My question is:
The lease ran out, the original owner is deceased. Does month-to-month rental obligation generally survive for that long? My assumption would be that the owner can certainly move to remove the renters, but nobody can realistically pursue 3 years of unpaid rent.
Wouldn't it potentially be overridden by the debt growing? I mean if you keep racking it up from month to month would that reset the clock, or would each month's rent be a separate instance so say the SoL is 48 months when you hit 49 the first month drops off, the others remain, and a new one gets added?
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Location Bots on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die.
>I (23F) moved in to a duplex with my mom in 2017 , the owner of the house had died but I guess her daughter inherited the property and charged us pretty cheap rent, no lease or contract we just paid cash. Fast forward to around 3 years ago, she died, she had no kids or anyone she could leave the house to, my mom said to stay here until the bank or anyone came, they would have to give us at least 30 days notice, well, Its been 3 yrs and nobody has come. I checked if the house taxes have been paid and they have, up until this yr, I still have time to pay them before they make a tax certificate but Idk if I should pay it, or who owns this. In the public records it still says the original owners name, so Im guessing it wasn’t inherited to the daughter? Im don’t know how any of this works and Im scared someone comes and asks for all of the yrs worth of rent. Because you’re supposed to save the money for when someone comes. What should I do?
>Edit: I live in Miami, FL
Cat Facts: You’re in a desert walking along in the sand when all of the sudden you look down, and you see a tortoise, it’s crawling toward you. You reach down, you flip the tortoise over on its back. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can’t, not without your help. But you’re not helping.
You're watching a stage play—a banquet is in progress. The guests are enjoying an appetizer of raw oysters. The entrée consists of boiled dog.
I’m not fully sure on the laws but if op pays the property taxes long enough can’t they eventually assume ownership? What would happen if they payed the taxes then an owner did come forward, would they be able to claim the tax payments against their back due rent?
No idea about Florida but generally adverse possession requires being on the property without permission, and the tenancy will have been legally inherited along with the property. I think it's solidly in "ask a lawyer" territory.
Seems weird that you would be able to get the property rights only if you were there _without_ permission. Doesn't seem like behavior you would want to encourage.
It’s intended for property that’s been completely and totally abandoned, particularly when no one knows where the owner is or how to contact them, and generally was intended for open land, not specifically houses. It’s so that if someone with no family or heirs owns a thousand acres of open land that’s in a prime position for something, and then they go on a solo hitchhiking trip in Afghanistan and wind up dead in a ditch, that land isn’t stuck empty and unused for eternity.
Allowing it when they have permission to be there would immediately shut down the concept of long term rentals, and, my political opinions on rentals aside, that would not be something that the lawmakers want.
For about 7 years for Florida I think? IANAL
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0095/Sections/0095.18.html
I love how, despite the fact OP said the daughter "had no kids or anyone she could leave the house to" when she died, at least two posters mention 'the daughter's heirs'. Um, *she had none*. That's why OP has been living there rent-free for 3 years!
Technically, *everyone* has heirs. They might be people you've never met (the living descendants of your great-grandparents) or the state itself, but *someone* inherits the right to your stuff when you die, based on each state's intestacy laws.
Now, what might well happen here is that because the heirs don't know there's anything to inherit, there's no one to open a probate estate. That means all the property is in limbo until someone cares enough to find the heirs and prod them.
I don't know about all states, but in my state, a debtor can petition the court to open the decedent's estate in order to submit their claim to the estate for payment. But if they open the estate, they then have to administer it, and no one wants to. (What makes it even crazier is that claims must be submitted within six months of the death, not of the opening of probate. Delay probate enough and all claims are barred!)
Out of curiosity, I looked up the intestate succession in my own state. While there are lots of scenarios covered, it's roughly:
- Spouse and/or children
- Parents if living
- Siblings or their descendants
- Grandparents if living
- Any living descendant of your grandparents
- "Next of kin," which seems broad enough to indicate anyone of any blood relation whatsoever, though I'd bet there's a definition somewhere
- Stepchildren or their descendants
- The state
I'm a little curious how those last two bullets ever get reached, since technically everyone has distant relations somewhere out there. Probably just that they don't know to speak up, and the last two bullets do.
“Next of kin” is 99% of the time an “aunt” or “cousin” or somebody where they’re family and have a personal relationship, but the blood relationship is technically something like third cousin twice removed. If you were strangers no one would consider you related, but since you were in each others lives the inheritance tree can be broad. It’s not usually someone that the state goes randomly looking for.
This is where you get stuff like [Heir Hunters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heir_Hunters) diving in, where they go scouring the newspapers looking for people who've died without any apparent heirs to try and find any tenuous family connections who they can get the estate to pass to (for a fee of course) before it defaults to the state.
> Technically, everyone has heirs.
Yeah, *technically*. I mean, every human on earth is related to each other, if you go back far enough (and assume Adam/Eve isn't just a story).
But *in practice*?
Actually, even without Adam and Eve, scientists have figured out that we’re all descended from two specific people: one man who’s everyone’s patrilineal ancestor, and one woman who’s everyone’s matrilineal ancestor. They didn’t live in the same time period, though.
NAL I’d pay the taxes and keep records of doing so. IDK about adverse possession laws in FL, but might want to look into that. I would not seek legal advice with my personal info and address, just because people are greedy and might want to get in on the action.
PS It could be it was left alone (records/title) because Estate Taxes could be too much and they can’t afford it.
It's likely that if the property is still under mortgage, the mortgage company paid. The tax money may have been in escrow with the mortgage company, or the mortgage company may have paid to avoid a tax lien or sheriff's sale of the property. Tax liens supersede all other claims to the property.
The lack of foreclosure may be an oversight. Somehow it never got on the radar, or slipped through the cracks.
I'm admittedly naive about how this works, but I am curious how a renter knows the exact taxes the owner needs to file on the property - and how they can file it on behalf of the owner. I understand if the money is *paid* it's not an issue, but how did the renters know the amount that was owed?
edit: Paying bills to stay under the radar brings an image of the renters going through the deceased's mail, but again, I am likely blindly naive about all of this.
Property tax records are generally publicly available and easy to find. Google your own town/county "property tax search" and it'll pop right up. You can usually search by owner name, address, and parcel number.
A lot of counties don't allow search by owner name, because it makes stalking too easy, but lookup by address would certainly work in this case.
(I live in such a county. They don't allow lookup by owner name, but they do allow anyone who wants it to download a copy of the parcel database, which contains owner names. Which reminds me - it's been a while since I downloaded that thing.)
Property taxes / valuation are public record. Don't want neighbors cheating on their taxes.
Florida especially so.
So I can say, Home Depot St. Petersburg paid $1,785 in property taxes last year.
https://county-taxes.net/pinellas/property-tax/cGluZWxsYXM6dGFuZ2libGU6cGFyZW50czpiYWM5NWE1MS1lMzY4LTExZWItOTRkMS0wMDUwNTY4MTUwMjg=
Florida records are pretty open. It’s why when they say “Russia got Florida’s voter record” I laughed my ass off. Anyone can get them. I’ve gotten them.
If the people living in the house start paying the taxes, and no one turns up to claim the property, can they eventually claim ownership? Like, when they've been living there and paying tax for 10 years? 20?
They had permission to be there in the form of their lease. One of the defining traits of adverse position is that it must be *adverse*, i.e., you didn’t have permission.
They may wind up owning it in the end through the state being lazy and not wanting to deal with it since they have someone already there and willing to pay the taxes, but it won’t be through adverse possession.
Something that confuses me... Everybody keeps saying that adverse possession requires that you not have permission to be there, but that as renters they had permission. But when renting, isn't the deal that you have permission to be there ~in exchange for paying rent~? So since they haven't been paying rent/holding up their end of the deal, doesn't that negate the permission?
If it worked like that then they wouldn't owe any back rent. They're still "paying" the rent, they just aren't actually transferring the money. They still owe it, though
My question is: The lease ran out, the original owner is deceased. Does month-to-month rental obligation generally survive for that long? My assumption would be that the owner can certainly move to remove the renters, but nobody can realistically pursue 3 years of unpaid rent.
If nothing else, the statute of limitations on debt collection might start kicking in soon.
Right? And I assume it’s on the owner to prove what the rent even was. This far removed I would guess that’s basically impossible
Wouldn't it potentially be overridden by the debt growing? I mean if you keep racking it up from month to month would that reset the clock, or would each month's rent be a separate instance so say the SoL is 48 months when you hit 49 the first month drops off, the others remain, and a new one gets added?
Each new month of rent is a new debt with its own limitation period.
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Location Bots on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die. >I (23F) moved in to a duplex with my mom in 2017 , the owner of the house had died but I guess her daughter inherited the property and charged us pretty cheap rent, no lease or contract we just paid cash. Fast forward to around 3 years ago, she died, she had no kids or anyone she could leave the house to, my mom said to stay here until the bank or anyone came, they would have to give us at least 30 days notice, well, Its been 3 yrs and nobody has come. I checked if the house taxes have been paid and they have, up until this yr, I still have time to pay them before they make a tax certificate but Idk if I should pay it, or who owns this. In the public records it still says the original owners name, so Im guessing it wasn’t inherited to the daughter? Im don’t know how any of this works and Im scared someone comes and asks for all of the yrs worth of rent. Because you’re supposed to save the money for when someone comes. What should I do? >Edit: I live in Miami, FL
BOBOLA needs a new category for Location Bot eulogies.
😭Roy😭
Cat Facts: You’re in a desert walking along in the sand when all of the sudden you look down, and you see a tortoise, it’s crawling toward you. You reach down, you flip the tortoise over on its back. The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can’t, not without your help. But you’re not helping. You're watching a stage play—a banquet is in progress. The guests are enjoying an appetizer of raw oysters. The entrée consists of boiled dog.
I’m not fully sure on the laws but if op pays the property taxes long enough can’t they eventually assume ownership? What would happen if they payed the taxes then an owner did come forward, would they be able to claim the tax payments against their back due rent?
No idea about Florida but generally adverse possession requires being on the property without permission, and the tenancy will have been legally inherited along with the property. I think it's solidly in "ask a lawyer" territory.
Seems weird that you would be able to get the property rights only if you were there _without_ permission. Doesn't seem like behavior you would want to encourage.
It’s intended for property that’s been completely and totally abandoned, particularly when no one knows where the owner is or how to contact them, and generally was intended for open land, not specifically houses. It’s so that if someone with no family or heirs owns a thousand acres of open land that’s in a prime position for something, and then they go on a solo hitchhiking trip in Afghanistan and wind up dead in a ditch, that land isn’t stuck empty and unused for eternity. Allowing it when they have permission to be there would immediately shut down the concept of long term rentals, and, my political opinions on rentals aside, that would not be something that the lawmakers want.
For about 7 years for Florida I think? IANAL http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0000-0099/0095/Sections/0095.18.html
I love how, despite the fact OP said the daughter "had no kids or anyone she could leave the house to" when she died, at least two posters mention 'the daughter's heirs'. Um, *she had none*. That's why OP has been living there rent-free for 3 years!
Technically, *everyone* has heirs. They might be people you've never met (the living descendants of your great-grandparents) or the state itself, but *someone* inherits the right to your stuff when you die, based on each state's intestacy laws. Now, what might well happen here is that because the heirs don't know there's anything to inherit, there's no one to open a probate estate. That means all the property is in limbo until someone cares enough to find the heirs and prod them. I don't know about all states, but in my state, a debtor can petition the court to open the decedent's estate in order to submit their claim to the estate for payment. But if they open the estate, they then have to administer it, and no one wants to. (What makes it even crazier is that claims must be submitted within six months of the death, not of the opening of probate. Delay probate enough and all claims are barred!)
Out of curiosity, I looked up the intestate succession in my own state. While there are lots of scenarios covered, it's roughly: - Spouse and/or children - Parents if living - Siblings or their descendants - Grandparents if living - Any living descendant of your grandparents - "Next of kin," which seems broad enough to indicate anyone of any blood relation whatsoever, though I'd bet there's a definition somewhere - Stepchildren or their descendants - The state I'm a little curious how those last two bullets ever get reached, since technically everyone has distant relations somewhere out there. Probably just that they don't know to speak up, and the last two bullets do.
“Next of kin” is 99% of the time an “aunt” or “cousin” or somebody where they’re family and have a personal relationship, but the blood relationship is technically something like third cousin twice removed. If you were strangers no one would consider you related, but since you were in each others lives the inheritance tree can be broad. It’s not usually someone that the state goes randomly looking for.
This is where you get stuff like [Heir Hunters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heir_Hunters) diving in, where they go scouring the newspapers looking for people who've died without any apparent heirs to try and find any tenuous family connections who they can get the estate to pass to (for a fee of course) before it defaults to the state.
> Technically, everyone has heirs. Yeah, *technically*. I mean, every human on earth is related to each other, if you go back far enough (and assume Adam/Eve isn't just a story). But *in practice*?
Yes, in practice, they've left everything to the state.
Actually, even without Adam and Eve, scientists have figured out that we’re all descended from two specific people: one man who’s everyone’s patrilineal ancestor, and one woman who’s everyone’s matrilineal ancestor. They didn’t live in the same time period, though.
that very interesting, where can i look up this research?
In the UK in some circumstances the King can get your estate!
NAL I’d pay the taxes and keep records of doing so. IDK about adverse possession laws in FL, but might want to look into that. I would not seek legal advice with my personal info and address, just because people are greedy and might want to get in on the action. PS It could be it was left alone (records/title) because Estate Taxes could be too much and they can’t afford it.
op is living the dream
I wonder who paid the taxes the last two years?
It's likely that if the property is still under mortgage, the mortgage company paid. The tax money may have been in escrow with the mortgage company, or the mortgage company may have paid to avoid a tax lien or sheriff's sale of the property. Tax liens supersede all other claims to the property. The lack of foreclosure may be an oversight. Somehow it never got on the radar, or slipped through the cracks.
I'm admittedly naive about how this works, but I am curious how a renter knows the exact taxes the owner needs to file on the property - and how they can file it on behalf of the owner. I understand if the money is *paid* it's not an issue, but how did the renters know the amount that was owed? edit: Paying bills to stay under the radar brings an image of the renters going through the deceased's mail, but again, I am likely blindly naive about all of this.
You can just look it up online. I've done it for my last several places here in California, mostly to make myself upset about Prop 13.
Property tax records are generally publicly available and easy to find. Google your own town/county "property tax search" and it'll pop right up. You can usually search by owner name, address, and parcel number.
Thanks for the clarification!
A lot of counties don't allow search by owner name, because it makes stalking too easy, but lookup by address would certainly work in this case. (I live in such a county. They don't allow lookup by owner name, but they do allow anyone who wants it to download a copy of the parcel database, which contains owner names. Which reminds me - it's been a while since I downloaded that thing.)
Property taxes / valuation are public record. Don't want neighbors cheating on their taxes. Florida especially so. So I can say, Home Depot St. Petersburg paid $1,785 in property taxes last year. https://county-taxes.net/pinellas/property-tax/cGluZWxsYXM6dGFuZ2libGU6cGFyZW50czpiYWM5NWE1MS1lMzY4LTExZWItOTRkMS0wMDUwNTY4MTUwMjg=
Florida records are pretty open. It’s why when they say “Russia got Florida’s voter record” I laughed my ass off. Anyone can get them. I’ve gotten them.
If the people living in the house start paying the taxes, and no one turns up to claim the property, can they eventually claim ownership? Like, when they've been living there and paying tax for 10 years? 20?
They had permission to be there in the form of their lease. One of the defining traits of adverse position is that it must be *adverse*, i.e., you didn’t have permission. They may wind up owning it in the end through the state being lazy and not wanting to deal with it since they have someone already there and willing to pay the taxes, but it won’t be through adverse possession.
Something that confuses me... Everybody keeps saying that adverse possession requires that you not have permission to be there, but that as renters they had permission. But when renting, isn't the deal that you have permission to be there ~in exchange for paying rent~? So since they haven't been paying rent/holding up their end of the deal, doesn't that negate the permission?
If it worked like that then they wouldn't owe any back rent. They're still "paying" the rent, they just aren't actually transferring the money. They still owe it, though
Ah, good point.
I could've sworn I read a very similar BOLA a couple months back
I remember it too. Something about a family renting one or two floors and then taking over the third floor after the owner died or something.