Tenants rights question. Please help (Chicago: real estate, apartments, foreclosure)

[tedip123]

Hi everyone.

I live in Chicago IL. I have been renting a condo and I have been paying my rent to the Real estate company that helped me find the condo. About 2 years later I get a letter from the association saying that the association obtained the right to collect rent and also had a copy of the order of possession. So we contacted them and signed a month to month lease, and we started paying our rent to them. I few days ago the Sheriff knocked on my door, saying that the apartment is for closure and told me we should apply for relocation assistance, and handed me a letter from Altisource saying that the new owner is Ocwen and that I might be a qualified tenant for relocation assistance. So my question is, should I keep paying the rent to the association? The association never told me that the apartment is for closure. I also haven't received a letter from Ocwen, so I have no idea if they want the property vacant. I don't know who I should be paying the rent to.

[ChicagoMeO]

what about contacting your original landlord that you signed a lease with. If you signed a lease and the lease is not up yet, then i dont see how they can kick you out.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by ChicagoMeO

what about contacting your original landlord that you signed a lease with. If you signed a lease and the lease is not up yet, then i dont see how they can kick you out.

In a foreclosure, the lease can be invalidated. That's how you get kicked out and is one of the little-talked-about risks of renting a property from private parties.

It sounds to me like either you misunderstood something someone told you or they lied to you. If the condo association was actually in possession, then their possession usually makes the foreclosure irrelevant to you because the foreclosure would already have happened in order for the condo association to be in possession of the property. It would also be unusual for the condo association to end up in possession of property unless the owner had no mortgage. If they had no mortgage, then the only two entities that could foreclose are the county, over taxes, or the condo association, over unpaid assessments. If the condo association sued and won possession from the owner, and you had even a month-to-month lease with them, then they can't kick you out without formally ending that lease. If the condo association had possession and then failed to pay the taxes on it, I suppose the county could have gain possession.

Now, if the association simply had the right to collect the rent to cover unpaid assessments, which is a more common scenario, then that's different from possession of the title to the unit itself. That could be part of the confusion.

First step is to contact Ocwen and 1) verify they actually do have title now and 2) whether they want you to move out. If they bought it as an investment they likely will let you stay, although they may raise your rent, which they can do. If they bought it to live in then, well, you have to move. You can fight eviction, which might buy you a few months, but the end result will be the same. If Ocwen wants you to move in less than, say, 2 months, I'd try to negotiate some sort of "incentive" to be paid to you to offset the disruption to your life caused by all the confusion and to give them peace of mind that you will actually move out without fighting them and forcing them to do a formal eviction. The incentive would be promised in writing and would usually be paid immediately on your move-out day. You can request it be paid in cash - be sure you get sign-off that the unit is in acceptable condition when you leave.

It sucks, but, honestly, once you had to send checks to the association that was a HUGE red flag that something was amiss that would end up affecting your life eventually. Now you know if that ever happens again that it's probably time to start looking for a new place.

[Boricua.chic]

I rented an apartment with heat included in April. All I had to pay was rent, cooking gas and electricity. Fast forward to October the heating system which was steam heat / Radiators . Broke and he will be installing individual heating to each apartments. I asked Who will control the heat and he told me we will so I asked him who will be paying for the heat and he told me we will. My question is is that against the law and can he do that without notice? I do don't have a lease. It's month to month

[NealIRC]

Originally Posted by Boricua.chic

I rented an apartment with heat included in April. All I had to pay was rent, cooking gas and electricity. Fast forward to October the heating system which was steam heat / Radiators . Broke and he will be installing individual heating to each apartments. I asked Who will control the heat and he told me we will so I asked him who will be paying for the heat and he told me we will. My question is is that against the law and can he do that without notice? I do don't have a lease. It's month to month

Sounds like the free market. He can't force you to pay for the heat if you don't use it or don't want it.

Seems like you got free heat (which you probably didn't use in the summers) because he paid for it prior. Now he's just making you pay for it on your own if you use it. You don't have a lease so that allows him to.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Boricua.chic

I rented an apartment with heat included in April. All I had to pay was rent, cooking gas and electricity. Fast forward to October the heating system which was steam heat / Radiators . Broke and he will be installing individual heating to each apartments. I asked Who will control the heat and he told me we will so I asked him who will be paying for the heat and he told me we will. My question is is that against the law and can he do that without notice? I do don't have a lease. It's month to month

Even without a written lease, an oral agreement can be legally binding. I assume if they're installing individual heaters that they'll be electric, which could add significant additional cost.

A fair negotiation would be to find out what his cost to provide heat to the building was over an entire year, divide that by the square footage (or some reasonable approximation) and ask for that much of a discount to your rent based on your unit size as a proportion of the total square footage. However, the landlord is unlikely to agree to that because he knows you'd have to sue him to get it enforced and that without a lease it's hard to prove. If you and all the other tenants each had oral agreements and they all agreed that heat was included then you'd probably win in court, but you'd have to sue and it would be a hassle and even if you won you may or may not get legal fees fully awarded.

However, since you don't have a written lease, it also means it's relatively easy for you to move. That may actually be your best option if you really can't afford the extra money for the lease and can find a better place. Of course moving is a pain, too, and I'm guessing if you don't have a lease you're paying below market so you may end up having to pay more that way, too.

If you know the other tenants and there are enough of you and they're all in the same boat, organizing might be effective. The landlord will not want to lose a bunch of tenants at once, especially since he now has a capital outlay for the new heating system. He won't want to discount rent, either, but as a group you'd have better leverage than as individuals.