to the redemption amount consisting of the amount paid at the trustee sale. Here is the text I found most interesting...
"Code of Civil Procedure section 729.060, subdivision (a) requires "[a] person who seeks to redeem the property [to] deposit the redemption price with the levying officer who conducted the sale before the expiration of the redemption period." Subdivision (b) of this statute defines the redemption price as "the total of the following amounts . . . . (1) The purchase price at the sale. (2) The amount of any assessments or taxes and reasonable amounts for fire insurance, maintenance, upkeep, and repair of improvements on the property. (3) Any amount paid by the purchaser on a prior obligation secured by the property to the extent that the payment was necessary for the protection of the purchaser's interest. (4) Interest on the amounts described in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) . . . ." In addition, subdivision (c) of Code of Civil Procedure section 729.060 authorizes an offset to the redeeming party for "[r]ents and profits from the property paid to the purchaser or the value of the use and occupation of the property to the purchaser . . . ."]"
and....
"(4) Nor did defendant engage in wrongdoing when it entered the unit. By statute, it had the right "from the time of sale until redemption . . . to enter the property during reasonable hours to repair and maintain the premises . . . ." (Code Civ. Proc., ยง 729.090, subd. (c).) Thus, we reject plaintiff's denial of due process claim.
3. Defendant's Right to Enter and Repair the Unit
Next, plaintiff repeats her argument defendant acted as a trespasser, claiming it failed to contact her before having a locksmith change the locks and then engage a contractor to perform work that prepared the property for sale.
Plaintiff acknowledges Code of Civil Procedure section 729.090, subdivision (c) authorizes the purchaser at a foreclosure sale to enter the property "to repair and maintain the premises . . . ." While this statute limits entry to "reasonable hours" (ibid.), nothing in the statute required defendant to notify plaintiff or seek her cooperation. In addition, when the foreclosure sale occurred the unit was admittedly vacant and plaintiff had not shown any interest in recovering the property.
After entry, defendant began rehabilitating the unit with the intention of reselling it. Contrary to plaintiff's claim, this effort did not alter the unit's intended use.]"
It appears that we would be stretching a bit to put a tenant in the property, but that we have the right to secure the property, pay the taxes and mortgage current, and add those amounts to the redemption total.
Any additional input is appreciated!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/16/2011 01:42PM by reagentmel.
