Re: Eviction halted by tenant’s Bankruptcy - Posted by JohnBoy
Posted by JohnBoy on January 12, 2001 at 08:15:07:
That makes sense to me. I just went through a case like this, only in my case the tenant “had” an option to buy. The only thing is, the tenant’s option had expired a few months prior to filing. The tenant was on a month to month since the option and prior lease had expired. I was told by my attorney and the trustee, another attorney, that I could not do anything without getting a lift of stay before proceeding with any further actions.
I then filed the motion to lift stay, which the BK judge granted immediately without even having a hearing on the matter. The tenant’s attorney then complained to the BK court that this was in violation of his clients rights to just issue a lift of stay without allowing them to respond to the lift of stay. The judge then haulted the lift of stay because the tenant’s attorney had objected claiming the tenant had an option on the property giving the tenant an interest, which they didn’t have since the option had expired. Besides that, the tenant had filed chapter 7 without claiming any interest or intent to secure any interest in the property. Regardless, the judge set a hearing on the matter and had a phone conference with my attorney and the tenant’s attorney. At this point the tenant’s attorney backed off since they had no case or grounds to fight it. But that allowed the tenant to stay in the property another month while this was dragged on longer. By the time I got the stay lifted, his BK was discharged a couple of weeks later and they had abandoned the property.
Goes to show how many morons are out there for attorney’s if what you’re saying is correct. But the way it was explained to me was that it didn’t matter that the tenant wasn’t paying after the filing date since he was still a debtor of mine. I was not allowed to make any contact with them for any reason. So even if I filed a new eviction for new debt after the filing date, I would be making contact with the tenant and that was not allowed, period! I was told I still needed to get a lift of stay before I could file for a new eviction. The BK appointed trustee said I had two choices. Get a lift of stay or just wait 90 days until the BK is over with and discharged. THEN, I could evict and go after the tenant for any monies owed beyond the filing date.
So are you saying both attorney’s were incorrect in telling me I could not take any action for any debt incurred after the filing date without first getting a lift of stay or just waiting until the BK was over with and discharged? It certainly wouldn’t surprise me, but I wouldn’t want to risk creating more problems by taking further action after being told I couldn’t. I need to look into this more.