Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Let's see; prior to 11/07 your sister was both the owner and the borrower, right? Then she transferred the house to you -- probably as a gift, since you don't say you bought it or that she sold it to you.

Here are your problems:

First, the transfer without paying off the lender was probably a violation of a "due on sale or transfer" clause in the loan agreement, if the lender's permission for the transfer wasn't obtained beforehand. That probably caused an acceleration of the loan, and it became due and payable in full in or soon after 11/07.

Second, if the purpose or effect of the transfer of ownership was to "hinder, defraud or delay" a creditor, such as the lender (or any other then-current or then-anticipated creditor of your sister), then there is a strong possibility that the transfer was fraudulent under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, Civil Code section 3439 to 3439.12, and both your sister and you could be liable to the creditor(s) affected, and/or the transfer could be un-done. (The latter is unlikely since the lender has already reacquired the property).

Finally, assuming the loan that was foreclosed was made and recorded prior to the deed from your sister to you, it takes precedence over your deed and you and your ownership are subject to the lien of said loan.

If there were no irregularities in the foreclosure process, the bank now has good title to the house and your presence there is subject to termination by the sheriff after an unlawful detainer action and the bank's obtaining a writ of possession. I can't predict how long that will take because you didn't say whether the unlawful detainer action has been initiated or not, or where it stands.

The plain english for Mr. Whipple's answer is: after the foreclosure sale your title was wiped out. So you don't actually hold title anymore. Technically you are now a squatter in your own home, because you don't own it and you don't have a lease giving you any right to be there.