Roberta M. Roy
Two recent occurrences related to properties going into or in foreclosure flew as do red flags to the need for closer tabs on the rules related to the management of foreclosed properties. The first involved a neighbor to the owner the second involved the direct care of a foreclosed owner’s property by a reputedly appointed company. One story occurred in the country, one in the city. Two different national banks were involved.
A Foreclosed House in the Country
A multiple-family on the outskirts of a tiny village in Dutchess County, New York, had been taken over by the bank. As the dead-end on which the house was located was narrow and it was difficult to park in a way that permitted other cars to easily pass, the man next door to the foreclosed property parked on its driveway, in part to lessen the look of the property having been abandoned.
A few days later, a bank representative dropped by and he and the man talked about how having a car parked on the foreclosed property lessened the likelihood of the place being vandalized. So, given that even the bank rep thought it was a good idea, the neighbor–being a good neighbor and happy to keep his vehicle off the road–continued to park in the driveway of the foreclosed property—that is until one morning when the man looked to find that his car was no longer there. It seemed it had been towed some thirty miles south of the village by a man hired not by the bank but by the entity appointed by the bank to keep the property clear of squatters and uninvited vehicles. It was then a representative of this entity that called a more ‘local’ tow truck owner to remove the vehicle.
As it turned out, with an apology, the tow trucker agreed to not charge the full three hundred dollars due him as he knew when he took the car that it was not an abandoned vehicle and had even called the Sheriff’s Department to let them know he was taking it in spite of the fact it had a license plate on it and towing it seemed a bit extreme. Well, the Sheriff’s Department explained, you can’t park on property owned by other people as that would be trespassing so it is perfectly okay if you tow it. Done.
The way it had worked was that the bank had hired an entity from the other side of the New York State to arrange for local providers in the Mid-Hudson Valley to do the Bank’s dirty work. Yet the tow trucker got paid for his time (by the local man not the bank) and the local man, after driving the thirty miles or so and paying the hundred or more dollars demanded, got his car back. None of which involved the appointed caretaker directly. So who is even to say the bank or the appointed entity would be technically liable if for instance in towing the car one of its axles had broken or the transmission fallen out.
A Foreclosed One-Family in the City
Scene change now from country to medium-sized city: A nicely kept one-family house in a pleasant ‘safe’ area in the city was undergoing foreclosure. Winter was coming. Again a large national bank appointed someone from another part of New York State to oversee the preparation of this property. They had been assigned to bleed the heating system and add antifreeze and that completed they were to it shut it off. An excellent plan except when the men showed they jumped from their trucks with hack saws in hand. A neighbor read on the truck that they in did heating and cooling called them. “Wait!” she said. “I have the keys to the house. The owner left them with me for use in case of emergencies. No need to break in.”
So the men took the keys.
Good Management or Vandalism?
In eyeballing the property after the men were done, the neighbor discovered that the men, instead of using the keys to open the locks had used the hacksaws to cut them out. To secure the back door, the workers had added a padlock. To secure the front door, nothing. It swung free in the wind, an invitation to burglars . . . or perhaps even to the same men to return after hours to remove the house furnishings.
The neighbor called the company named on the truck. The men had given her their cards. Whoever answers the phone insisted that padlocks had been placed on all the doors.
Time passed. Later in the day when the neighbor passes the front of the house it is visually quite evident that someone . . . probably one of the same men . . . returned for indeed, unlike the situation soon after they left, now indeed there is a padlock on the front door.
And I cannot help but wonder how many other strange invitations to behaviors bordering on or inviting thievery and vandalism are encourage by this and that national bank to be visited upon the innocent or minimally unwary neighborhoods across these United States. And I am reminded that the problem is probably so large that just determining who is in charge and holding them responsible would be pretty much beyond our simple means.
And I breathe a deep sigh of regret.
And the man who got back his car is just glad it was not damaged.
And the neighbor, who so faithfully kept the keys to keep the neighbor’s house and therefore the neighborhood well, feels a betrayed . . . and just possibly under threat. But her life goes on.
Is there any other choice?
My conclusion: There is a greater need for oversight in the way in which banks and their miscellaneous appointees carry on business in relation to foreclosed properties.
But then who is there to do it? And what else is new?
robertamroy 