Posted by Brad Crouch on June 08, 2001 at 15:56:44:
_
Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by Don Baker
Posted by Don Baker on June 07, 2001 at 17:18:18:
I recently had a homeowner that I had solicited, who was going into foreclosure contact me. They didn’t have the money to reinstate the loan or file bankruptcy. I told them I could save their house from going into foreclosure and keep it off their credit, in return they would deed the house into my possession and I would get the money to reinstate the loan. He and his girlfriends mother are on the Note and Deed. I had them deed the house to me into a Land Trust and sign all the documents. They were going to move into an apartment at the end of the month (May). I had an investor that I’ve dealt with in the past put up the money to reinstate the loan. We went down to the foreclosure attorneys office on the last day of May and reinstated the loan. When I called the next day to find out when they were going be out, they informed me that they unsuccessful in getting an apartment and didn’t have the money to keep applying. They said that thay also contacted a bankruptcy attorney. They don’t want to move out because they have nowhere to go. Any suggestions on how I should handle this.
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by terryr
Posted by terryr on June 07, 2001 at 23:50:32:
have a hit man get all of them when they are out of the house - less mess that way
Buy them out - Posted by Bob H
Posted by Bob H on June 07, 2001 at 23:03:06:
Your cheapest solution is to pay them to move. Offer to pay their 1st mos. rent on an apt., payable AFTER they have vacated. I would be willing to pay them at least my holding expenses and attorney fees if I had to evict. It may go against your grain to have to pay someone to just do the right thing, but in the long run, it’s your cheapest way out of the problem, and considerably less brain damage than having to evict.
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by JT - IN
Posted by JT - IN on June 07, 2001 at 20:01:13:
Unfortunately, you are learning first hand, why many folks here on the board avise not to put any money into a deal until the Owner has vacated the property.
Now, with the threat of the BK, the trustee could reverse the transfer/sale of the property, and bring the asset back to be preserved for creditors.
You should get an Attorney working on this ASAP ! You are in a very vulnerable position.
JT - IN
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by Don Baker / Texas
Posted by Don Baker / Texas on June 07, 2001 at 17:22:15:
Sorry, I forgot to post the area that this was happening in. This issue is in Dallas, Texas. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by SandyFL
Posted by SandyFL on June 08, 2001 at 07:00:36:
Really?
Don wrote: “I had them deed the house to me into a Land Trust and sign all the documents.”
I believe that means that Don (rather, the trustee) controls the property, and it could not be included in a BK action. Unless they start squawking about it being an unfair sale…I don’t know. I have always heard that a legal real estate transaction needs two things - a contract (he had) and consideration (he paid to catch up the loan). They had an agreement, I am assuming it had something in there about the property being vacated… (didn’t it, Don?) … and if that’s the case, then basically he owns the property, he has tenants who are present in the property without permission, and he can evict.
I would love to see what Piper has to say, or Phil, but either way, JT is right, you need an attorney to cover your back. Let us know how it goes.
SandyFL
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by SandyFL
Posted by SandyFL on June 07, 2001 at 19:40:06:
I once bought a house from a wholesaler and the previous owner’s grandson stayed in there till about the 6th. However my wholesaler had a pitbull lawyer that threatened him with a nasty eviction, and I don’t know what else, and that boy finally moved out.
Basically once they have signed the papers and you’ve had a closing, they have no rights to be in that property and it’s called “unlawful detainer” I think. I am sure the more experienced people here will have more to say about it. But if you don’t have the nerve to deal with them yourself, especially with their practiced pitiful-me-song-and-dance, then hire the services of someone who makes it their specialty.
And good luck!
SandyFL
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by JPiper
Posted by JPiper on June 08, 2001 at 07:26:39:
JT is right…the bankruptcy court could set the sale aside if they determined that there was sufficient equity, or if they determined the transaction was a “fraudulent conveyance”. Most of these subject to deals don’t have the equity to merit this type of concern, but we don’t know the details here. Either way, the borrower would be well advised to include the LOAN in his bankruptcy since it remains his debt, and because in a bankruptcy you’re supposed to include all debts. The fact that the property has been deeded does not remove the debt as you know.
JPiper
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by Brad Crouch
Posted by Brad Crouch on June 08, 2001 at 14:14:01:
Jim,
This brings up something I have been wondering about.
After a loan has been discharged through bankruptcy, isn’t it possible for that loan to be re-instated (prior to foreclosure) by a payment being made on that account?
There must be something in place to keep the lenders from making such a payment in an attempt to avoid the loss through the bankruptcy action, . . . but what about a third party?
Thanks,
Brad
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by SandyFL
Posted by SandyFL on June 08, 2001 at 07:45:09:
Ah - haaaa. Thanks Piper!
Re: Foreclosure Squatter Dilema - Posted by JPiper
Posted by JPiper on June 08, 2001 at 15:34:36:
I was in a deal about a year ago with an owner in bankruptcy. I was making the payments when he was discharged from the Chapter 7. The loan with Bank of America was paid during bankruptcy and afterwards by me. The loan was never delinquent at all…but it was included in the bankruptcy. Never heard a word from them. But the entire time it was in bankruptcy they monitored the situation through the “bankruptcy department”. After discharge it was returned to “regular channels”.
JPiper