Beaver County Common Pleas Judge Gus Kwidis is under file this week after he ordered the home of a widow, Eileen Battisti sold for failure to pay $6.30 in unpaid interest to the county. Kwidis ruled that Battisti had ample notice and only has herself to blame for losing her home. Others see the blame lying elsewhere in a decision that elevated a de minimus violation above simple justice.
Battisti’s husband took care of these bills but passed away. She says that she never noticed the remaining $6.30 due on interest. However, Kwidis held that the county tax claim bureau complied with notification requirements in state law before the auction and “[t]here is no doubt that (she) had actual receipt of the notification of the tax upset sale on July 7, 2011, and Aug. 16, 2011. Moreover, on Aug. 12, 2011, a notice of sale was sent by first class mail and was not returned.”
However, there remains that little question of justice — and the notion of discretion. If there is no role for a court to play in such matters, we could handle these cases by computer.
The couple had previously owed other taxes, but at the time of the sale owed just $235, including other interest and fees. They sold the house from under her for $116,000. Such sales usually generate low prices as distress sales.
Joe Askar, Beaver County’s chief solicitor, insisted that the country and the judge were right in forcing the sale, but then added “It’s bad – she had some hard times, I guess her husband kind of took care of a lot of that stuff. It seemed that she was having a hard time coping with the loss of her husband – that just made it set in a little more.” It is remarkable that Askar would acknowledge such mitigating circumstances over less than seven bucks and yet believe that this was an appropriate and justifiable act. It cost more for the prosecutors and court to meet to issue the order. It cost more to actually put the property up for sale. Yet, even with the mitigating factor of her husband’s death, this was not viewed as sufficient reason for a modicum of mercy.
Source: Washington Post
Our state requires such notifications to be by Certified Mail which can provide proof of delivery, not just dropped in a mailbox and stuck in a box (who knows who’s) at the other end.
Mike A – 116k will get you a cardboard box here. On the outskirts maybe 2 cardboard boxes.
I agree with Veronica, had the public known, they/we could have paid this small amount. And couldn’t she be given a public defender to guide her through the process. Has our judicial system completely gone to hell in a hand basket? I don’t think my brother (who was a judge) would ever have made such a cruel decision. He spent much of his free time helping please like this lady out of jams and keeping these petty bills from ever entering the court room in the first place. I pray this woman will finds someone to help her.
Paul,
I think you’re incorrect. But I’m not going to be your fishing buddy today. The thread speaks for itself. But, in essence, you don’t own nothing, you just have a better right to it than the next guy. That was my point. Don’t pay taxes, poof it’s gone.
Paul S.:
According to the story, the house was sold for $116,000.00.
Mike A – they probably sold the house under the market value and after expenses she will be lucky, assuming she owned the house free and clear, to take home 50k
De minimus they coulda done for dis lady was take up a collection among the spectators in court dat day.
Jim Mc: The answer is more sensible government, not necessarily less.
Incidentally, state and local governments are under more pressure to collect every dime they can get as a result of increasingly limited federal funding.
That said, Mike A underscores where the system failed this woman.
At the point it got to court is was already too late. Still this is an over-reach by any standard.
Mr. Keebler:
The government doesn’t actually “take” the land for taxes. They hold an auction and sell to the highest bidder. After the overdue taxes and sale expenses are deducted, any surplus is supposed to be remitted to the previous owner.
Hey Paul, this discussion we had about the government taking your property for taxes. What are you thinking about this one. Since you said it can’t happen on another thread?
Keebler – I said it could happen, just not the way you said it could happen.
There are two systems of court power in place: at law and in equity. This court may have not had equitable power.
Most government lien laws treat all debts identically without regard to the amount. The judge likely had to choose between strictly enforcing the judicial sale statute in this instance, or setting aside the sale in technical violation of the law. The law demanded that he rule as he did. Justice demanded that he set aside the sale. He chose the letter rather than the spirit of the law in this case, and that speaks ill of his fitness for the bench. It also suggests that some legislative revisions are in order, including a broadened redemption remedy in the case of small debts.
Mike – others on here have commented that the state law requires both first class and certified delivery of the notification. According to the information supplied to us, they only had the first class. This is like the robo-signing by the banks and mortgage companies. They did the cheaper of the two things they were supposed to do. The judge should have ticked all the boxes and apparently he did not.
The assumption that the judge issued a legally erroneous decision seems unwarranted. In most states, the tax law is very statute driven, and a judge has very limited discretion to deviate. Some of the commenters seem to misunderstand what was presented to the judge. The sale of the property had already taken place so the judge wouldn’t have had any opportunity to assist or encourage that the debt be resolved in a different way. The matter was before the court on a petition to set aside the sale. Again, in most states the grounds upon which the judge can do so are very limited. It is my understanding that the evidence included evidence that the petitioner admitted receiving the mailed notices.
Last time I checked the Judicial Branch was supposed to read the law and the Constitution and judge the comparison of the clear and understandable words therein against the allegation against the defendant. Last time I checked the Legislative Branch writes the law. It is a crime to legislate from the bench as the SCOTUS has done for over a century. The Founders did not mandate interpretation, especially by usurping justices that decide subjectively and arbitrarily. You are absolutely right. It is time to start enforcing severe penalties for arbitrary, ney corrupt, and subjective applications of the law by biased, political or otherwise, judges including the SCOTUS.
Elaine M.,
This is so illuminating. Forget the felonious Timothy Geithner Remember Lois Lerner? She took the fifth because she’s a. innocent with a great alibi or b. she’s guilty as hell and what she did was done by direction from superior offices that took orders from superior offices? Oops! I forgot, the buck stops somewhere. Wherever could that be? Perhaps the same place the Benghazi buck stopped?
What an incredible waste from both perspectives. The county wasted so much time and money in the judicial proceedings — far more than the $6.30 in interest. Government is not the answer — less of it is better.
Jim – the county gets to deduct its costs from the sale price. No loss to the tax payer in this case.
In Philadelphia v Schaffer, 974 A.2d 509 (2009), a tax sale which a lower county court had upheld was reversed.
The procedures set by law regarding tax foreclosures are strictly construed in favor of the property owner.
The “on Aug. 12, 2011, a notice of sale was sent by first class mail and was not returned” statement JT quotes seems to indicate a flaw in the process, because Pennsylvania’s Municipal Claims and Tax Liens Act (Tax Liens Act), requires registered mail in addition to first class mail (Schaffer, supra).
Just sayin’ …
Reblogged this on Citizens, not serfs.
Legalised theft.
That judge should just change his name to Snidely Whiplash and be done with it; be very suspicious if he lays railroad tracks anywhere near the courthouse.
I’d burn it down… before I sold it!