Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: House occupied by unknown persons no legal or written contract

if the unlawful occupants of your property have no legal claim to the land by virtue of lease, succession in ownership, adverse possession, etc..you are with in your rights to file a trepass to land suit and/or have them lawfully removed by the police department as trepassers. however, if these possessors have been there awhile for per se the statutory period to qualify as adverse possessors ("squatter's rights"), your best move would be to go to court and quiet title in your name alone ASAP. if you would like further assistance or representation, feel free to email more details on your case and how long they have been in possession of your property.

Re: House occupied by unknown persons no legal or written contract

You would have to evict them. There are attorneys that specialize in this type of work, contact one of them and get professional help with this problem.

The law regarding eviction is strictly construed and one mistake can cause you to have to start over again.

Re: House occupied by unknown persons no legal or written contract

In my opinion, there are at least four possible types of lawsuit that might need to be used, each appropriate only under a certain set of facts as to how the parties in possession got there.

First, if and only if the possession is based on a lease or rental agreement of some kind, i.e. a tenancy, the proper action is "unlawful detainer" and if successful, it results in an eviction. The process is quick, often used, and relatively inexpensive.

Second, if as sounds likely from your facts, these occupants are trespassers, the correct action is "ejectment," which despite one answer you received is not the same in procedure or result as an action for trespass. The outcome would resemble eviction, but there are differences, especially in the procedure and cost.

Third and fourth are actions to "quiet title" or "remove cloud on title" which are different from each other and different from the first two. Essentially, they are used to establish ownership or possessory rights by attacking instruments such as questionable deeds or by obtaining judicial determination of disputed or uncertain title. These are less likely to be appropriate here.

Finally, a word about adverse possession. This is a legal doctrine saying, in effect, that after five years have passed, a record owner cannot pursue any legal action against a person in possession where that possession has been open, notorious, hostile and continuous. Usually the party in possession must also have paid the property taxes. The terms such as 'notorious' and 'hostile' have technical legal meanings. The occupants might be able to raise 'adverse possession' as a defense to your suit under any of the above four theories, but it's not too likely, as a guess.

The upshot is you need a local lawyer (who practices real estate law in the county where the house is located) to review all the records and to carry out the requisite action.

The four actions mentioned are the most likely and this is not an exhaustive list of causes of action that could be alleged in a suit.

Re: House occupied by unknown persons no legal or written contract

From the limited facts you've given, it sounds like an unlawful detainer would be appropriate. If they're not making claims to the property other than a right to stay there, unlawful detainer is most often used.