Rich SF residents shock: Someone bought their street (San Francisco: sales, rent)

[MinervaPallasAthena]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Nope. I salute this couple for sticking it to the people that caused the Bay Area to become so expensive.

The people living on that street didn't cause this. The growth of the high tech sector and incoming techies did.

[Hal Roach]

When you play the tax sale game, the object is to find the most valuable property you can...common sense. You could literally spend years finding one like this. How many evictions were there yesterday? How many foreclosures? How many repossessions? Virtually none were illegal or reverseable. If the City reverses the deed, they would be admitting a huge mistake, and they will be the ones taken to the cleaners. It is no longer a matter of 90,000$, but a matter of what x square feet of prime land in SF is worth. I would guesstimate...non-buildable private street would be 200 dollars PSF. A parking space is worth 100,000..easily.

[phantompilot]

Originally Posted by Perma Bear

Nope. I salute this couple for sticking it to the people that caused the Bay Area to become so expensive.

You're delusional or confused. This couple ARE the people that caused this area to be expensive.

-immigrants
-foreign investor

Guilty on both counts.

[phantompilot]

Originally Posted by MinervaPallasAthena

The people living on that street didn't cause this. The growth of the high tech sector and incoming techies did.

Its really just immigration. The high tech sector was here long before this place got overran with foreigners.

[bmw335xi]

And to be fair without wealthy people paying a fortune in taxes for schools, welfare programs and pretty much everything else... all the complaining free loaders wouldnt be able to get all their subdized services.

[Hal Roach]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

And to be fair without wealthy people paying a fortune in taxes for schools, welfare programs and pretty much everything else... all the complaining free loaders wouldnt be able to get all their subdized services.

Agreed, the immigrants are some of the few people to not know how extortionate taxes and fees are in the golden brown state.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by jade408

It looks like this has happened before in SF:
2nd time unpaid taxes have come back to bite SF

I looked up the homeowners association attorney, Scott Emblidge, and found this article about him. He used to be a Deputy City Attorney, and has been involved with city issues from both sides for many years. Looks like the right man for the job, to let the city somehow save face, but undo this mistake.

Business Partner Spotlight: THE MOSCONE LAW FIRM - Tam High Foundation

I looked up the law, and have been reading it for a couple hours now. It's my opinion, the city didn't give proper notice of the impending auction, as outlined by state law. The city and county tax collectors are governed by state law.

PTLG - Revenue and Taxation Code - Sec. 3701

The law includes reference to a case where a tax collector didn't try to find the owner with reasonable means, prior to selling property at auction. He sent notices, which were returned as undeliverable, and then made no further effort to notify the owner of the impending sale. The California State Court of Appeals ruled that this violated both state law and due process under the US Constitution.

This is the quote from the linked page above, referencing the case:

Construction.—A county's failure to discover the whereabouts of the owner of a parcel of property before proceeding with a state tax sale of the property violated both the due process clause of the United States Constitution and this section where, although the county mailed the owner notice of the pending sale, it did so with full knowledge that the notice would not reach the owner since for a year the county's tax bills had been returned marked "undeliverable". Sinclair & Valentine Company, Inc. v. Los Angeles County, 201 Cal.App.3d 1021. A county's failure to make a reasonable effort to obtain a secured lienholder's last known mailing address before proceeding with its tax sale of the property violated both the due process clause of the United States Constitution and this section. The county's sole reliance on a lot book report, which would not provide notice of documents recorded after the creation of a lien, did not constitute a reasonable effort. Bank of America v. Giant Inland Empire R. v. Center, Inc., 78 Cal.App.4th 1267.


The tax code also says that if the property is sold in error, which can be determined by the Board of Supervisors, the city just refunds the money to the buyers. There's no mention of interest to the buyer.

So, they would have been out their $90,000 for two years for no return. I can't make myself feel sorry for them, though. Buying a property where people know they haven't paid their taxes is one thing, but these guys acted like vultures waiting for something to die.


The only leeway I can give the tax collector's office, is that there was one code about commercial property, where it looked like the tax collector only had to send a notice to the last known address. I'm tired, though, so I don't remember the details. But, the property that was sold was private property. Maybe that's where the city made the error, though? I still think that's a stretch.

[Hal Roach]

I looked at some of the court cases, too. Pretty complicated and varies by State. However, the courts have determined that they cannot undermine the tax sale process as cities need to have a way to collect back taxes. There can't be different enforcement of the law based on economic conditions. There is likely a statute of limitations on how this could be appealed. If it is only two years, then that is another nail. The couple had an attorney, who would have known, and that may explain why they waited. Last known address works for Equalization...then it is confiscation time.


From the State Controller's website. "There is a ONE YEAR statute of limitations to bring an action to overturn a tax sale." "Title companies will generally not issue title insurance until after the statute of limitations has expired.". Perhaps, they now have title insurance. Wouldn't mind seeing a few of them take a bath, either.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Originally Posted by Hal Roach

I looked at some of the court cases, too. Pretty complicated and varies by State. However, the courts have determined that they cannot undermine the tax sale process as cities need to have a way to collect back taxes. There can't be different enforcement of the law based on economic conditions. There is likely a statute of limitations on how this could be appealed. If it is only two years, then that is another nail. The couple had an attorney, who would have known, and that may explain why they waited. Last known address works for Equalization...then it is confiscation time.


From the State Controller's website. "There is a ONE YEAR statute of limitations to bring an action to overturn a tax sale." "Title companies will generally not issue title insurance until after the statute of limitations has expired.". Perhaps, they now have title insurance. Wouldn't mind seeing a few of them take a bath, either.

But, the issue keeps coming back to "notice." if a property owner does not know they are in default, nor that there is about to be a sale, nor that there has already been a sale - the clock can't start ticking for the statute of limitations.

People need to know that their property is up for confiscation, and the time frame to redeem it.

One of the things I really love about the law, is that everything boils down to what is "reasonable." If it doesn't sound like what's happening would be reasonable to a reasonable person, then it's probably not fair or in line with the law.

[WizardOfRadical]

I would not mind if Europeans were buying up property, but the bay is just a dumping ground for dirty money from China to get cleaned.