InnoVest Resource Management's Foreclosure Forum

Home Discussion Board "Hands-On" Training Title Holding Trust Annual Reunion Speaking Schedule Store Foreclosure Fundamentals Code References 50 State Foreclosure Basics Foreclosure Glossary Foreclosure Statistics 70+ Yrs Interest Rates Fillable Forms Archived Articles Dingbat Retirement Plan Links Contact / Map About Us Home

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Forum Board ] [ FAQ ] Re: Evict Posted by Kristine-CA on November 23, 2009 at 8:22 AM In Reply to: Evict posted by Rick, the Probate Guy on November 21, 2009 at 9:51 AM Rick: there have been pronouncements coming out of Washington (but I can't say whether or not they are yet law), that make the lender getting the properties back at sale honor the lease agreements. I don't know how it applies to 3rd party purchasers. The days of buying at trustee sale with a slam dunk as to getting rid of tenants and/or the previous owner are over. : The tenant's "lease" is most likely subordinate to the foreclosing lender's TD. It would be rare to see a recorded Memorandum of Agreement (as to a lease) in a senior position on residential property. : Therefore, my best guess is that the "lease" claim would have been wiped off by the action of the foreclosure. What would remain is the possessory right like any other 3rd-party holdover tenant. : Anybody else have a different interpretation? Follow Ups: Post a Followup: Name : E-Mail : Subject : Comments: : Rick: there have been pronouncements coming out of Washington (but I can't say whether or not they are yet law), that make the lender getting the properties back at sale honor the lease agreements. I don't know how it applies to 3rd party purchasers. The days of buying at trustee sale with a slam dunk as to getting rid of tenants and/or the previous owner are over. : : The tenant's "lease" is most likely subordinate to the foreclosing lender's TD. It would be rare to see a recorded Memorandum of Agreement (as to a lease) in a senior position on residential property. : : Therefore, my best guess is that the "lease" claim would have been wiped off by the action of the foreclosure. What would remain is the possessory right like any other 3rd-party holdover tenant. : : Anybody else have a different interpretation? [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Forum Board ] [ FAQ ] WWWAdmin 2.0a © 1997 Matt Wright and DBasics Software Company, All Rights Reserved

Information provided by this website is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional advice. Please consult your investment advisor and/or attorney before entering into any transaction. Read our privacy policy.

Copyright © 1997-date("Y"), InnoVest Resource Management
http://www.foreclosureforum.com

InnoVest Resource Management, 4569-A Mission Gorge Place, San Diego CA 92120-4112
(619) 283-5444, Fax (619) 283-5455