[pizzaman]

[quote=threadkiller]That brings up a good point. Does everybody in the house have to be named in the eviction?Roomates?Couldn’t someone just invite a roomate to stay during foreclosure. What if the house was being rented and the tenants had no idea of the foreclosure?Squatting?Adverse possession?OK now everybody let’s play musical house.[/quote]

I had the same question so I did some research and found the following
In some cases when the Sheriff attempts to perform a lockout, a third party will hand a Claim of Right to Possession form to the deputy. This individual will claim to be an occupant of the Premises but was not named in the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit. The Sheriff will immediately stop the lockout until the Court holds a hearing on whether or not the alleged occupant should have been named as a defendant in the lawsuit. The hearing will take place within a week or later if the individual posts 15 days rent.
If the Court decides that the claim is valid, the Court will allow the occupant to become a Defendant in the lawsuit and raise any defenses that could have been raised by the other named Defendants. If the Court decides that the claim is invalid, it will be denied and the Sheriff will be ordered to continue with the lockout as soon as possible. Very often such claims are denied because the “claimant” does not appear at the hearing but there is enough of a delay to buy the Tenants extra time in the Premises.
Tip: The only way to prevent this type of delay is to serve a form with the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit known as a Pre-judgment Claim of Right to Possession. This form gives any unnamed occupant the right to identify himself or herself so that they can be added to the lawsuit before the lockout. The drawback of serving this form is that it delays the case by an additional five days since the unknown occupant has ten days to respond to the Court instead of only five.

[pizzaman]

[quote=threadkiller]That brings up a good point. Does everybody in the house have to be named in the eviction?Roomates?Couldn’t someone just invite a roomate to stay during foreclosure. What if the house was being rented and the tenants had no idea of the foreclosure?Squatting?Adverse possession?OK now everybody let’s play musical house.[/quote]

I had the same question so I did some research and found the following
In some cases when the Sheriff attempts to perform a lockout, a third party will hand a Claim of Right to Possession form to the deputy. This individual will claim to be an occupant of the Premises but was not named in the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit. The Sheriff will immediately stop the lockout until the Court holds a hearing on whether or not the alleged occupant should have been named as a defendant in the lawsuit. The hearing will take place within a week or later if the individual posts 15 days rent.
If the Court decides that the claim is valid, the Court will allow the occupant to become a Defendant in the lawsuit and raise any defenses that could have been raised by the other named Defendants. If the Court decides that the claim is invalid, it will be denied and the Sheriff will be ordered to continue with the lockout as soon as possible. Very often such claims are denied because the “claimant” does not appear at the hearing but there is enough of a delay to buy the Tenants extra time in the Premises.
Tip: The only way to prevent this type of delay is to serve a form with the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit known as a Pre-judgment Claim of Right to Possession. This form gives any unnamed occupant the right to identify himself or herself so that they can be added to the lawsuit before the lockout. The drawback of serving this form is that it delays the case by an additional five days since the unknown occupant has ten days to respond to the Court instead of only five.

[pizzaman]

[quote=threadkiller]That brings up a good point. Does everybody in the house have to be named in the eviction?Roomates?Couldn’t someone just invite a roomate to stay during foreclosure. What if the house was being rented and the tenants had no idea of the foreclosure?Squatting?Adverse possession?OK now everybody let’s play musical house.[/quote]

I had the same question so I did some research and found the following
In some cases when the Sheriff attempts to perform a lockout, a third party will hand a Claim of Right to Possession form to the deputy. This individual will claim to be an occupant of the Premises but was not named in the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit. The Sheriff will immediately stop the lockout until the Court holds a hearing on whether or not the alleged occupant should have been named as a defendant in the lawsuit. The hearing will take place within a week or later if the individual posts 15 days rent.
If the Court decides that the claim is valid, the Court will allow the occupant to become a Defendant in the lawsuit and raise any defenses that could have been raised by the other named Defendants. If the Court decides that the claim is invalid, it will be denied and the Sheriff will be ordered to continue with the lockout as soon as possible. Very often such claims are denied because the “claimant” does not appear at the hearing but there is enough of a delay to buy the Tenants extra time in the Premises.
Tip: The only way to prevent this type of delay is to serve a form with the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit known as a Pre-judgment Claim of Right to Possession. This form gives any unnamed occupant the right to identify himself or herself so that they can be added to the lawsuit before the lockout. The drawback of serving this form is that it delays the case by an additional five days since the unknown occupant has ten days to respond to the Court instead of only five.

[pizzaman]

[quote=threadkiller]That brings up a good point. Does everybody in the house have to be named in the eviction?Roomates?Couldn’t someone just invite a roomate to stay during foreclosure. What if the house was being rented and the tenants had no idea of the foreclosure?Squatting?Adverse possession?OK now everybody let’s play musical house.[/quote]

I had the same question so I did some research and found the following
In some cases when the Sheriff attempts to perform a lockout, a third party will hand a Claim of Right to Possession form to the deputy. This individual will claim to be an occupant of the Premises but was not named in the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit. The Sheriff will immediately stop the lockout until the Court holds a hearing on whether or not the alleged occupant should have been named as a defendant in the lawsuit. The hearing will take place within a week or later if the individual posts 15 days rent.
If the Court decides that the claim is valid, the Court will allow the occupant to become a Defendant in the lawsuit and raise any defenses that could have been raised by the other named Defendants. If the Court decides that the claim is invalid, it will be denied and the Sheriff will be ordered to continue with the lockout as soon as possible. Very often such claims are denied because the “claimant” does not appear at the hearing but there is enough of a delay to buy the Tenants extra time in the Premises.
Tip: The only way to prevent this type of delay is to serve a form with the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit known as a Pre-judgment Claim of Right to Possession. This form gives any unnamed occupant the right to identify himself or herself so that they can be added to the lawsuit before the lockout. The drawback of serving this form is that it delays the case by an additional five days since the unknown occupant has ten days to respond to the Court instead of only five.

[pizzaman]

[quote=threadkiller]That brings up a good point. Does everybody in the house have to be named in the eviction?Roomates?Couldn’t someone just invite a roomate to stay during foreclosure. What if the house was being rented and the tenants had no idea of the foreclosure?Squatting?Adverse possession?OK now everybody let’s play musical house.[/quote]

I had the same question so I did some research and found the following
In some cases when the Sheriff attempts to perform a lockout, a third party will hand a Claim of Right to Possession form to the deputy. This individual will claim to be an occupant of the Premises but was not named in the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit. The Sheriff will immediately stop the lockout until the Court holds a hearing on whether or not the alleged occupant should have been named as a defendant in the lawsuit. The hearing will take place within a week or later if the individual posts 15 days rent.
If the Court decides that the claim is valid, the Court will allow the occupant to become a Defendant in the lawsuit and raise any defenses that could have been raised by the other named Defendants. If the Court decides that the claim is invalid, it will be denied and the Sheriff will be ordered to continue with the lockout as soon as possible. Very often such claims are denied because the “claimant” does not appear at the hearing but there is enough of a delay to buy the Tenants extra time in the Premises.
Tip: The only way to prevent this type of delay is to serve a form with the Unlawful Detainer lawsuit known as a Pre-judgment Claim of Right to Possession. This form gives any unnamed occupant the right to identify himself or herself so that they can be added to the lawsuit before the lockout. The drawback of serving this form is that it delays the case by an additional five days since the unknown occupant has ten days to respond to the Court instead of only five.

[pizzaman]

[quote=jimg111] Just did one today where we got the asset after the sale in February and the tenants stayed until yesterday and we took possession this morning.[/quote]

I’ve been following a house in Murrieta that was sold to the bank at auction in Feb 2008 (not a typo) and the former owners (and others) are still in the house. They have used every legal maneuver known to avoid eviction. The bank at one point even had a writ of possession but when they went to serve it someone else was there with a claim of possession form so there going back to court again later this month. Sad but true.

[pizzaman]

[quote=jimg111] Just did one today where we got the asset after the sale in February and the tenants stayed until yesterday and we took possession this morning.[/quote]

I’ve been following a house in Murrieta that was sold to the bank at auction in Feb 2008 (not a typo) and the former owners (and others) are still in the house. They have used every legal maneuver known to avoid eviction. The bank at one point even had a writ of possession but when they went to serve it someone else was there with a claim of possession form so there going back to court again later this month. Sad but true.

[pizzaman]

[quote=jimg111] Just did one today where we got the asset after the sale in February and the tenants stayed until yesterday and we took possession this morning.[/quote]

I’ve been following a house in Murrieta that was sold to the bank at auction in Feb 2008 (not a typo) and the former owners (and others) are still in the house. They have used every legal maneuver known to avoid eviction. The bank at one point even had a writ of possession but when they went to serve it someone else was there with a claim of possession form so there going back to court again later this month. Sad but true.

[pizzaman]

[quote=jimg111] Just did one today where we got the asset after the sale in February and the tenants stayed until yesterday and we took possession this morning.[/quote]

I’ve been following a house in Murrieta that was sold to the bank at auction in Feb 2008 (not a typo) and the former owners (and others) are still in the house. They have used every legal maneuver known to avoid eviction. The bank at one point even had a writ of possession but when they went to serve it someone else was there with a claim of possession form so there going back to court again later this month. Sad but true.

[pizzaman]

[quote=jimg111] Just did one today where we got the asset after the sale in February and the tenants stayed until yesterday and we took possession this morning.[/quote]

I’ve been following a house in Murrieta that was sold to the bank at auction in Feb 2008 (not a typo) and the former owners (and others) are still in the house. They have used every legal maneuver known to avoid eviction. The bank at one point even had a writ of possession but when they went to serve it someone else was there with a claim of possession form so there going back to court again later this month. Sad but true.

[pizzaman]

Thanks all for weighing in. For whats its worth, the small amount of money I’m going to make on this I made when I bought. Could have flipped it right away at +100k now 9 months later its +70k and that’s after about 30k of improvements. Bottom line maybe 10k to me after all costs. Too little money for all the work but buy selling I can put myself in a position to pick something up later this year when hopefully inventory has picked back up and nobody’s buying. Maybe this time if I can buy under market the market won’t move back to me.

I am having trouble understanding where all the inventory is. Right now in zip 92562 its off over 50% from where it was last year. I understand the concept of shadow inventory but from a practical stand point , at least in the area I track in west Murrieta , I am not seeing houses go back to the bank and then not get listed. The ones I do know of that appear to be shadow inventory all seem to have a story to go with them. For example I have been in touch with one bank about a house that has been on their books for 16 months and it still is not for sale. This would appear to be shadow inventory but in reality they would like nothing more than to sell it. The problem is that as unlikely as this sounds they have been working all this time to evict the former owner who has thrown one legal maneuver after another at them. They have literally been in court for the last year plus. At any rate my plan will fail miserably if the inventory doesn’t start picking up.

TG- I’m with you on the moving thing but at least I’m coming out of single story and can pretty much guarantee I’ll only look at the same as far as rent/purchase. Also I’m reconsidering whether owning land is all its cracked up to be. Although its nice to look at, I found out that acreage costs a lot to maintain in both time and money. I’ve concluded that to own land you have to be rich, retired or retarded and I’m not either of the first two. I think this time I’ll be looking more into the 1/3 to 1/2 acre range.

[pizzaman]

Thanks all for weighing in. For whats its worth, the small amount of money I’m going to make on this I made when I bought. Could have flipped it right away at +100k now 9 months later its +70k and that’s after about 30k of improvements. Bottom line maybe 10k to me after all costs. Too little money for all the work but buy selling I can put myself in a position to pick something up later this year when hopefully inventory has picked back up and nobody’s buying. Maybe this time if I can buy under market the market won’t move back to me.

I am having trouble understanding where all the inventory is. Right now in zip 92562 its off over 50% from where it was last year. I understand the concept of shadow inventory but from a practical stand point , at least in the area I track in west Murrieta , I am not seeing houses go back to the bank and then not get listed. The ones I do know of that appear to be shadow inventory all seem to have a story to go with them. For example I have been in touch with one bank about a house that has been on their books for 16 months and it still is not for sale. This would appear to be shadow inventory but in reality they would like nothing more than to sell it. The problem is that as unlikely as this sounds they have been working all this time to evict the former owner who has thrown one legal maneuver after another at them. They have literally been in court for the last year plus. At any rate my plan will fail miserably if the inventory doesn’t start picking up.

TG- I’m with you on the moving thing but at least I’m coming out of single story and can pretty much guarantee I’ll only look at the same as far as rent/purchase. Also I’m reconsidering whether owning land is all its cracked up to be. Although its nice to look at, I found out that acreage costs a lot to maintain in both time and money. I’ve concluded that to own land you have to be rich, retired or retarded and I’m not either of the first two. I think this time I’ll be looking more into the 1/3 to 1/2 acre range.

[pizzaman]

Thanks all for weighing in. For whats its worth, the small amount of money I’m going to make on this I made when I bought. Could have flipped it right away at +100k now 9 months later its +70k and that’s after about 30k of improvements. Bottom line maybe 10k to me after all costs. Too little money for all the work but buy selling I can put myself in a position to pick something up later this year when hopefully inventory has picked back up and nobody’s buying. Maybe this time if I can buy under market the market won’t move back to me.

I am having trouble understanding where all the inventory is. Right now in zip 92562 its off over 50% from where it was last year. I understand the concept of shadow inventory but from a practical stand point , at least in the area I track in west Murrieta , I am not seeing houses go back to the bank and then not get listed. The ones I do know of that appear to be shadow inventory all seem to have a story to go with them. For example I have been in touch with one bank about a house that has been on their books for 16 months and it still is not for sale. This would appear to be shadow inventory but in reality they would like nothing more than to sell it. The problem is that as unlikely as this sounds they have been working all this time to evict the former owner who has thrown one legal maneuver after another at them. They have literally been in court for the last year plus. At any rate my plan will fail miserably if the inventory doesn’t start picking up.

TG- I’m with you on the moving thing but at least I’m coming out of single story and can pretty much guarantee I’ll only look at the same as far as rent/purchase. Also I’m reconsidering whether owning land is all its cracked up to be. Although its nice to look at, I found out that acreage costs a lot to maintain in both time and money. I’ve concluded that to own land you have to be rich, retired or retarded and I’m not either of the first two. I think this time I’ll be looking more into the 1/3 to 1/2 acre range.

[pizzaman]

Thanks all for weighing in. For whats its worth, the small amount of money I’m going to make on this I made when I bought. Could have flipped it right away at +100k now 9 months later its +70k and that’s after about 30k of improvements. Bottom line maybe 10k to me after all costs. Too little money for all the work but buy selling I can put myself in a position to pick something up later this year when hopefully inventory has picked back up and nobody’s buying. Maybe this time if I can buy under market the market won’t move back to me.

I am having trouble understanding where all the inventory is. Right now in zip 92562 its off over 50% from where it was last year. I understand the concept of shadow inventory but from a practical stand point , at least in the area I track in west Murrieta , I am not seeing houses go back to the bank and then not get listed. The ones I do know of that appear to be shadow inventory all seem to have a story to go with them. For example I have been in touch with one bank about a house that has been on their books for 16 months and it still is not for sale. This would appear to be shadow inventory but in reality they would like nothing more than to sell it. The problem is that as unlikely as this sounds they have been working all this time to evict the former owner who has thrown one legal maneuver after another at them. They have literally been in court for the last year plus. At any rate my plan will fail miserably if the inventory doesn’t start picking up.

TG- I’m with you on the moving thing but at least I’m coming out of single story and can pretty much guarantee I’ll only look at the same as far as rent/purchase. Also I’m reconsidering whether owning land is all its cracked up to be. Although its nice to look at, I found out that acreage costs a lot to maintain in both time and money. I’ve concluded that to own land you have to be rich, retired or retarded and I’m not either of the first two. I think this time I’ll be looking more into the 1/3 to 1/2 acre range.

[pizzaman]

Thanks all for weighing in. For whats its worth, the small amount of money I’m going to make on this I made when I bought. Could have flipped it right away at +100k now 9 months later its +70k and that’s after about 30k of improvements. Bottom line maybe 10k to me after all costs. Too little money for all the work but buy selling I can put myself in a position to pick something up later this year when hopefully inventory has picked back up and nobody’s buying. Maybe this time if I can buy under market the market won’t move back to me.

I am having trouble understanding where all the inventory is. Right now in zip 92562 its off over 50% from where it was last year. I understand the concept of shadow inventory but from a practical stand point , at least in the area I track in west Murrieta , I am not seeing houses go back to the bank and then not get listed. The ones I do know of that appear to be shadow inventory all seem to have a story to go with them. For example I have been in touch with one bank about a house that has been on their books for 16 months and it still is not for sale. This would appear to be shadow inventory but in reality they would like nothing more than to sell it. The problem is that as unlikely as this sounds they have been working all this time to evict the former owner who has thrown one legal maneuver after another at them. They have literally been in court for the last year plus. At any rate my plan will fail miserably if the inventory doesn’t start picking up.

TG- I’m with you on the moving thing but at least I’m coming out of single story and can pretty much guarantee I’ll only look at the same as far as rent/purchase. Also I’m reconsidering whether owning land is all its cracked up to be. Although its nice to look at, I found out that acreage costs a lot to maintain in both time and money. I’ve concluded that to own land you have to be rich, retired or retarded and I’m not either of the first two. I think this time I’ll be looking more into the 1/3 to 1/2 acre range.

[Author]

Posts