[FlaLadyB]

I hear it every day. People calling me saying they have been paying the rent on time only to find out that their landlord is in foreclosure.

WHAT RIGHTS DO THE TENANTS HAVE?

Do they have to continue to pay the rent since they are in a lease even though the owner is no longer paying the mortgage?

Do they have the right to STOP paying rent yet stay there since they are not going to get back their last months rent or their security deposit?

Do they put the rent money in a individual bank account so that the money is actually there, even though they are not paying the owner?

CAN the owner in foreclosure actually EVICT them for non-payment of rent?

What can or does the BANK do...anything? They won't answer the tenants questions since they are not the owners of the property.

WHO has the say so over the tenant, the owner or the bank? Does the bank even KNOW or CARE that someone is living there?

WHAT DO I LEGALLY TELL THESE POOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LOSING EVERYTHING?

CAN I HAVE SOME ACTUAL LEGAL ANSWERS PLEASE?? I would really appreciate it since this is a DAILY problem.

Thank you!!!!

[Lilybeans]

Until the bank actually has title in hand, the owner of the property remains the owner of the property. Filing a foreclosure action does not change title. The tenant still has to continue to pay the rent and the landlord still has the right to evict the tenant for non payment.

The tenant has certain contractual rights, which is why mortgage companies name the tenant as a party in the foreclosure action-to get rid of those rights. If a tenant wants to stay in the property after a foreclosure is filed, they should respond, and it's usually better done with a lawyer.

[FlaLadyB]

What about the landlords who just "disappear" and the fact that most of the time the bank doesn't know, or care, that there is a tenant living there. Many times the tenant receives the mail directed to the owner but doesn't know anything till they get that wonderful "knock on the door". Then what are they supposed to do?

It doesn't seem right that a tenant has to pay an owner that hasn't paid his mortgage yet still expects them to pay him rent. Like double dipping ...and doing it knowingly. It's just wrong.

[Retiredcoach]

Originally Posted by FlaLadyB

What about the landlords who just "disappear" and the fact that most of the time the bank doesn't know, or care, that there is a tenant living there. Many times the tenant receives the mail directed to the owner but doesn't know anything till they get that wonderful "knock on the door". Then what are they supposed to do?

It doesn't seem right that a tenant has to pay an owner that hasn't paid his mortgage yet still expects them to pay him rent. Like double dipping ...and doing it knowingly. It's just wrong.

Lilybeans,

Once again, you are right on with your posts. Your insights are always most informative and accurate.


Flalady,

There is the actual law, and there is emotion surrounding the law. Taking the emotion away, the tenant has signed a binding contract. The landlord and tenant are bound by the terms of the lease. The tenant is responsible to pay the rent, as the landlord is responsible for a habitable rental. Anything on the periphery of the lease has a negligible effect upon this written contract.

[Carbondated]

FlaLadyB,
Here is a link to an article, that may interest you, about the Cook County Sheriff.
Time mag interviews Tom Dart :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Politics (http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/1219936,tom-dart-time-foreclosure-101408.article - broken link)

Here is a quote from the Sheriff.
Why sheriff refuses to evict tenants :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Other Views (http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/1211633,CST-NWS-evict09.article - broken link)

"Where mortgage firms see pieces of paper, my deputies see people. Yet no matter how difficult they are, evictions are part of our job. What isn't part of our job, however, is to carry out work on behalf of the multi-billion-dollar banks and mortgage industries.

Too many times, our deputies arrive at a home to carry out a mortgage foreclosure eviction, only to find a tenant -- dutifully paying their rent each month -- who is unaware their landlord stopped using that rent money to pay the mortgage. They had no fair warning that they were about to be thrown out of their home.

That's because, in many cases, the banks have done nothing to determine, in advance, who's living in the building -- even though it's required by state law. Instead, those banks expect taxpayers to pay for that investigative work for them.

That stops today.

We won't be doing the banks' work for them anymore. We won't surprise tenants with an eviction order intended for their landlord.

I may be held in contempt of court over this. If that's the case, I'm willing to accept it though I believe most judges in Cook County share my desire to find a solution for this mess.

We're asking either the state courts or Legislature to order the banks to simply conduct very basic work before requesting an eviction.

I've come to this point after spending the last year trying to work with the banking industry, even asking the Legislature to pass a bill requiring them to -- at a minimum -- let us know if any children, disabled or senior citizens live at the home, so we can connect them with social services. That effort was killed by banking industry lobbyists.

Until the banking industry steps up and does the right thing, I won't continue to risk violating the law and open taxpayers to further liability."


It looks like only the Sheriff's Department is taking a stand for the hundreds of thousands of renters who are being victimized by landlords.

[Lilybeans]

Originally Posted by FlaLadyB

What about the landlords who just "disappear" and the fact that most of the time the bank doesn't know, or care, that there is a tenant living there. Many times the tenant receives the mail directed to the owner but doesn't know anything till they get that wonderful "knock on the door". Then what are they supposed to do?

It doesn't seem right that a tenant has to pay an owner that hasn't paid his mortgage yet still expects them to pay him rent. Like double dipping ...and doing it knowingly. It's just wrong.

Tenants always know about foreclosures, because they are sered with summonses. At that point they can protect their legal rights, if they want to.

What is going on between the bank and the owner is really none of the tenants business.

[Carbondated]

Originally Posted by Lilybeans

Tenants always know about foreclosures, because they are sered with summonses. At that point they can protect their legal rights, if they want to.

What is going on between the bank and the owner is really none of the tenants business.

I'm not a renter, or a landlord. Nor have I been caught up in this foreclosure mess. But I'm curious, as to how the tenants always know? When neither the bank nor the landlord has any legal obligation to inform the tenant of the foreclosure.

How do tenants protect their legal rights?

I mean, there must be something wrong with landlords and their banks, if the Sheriff of the Chicago area is not going to serve eviction notices on renters. Often renters continue to pay rent to a landlord even though that landlord no longer owns the dwelling.

True, it isn't anyones business what goes on between a mortgagee (the bank) and the borrower (the "owner").

But wouldn't you say it is good business for a renter, to check and see if the landlord has a checkered financial past? That information being available for public consumption on area Property Appraisers websites.

[heydade]

tenants do know....here in south florida, tenants are made aware and are CC'd the lis pendens.

[Muggy]

A tenant may be proactive be querying the county public records database in which they live. I do more research on my landlords than they do me. My current landlord, in addition to awesome, is completely Kosher with all things public.

[Lilybeans]

If there is a foreclosure, tenants and party's in possession are served with the foreclosure papers.