this is just horrible [tenant evicted after landlord loses property in foreclosure]

This is just horrible :frowning: I guess nothing surprises me any more, but I really feel bad for this poor lady and her kids. They shouldn’t be homeless because of their deadbeat maggot landlord’s failure to keep up with the mortgage.

SweetLucy our policy on copyright and fair use prohibits wholesale copying of articles. I’ve cut a big chunk of the article and enclosed the quoted matter in quote tags in order make your post compliant.

I’ve also edited your thread title to make it more descriptive.

Pit Moderator

Unfortunately, as the story suggests, this situation has become pretty common since the mortgage meltdown. We had a thread late last year about the situation in the Chicago area, where the Cook County sheriff actually decided to stop enforcing eviction orders where renters were being thrown out of foreclosed homes.

Personally, i think laws should be passed that make it compulsory for landlords to inform tenants of this situation, and that make a crime for landlords to continue taking rent once they have defaulted on their mortgage.

If they only lived there seven months, it is quite likely (or certain) that the landlord knew this was going to happen in the near future, which makes it more unfortunate for the family. Months go by in bankruptcy events wherein the homeowner stops paying, which is the first step, and all the subsequent steps to bankruptcy and foreclosure sale where the family has to move out. Very sad, and bad faith on the part of the landlord.

The landlords though unfortunately are letting their properties be foreclosed and consolidating their assets. To the best of my knowledge though the law is written so it’s fully legal for them to do so. In this kind of an economic crisis its the big people who take huge hits that are spotted, what isn’t generally noticed till after the big ones go down is all the little people they squashed in their fall. Its a tragedy make no mistake, however its become almost a norm.

Exact same thing happened to us last year. We just found another place.

Did you get your deposit back, at least?

Did you just laugh off an almost 6K security deposit in the process?

Good grief, I missed that part, that’s really terrible. …and yes, we did eventually get our deposit back.

(If she went through a broker, shouldn’t her deposit be in escrow?)

Is it possible for a tenant to find out about such a situation if the landlord doesn’t tell them? Can you just go to the town clerks office and ask? (I suppose you’d have to do that every month to be sure.)

If I were to foreclose on a house I’d inspect the property first.

If the property looked well-maintained, I’d keep the tenant in place rather than have the place sit empty and deteriorate. Having a responsible rent-paying caretaker in the place until the real estate market rights itself would make my property more valuable than a gang-tagged, boarded-up fixer-upper.

I’d make it clear to the tenant that it’s not my intention to own the property more than 18 mos. to 2 years, quote him a purchase price and give him right of first refusal @ lease’s end.
If the market remained in the toilet, I’d offer another year or two lease to the tenant.

Bankers who run off good tenants are not properly managing their shareholders’ assets and should be fired.

I don’t know about Long Island but in New York City tenants rights are so robust that she could extend this from 3 months to more if she chose to fight it.

[Hitchhiker’s Guide]The plans were on display for several months in the sub-basement at the clerk’s office. If you couldn’t be bothered to go and see plans that affected you, that is hardly our concern.[/Hitchhiker’s Guide]


I think they should get bonuses.

Hmmm, that’s not a bad idea, perhaps any mailings they send to the person who pays the mortgage that have to due with past due billing or possible forecloser, should not only go to the owner, but a copy should also be sent to the actual house (Addressed to the renter). Also, maybe there should be a point (non payment for X months) at which the renter can break the contract.

The other what if that I was thinking is…what if when you have a mortgage on a rental property, you would have to put your own house up as collateral. Now I realize that there are a multitude of problems with something like this, but if I’m renting from you and you stop making payments on the house I’m living in, YOU’RE the one that should lose your house, not me. Besides, if the house does go into forecloser, I’d think the bank would be able to find someone who would be able to take it over as a rental property. Either that or landlords maybe should be required to carry some soft or insurance to protect themselves against this.

I just don’t see the big deal here. The lady in the article chose to take certain risks, and lo and behold one roll of the dice came up snake eyes. If she wanted to absolutely secure the right to live in a house on Long Island then she could have bought one. She instead chose to rent. She could have bargained for other protetions (such as that she would pay at least part of the rent to the mortgage company), but she didn’t.

If someone buries landmines in their backyard, it’s hard for me to get all weepy for them if they blow their leg off one day while taking the dog for a walk.

I know lots of people here think I’m an asshole, so if that is all you want to say in reply to this then you can save it, I’m well aware already.

Oh wait. I forgot to take into account that she’s black and rented the house for the children! I take it all back! Oh, my heart aches for this poor, poor, dear woman! Why, I have a couple of extra bedrooms! She and the children could live with me! She must be protected from her own decisions, for she is a female and is black and therefore does not know any better!

Good point. Even so–now, just shy of three months on from moving into our new place, we STILL do not want to pack or unpack, shift furniture, put together boxes, break down boxes, be anywhere near boxes, know that boxes exist, smell boxes…And so on.

But I digress!

Scenarios like that in the OP are one reason why I never liked the idea of renting a house. The owner might have to sell it, rent it to a relative, or live there himself/herself. Granted in most situations there would be some notice. But moving house is like turning an oil tanker! At least when you rent an apartment you can usually keep it as long as you want.

It was a monumental PITA, no doubt, but it would’ve been much, much worse had we bought the place instead of renting it – even if we had lost our deposit. We were there for about 10 months and in that time the value declined by 80K. Now the place is worth over 100K less than the day we moved in. All in all I’d say renting – despite the uncertainty – is much less of a risk than buying right now.

Do I have to get me one of them there tax lawyerin’ degrees to come up with analogies that stupid?

While I think even people who have never read a single post from you in the past would now agree with the bolded portion of the quote, I’m now debating whether that or stupidity reigns supreme in ArrArr Land.

Who gives a flying wad what levels of melanin she has? As for the rest, I wouldn’t wish that punishment on anyone.

What if the tenant’s default in the rent caused the landlord’s default on the mortgage?