I thought if you had a valid lease on a property, that lease was binding to all subsequent owners. That is certainly the way commercial leases are treated.
The full story page 2 says:
State officials said that under California law, existing rental agreements are essentially wiped out when a property is foreclosed upon. All that’s required is that a tenant be given at least 30 days’ notice that he or she is being evicted....those officials also said that state law can be trumped by local rent-control statutes, which often provide tenants with more far-reaching protections.
“I thought if you had a valid lease on a property, that lease was binding to all subsequent owners. That is certainly the way commercial leases are treated.”
Generally true, but a foreclosure can wipe out a lease and the whole concept doesn’t apply at all to a month-to-month tenancy. A tenant can stage some kind of legal fight to preserve a lease on a fork’ed property and I am not sure how such a fight would be adjudicated. It’s also entirely up in the air as to how a tenant in the cited situation would or could recover any security deposit.
The mortgage is usually placed on the property before it is encumbered with the lease.
If you sell the property to statisfy the mortgage, the lease is still in effect.
On the other hand if the lender forecloses on the mortgage, they take precence over the lease since it was in place prior to the lease.
At that point the lender can evict if they want to as the lease is no longer valid.
Most times the lender wants the property vacant since it is MUCH easier to sell a vacatnt property than one with renters in it. (No matter how good the tenants are!)
The mortgage is usually placed on the property before it is encumbered with the lease.
If you sell the property to statisfy the mortgage, the lease is still in effect.
On the other hand if the lender forecloses on the mortgage, they take precence over the lease since it was in place prior to the lease.
At that point the lender can evict if they want to as the lease is no longer valid.
Most times the lender wants the property vacant since it is MUCH easier to sell a vacatnt property than one with renters in it. (No matter how good the tenants are!)
Depends on your state laws. In CA, a "month to month" rental without a specified term does not carry over to a new owner. It is an agreement between the original parties only.
I listened to Handel on the Law....he said in a foreclosure your lease in null and void in CA. He did say they have to serve you in court to throw you out on your ass though...(Unlawful Detainer) and you can drag it out for at least a month
generally, yes. Title is typically conveyed with existing restrictions, ie. lease.
But in a foreclosure situation, there is literally nobody to make payments to. Literally. Hard to believe, but it’s true. Banks have so little idea of how to manage real estate that it is almost implausible that they lend money on them.
The guy could go find another house to rent even better and even cheaper as more homes become available which need to be rented since there are not enough potential owners. This is a rentor bull market essentially.
It is.