home

Cook County Sheriff Halts Foreclosure Evictions

The Sheriff of Cook County (Chicago) today announced his office will no longer evict people from homes under foreclosure.

many people his office has helped throw out on the street are renters who did nothing wrong.
“We will no longer be a party to something that's so unjust,” a visibly angry Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart said at a news conference.

“We have to be sure that when we are doing this – and we are destroying some people's lives – we better be darned sure we're talking about the right people,” Dart said.

More...

Dart said that from now on, banks will have to present his office with a court affidavit that proves the home's occupant is either the owner or has been properly notified of the foreclosure proceedings.

Dart is believed to be the first Sheriff in the country to institute such a policy.

“My job as sheriff is to follow court orders, absolutely,” he said. “But I'm also in charge of making sure justice is being done here and it is clear that justice is not being done here.”

< Michelle Obama Interview on LKL | TrooperGate Report Out Friday >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Wow. (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by coigue on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 08:37:27 PM EST


    My thoughts exactly. WOW. Maybe this will (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Angel on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 08:40:16 PM EST
    start a trend...

    Parent
    Me three. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by nycstray on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 08:42:17 PM EST
    and I do hope he starts a trend. We need to start dealing with the people as people, not another number.

    Parent
    What does that mean? (2.00 / 1) (#24)
    by BrassTacks on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:57:42 AM EST
    People should get to remain in houses that they aren't paying anything for?  I couldn't agree more.  I can't wait to stop paying my mortgage.  I hope this spreads to everyone, across the country, and we can all ditch our mortgages and our rent!

    Parent
    That was beautiful (5.00 / 0) (#25)
    by blogtopus on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 01:03:17 AM EST
    Can I touch you? Or are you busy stuffing another strawman?

    The sheriff is asking for proof of ownership or that the occupant has been properly notified. Apparently the case is that banks are having people thrown out without notification.

    Yep. These people are paying rent on time, and then boom out of nowhere they have to leave. Sounds fair to me.

    Parent

    We actually just had a situation here (5.00 / 0) (#26)
    by nycstray on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 01:13:54 AM EST
    where a LL was renting out illegal apts (as a renter, not always easy to tell if they are legal). Many families were thrown out of their homes in one day. They paid their rent on the first, couple days later, utilities turned off. Next morning, immediate eviction. Now the city is and was trying to help them with places to stay etc, but still . . . they had to leave that day. I'm sure they would have loved a 30 day notice as hard as that would have been. At least they would have had their rent money they just paid.

    Even though I have disaster plans in place, it would be a whole 'nother story if I was evicted with 1 day, 7 days or even 2 weeks notice. O.M.G.

    Parent

    Nope, no straw involved (1.00 / 1) (#28)
    by BrassTacks on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 01:23:52 AM EST
    The sheriff will no longer serve evictions.  People can continue to stay where they are and not pay rent or mortgage.  The sheriff said so.

    We all live in hope that our local sheriffs will follow the lead of Cook County and there will be no more evictions anywhere in the country and we can all live without paying rent or mortgage.  What could be better?!  

    Parent

    putting your sarcasm aside- (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by kenosharick on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 06:06:56 AM EST
    nothing of the kind will happen. Read the WHOLE article before getting into a right-wing snit.

    Parent
    The Money Quote (5.00 / 0) (#37)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 07:57:25 AM EST
    llinois law requires that renters be notified that their residence is in foreclosure and they will be evicted in 120 days, but Dart indicated that the law has been routinely ignored.

    Interesting.  Illinois, like Florida is a lien theory state which usually means a mortgage is used rather than a deed of trust (I am deliberately dumbing this down). The difference is whether you have a judicial or non-judicial foreclosure. In a judicial foreclosure, the lender goes to court to foreclose. In the one title theory state I practiced in, the lender advertised the sale under strict rules and the only way it went to court was if the homeowner wanted to stop it alleging some defense.

    Here in Florida, we typically name and serve John and Jane Doe summons in foreclosures and send the process server out to serve them on any tenants which may be living there at the time the foreclosure is filed. We also do unknown spouse summons in case the borrower got married since the mortgage loan. I wonder what the "nuts and bolts" practice in Illinois is in this area...

    In normal times, a mortgage foreclosure in Florida could be done in 60 to 90 days, from filing date to sale at the courthouse.  

    These are not normal times, however. Getting a hearing date is problematic in South Florida right now. Judges are granting 90 day sale dates (30 to 60 used to be the norm). The procedure is file the complaint, serve the defendants, wait for the response, if any. Did they allege a defense? Again in normal times, most people write an informal response, e.g. I lost my job and can't pay. That typical response is an admission the debt is owed and not paid and makes the foreclosing parties' life easier. If no response,  motion for default, file the usual affidavits and motion for summary judgment, the MSJ hearing and then sale. You don't want to know how fast it is in a title theory state (lender's paradise), that doesn't have any homeowner protections.

    Another consequence of this crises, is that community associations are losing assessments (here in Florida and anywhere the association is 2nd to the lender's mortgage/deed of trust) and cannot upkeep the common area without assessment hikes. This in turn increases the financial burden on other homeowners in the association, which may be all the push  they need to fall into foreclosure. Services association members pay for are cut, property values plummet, a middle class homeowner's biggest asset is devalued.

    But hey, the market knows all, sees all. Blessed be the name of the market. Deregulation today! Deregulation tomarrah! Deregulation forevah!

    Parent

    from your lips..... (none / 0) (#8)
    by coigue on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 08:51:31 PM EST
    Funnily enough... (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Salo on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 10:14:36 PM EST
    ...I was over at Redsate, and one commentatr was saying how the next step to siocialim was Judges and court officials refusing to evict families.

    I hope that freeper was right, cause I'll take that Gramscian method if it's true.

    Imagine that people with roofs over their heads? The gall.

    Parent

    Roofs that don't belong to them? (1.00 / 1) (#23)
    by BrassTacks on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:56:11 AM EST
    I'm looking forward to not having to pay my mortgage anymore.  Even better would be living rent free in someone else's house!  

    Parent
    redstate (none / 0) (#42)
    by coigue on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 12:13:32 PM EST
    that may be a good place for you to check out.

    Parent
    Bless your heart, (1.00 / 1) (#45)
    by BrassTacks on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 02:23:16 PM EST
    You are still following me around and giving me those precious little 1 and 2 ratings.   Heaven knows, I need all the attention that I can get.  It's always nice to meet a fellow traveler.  

    Parent
    apparently, it's always (none / 0) (#46)
    by coigue on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 02:44:27 PM EST
    nice to throw a fellow trveller out in the street.

    Bless your heart.

    Parent

    I would NEVER throw you out in the street! (1.00 / 1) (#50)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Oct 10, 2008 at 02:03:05 AM EST
    You poor thing, we know you'd never find your way home!  

    Parent
    I am fine thank you very much (none / 0) (#51)
    by coigue on Fri Oct 10, 2008 at 11:04:13 AM EST
    I got out of the market this summer. I am talking about all the other folks in trouble.

    Parent
    The Sheriff from that Palin rally in Florida (5.00 / 0) (#6)
    by steviez314 on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 08:45:35 PM EST
    would probably just shoot the homeowner.

    God save this country from those people.

    Those are the people (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by andgarden on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 08:55:37 PM EST
    who voted for W twice. . .

    Parent
    yes but McCain is different (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by lilburro on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 08:58:15 PM EST
    <snark/"reality">

    Parent
    They might also shoot the sheriff. (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by Salo on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 10:19:30 PM EST
    too.

    Parent
    But what about the deputy? (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by andgarden on Wed Oct 08, 2008 at 10:56:58 PM EST
    BrassTacks: (5.00 / 0) (#27)
    by cpinva on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 01:22:58 AM EST
    poor thing, everyone's ignoring you! here, let me clear up your obvious confusion:

    Only renters have to pay their rent?

    yes, that's why it's called rent, because it's paid by renters.

    But not people with mortgages, right?

    correct. people with mortgages make mortgage payments, they don't pay rent. they aren't renting, they (along with the bank) own the property.

    How did the sheriff's office get eviction notices that were not legal?  

    apparently, some of the court ordered eviction notices contained no proof that the legally mandated notifications, to the renting occupants, had been properly executed, by the plaintif in the case.

    the eviction notices were not perfected. until this is done, they have no standing under law, and the sheriff is legally prohibited from acting on them.

    there ya go buddy! you needn't ask the same inane questions any more. :)


    Sorry I am so dumb (none / 0) (#31)
    by BrassTacks on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 01:29:06 AM EST
    Maybe you can tell me when I can stop paying my mortgage and not have to worry about eviction?  

    Thank you.

    Parent

    After you've paid it off, of course. (5.00 / 0) (#33)
    by nycstray on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 02:10:17 AM EST
    Rather obvious, eh?

    Parent
    He's not the first sheriff to try to do (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by scribe on Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 03:16:52 AM EST
    something.  Back in April the Sheriff of Philadelphia, Pa. (Philadelphia County and the City of Philadelhia share physical boundaries but are, legally speaking, separate governmental entities) announce he would no longer hold forelosure sales on houses with ARMs that kicked up their rates.  That is different from what the Cook County Sheriff is doing.

    As to the Philly sheriff, I suspect his moratorium has been forced to be lifted by the Courts - we are not hearing any more about it.

    The issue is pretty simple.  When a Sheriff is performing a sale as the culminating act of a foreclosure, he is performing a "ministerial" act as opposed to a "discretionary" act.  This is an important distinction in the law.  For the non-lawyers, a ministerial act is one where the governmental official is carrying out a legally required duty and has little if any discrection (power to decide) whether or not to do it.  "Just doing my job" in so many words.  A discretionary act, OTOH, is one where the act is within the official's power, but he may choose to perform it now, or perform it later.

    In carrying out a sheriff's sale or, likely for that matter an eviction, the sheriff is only doing this because the Court, as a part of the foreclosure, has ordered him to do it.  He is a court officer carrying out a court order.

    Now, can the sheriff find ways to drag his feet and require every i dotted and t crossed in such a way as to delay carrying out a foreclosure sale or eviction?  Yes.  Insisting on perfect paperwork is a classic, and very effective, way of delaying performing a duty odious to the official.  Sheriffs are, by and large, elected officials and they like their incumbency and re-election just like any other elected official.  Offending voters and having scenes of screaming people carried away from their homes reported does not held the public image.  

    But, as i