Dear Legislators:
It has been reported in the
media that the Office of Foreclosure has either negligently or intentionally
violated a number of state laws by:
- 1. Entering ex-parte writ of possession the same day as a judgment for possession in violation of N.J.S.A. 2A:18-57;
- 2. Entering ex parte writs of possession without the requisite notice for demand to quit in violation of 2A:18-61.2 and/or NJSA 2A:18-53 (addressing the removal of tenant at sufferance)
- 3. Entering an ex-parte judgment for possession without receiving a proof of notice to quit that is prerequisite to judgment (See N.J.S.A. 2A:18-56);
- 4. Accepting as true the self-certifications of bank attorneys that a residential property occupier had no possessory rights when according to state case law these people are tenant-at-sufferance, protected by the Summary Dispossess Act, N.J.S. 2A:18-53 (See the definition of tenant found in NJSA 46A:14-1, stating that a tenant-at-sufferance is included in the definition of a tenant)
The State’s own law revision
commission states the following:
Since enactment of the Anti-Eviction Act, N.J.S.A.
2A:18-61.1 et seq., the Summary Dispossess Act has been understood to cover the
eviction of nonresidential tenants and residential tenants not covered by the
Anti-Eviction Act. Source: STATE OF NEW JERSEY, NEW JERSEY LAW REVISION COMMISSION, Final
Report Relating to Landlord and Tenant Law, February 10, 2012.
This tenancy at sufferance is
included in the definition of tenant in the New Jersey statutes: "Tenant"
includes, but is not limited to, a lessee or tenant at will or at sufferance or
for any duration, or any subtenants, assigns, or legal representatives of the
lessee or tenant. Title 46A – Landlord and tenant law. Article 5, eviction,
chapter 14, eviction generally. 46A:14-1: Tenant, landlord, residential
rental premises; what is included.
Here is some of the case law
of New Jersey:
Under
New Jersey law, "[a] purchaser at a mortgage foreclosure sale obtains the
legal right to possession of land purchased as soon as he obtains a deed from
the selling officer." 30 New Jersey Practice, Law of Mortgages § 373. The
mortgagor's continued possession of the property after such time is that of a
tenant at sufferance. See Caruso v. Hunt, 69 N.J.Super. 447, 452, 174 A.2d 381 (Ch.Div. 1961) (quoting 2
C.J.S. Adverse Possession § 105, page 659) ("The owner's continued possession after sale of the property at
execution, judicial, or like sale is that of a tenant at sufferance of the
purchaser”). In Re St. Clair, 251 B.R. 660 (D.N.J. 2000).
CONFLICT OF INTEREST OF
SVEN PFAHLERT IN ISSUING OPINIONS ON FORECLOSURE MATTERS
What your Office of
Foreclosure did was to then believe Mr. Sven Pfahlert’s (a former employee of private
law firm Honig & Greenberg, L.L.C. – these are the people
who have been attacking the homeowners and now he works for the State of New
Jersey- THIS IS A BIG RED
FLAG) incorrect and illegal
advice and enter an ex-parte judgment for possession without the prerequisite
notices. You then entered the very same day an ex-parte writ for
possession again in violation of the state statutes requiring notice to quit or
vacate. You also violated state law that says you cannot enter a writ the
same day you entered a judgment. To make matters worse, the judgment was
entered by judges in Mercer County who had neither personal nor subject matter
jurisdiction over the homeowner or the property.
I LOOK FORWARD HEARING
FROM YOU REGARDING THESE STATE LAW VIOLATIONS AND THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
REGARDING MR. PFAHLERT
I hereby certify under penalty
of perjury that the foregoing statements made by me are true and correct.
I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully
false, I am subject to punishment. NJ Court Rule R. 1:4-4(b); 28 U.S.C.
§1746.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________
JOSHUA EPSTEIN, ESQ.