Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California
Suing Bank or Fake Owner??... first step?
We wish to sue the bank that owns the foreclosed home next to us.
After nearly a year of untolerable neighbors who have been squatting on foreclosed property, the bank has finally decided to evict. We have harangued them, emailed them, phoned them and it took nearly 5 months for a response. We elicited the help of city officials to put the heat on but, this eviction process is dragging.
We understand they 'intend' to offer a cash-for-keys deal but, we're not sure when. And now Renter's Rights is involved!!
The house was bought using a sub-prime loan $100K over the asking price. The buyer used a false identity, never paid the mortgage and he's now in jail. He intentionally set up this family in the home. They claim not to know him even though they are related.
The neighbors continue their life of drunkeness, non-stop fighting & partying; and we continue to call the police. The bank can't put a legal cap (or can they?) on their activity because they're not really landlords. The tenants pay no rent and act completely entitled.
We're considering suing.
But, we're not sure if it's the bank we sue or the false-owner who's in jail?!
We only wish to restore some peace to our lives. Help
1 Answer from Attorneys
Re: Suing Bank or Fake Owner??... first step?
I have followed your situation and replied in the past. I see this drags on and on, which is unfortunate.
I for one would definetly not want to become involved in this as a litigator, but on the other hand there are plenty of lawyers out there looking for more work. You'll need to be prepared to pay a retainer and thereafter on a monthly billing basis; I doubt anyone would take this kind of case on contingency, as there may be an injunction in sight but no big money damages payoff.
As to whether these people are tenants or not, that probably goes back to whether their original possession of the property was lawful or not. If they came into possession as tenants, guests, owners, etc., their continued possession is probably under the heading of "tenants by sufferance" meaning that the person entitled to possession "suffers" them to remain in possesson. As tenants by sufferance, they are one step above mere trespassers, but are unlawfully in possession if they remain after being given notice to quit, and can be removed through an unlawful detainer lawsuit followed by a writ of possession and action by the sheriff if necessary.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
