California AB 1832: Navigating Tax Sale Surplus Assignment Restrictions

California AB 1832: Understanding New Restrictions on Tax Sale Surplus Assignments

Tax sales, while providing a mechanism for local governments to recover unpaid property taxes, often generate surplus funds when the sale price exceeds the amount of taxes, penalties, and costs due. These surplus funds rightfully belong to the former property owner or their legitimate heirs and lienholders. However, the process of claiming these funds has historically been complex, leading to the emergence of third-party assignees who would purchase the rights to these funds, often at a significant discount.

California Assembly Bill 1832 (AB 1832), effective January 1, 2023, represents a pivotal legislative effort to regulate the assignment of these surplus funds, aiming to protect former property owners from predatory practices and ensure a fairer distribution of proceeds. This guide delves into the legal landscape shaped by AB 1832, outlining its key provisions, claimant hierarchy, and the implications for those seeking to claim or assign surplus funds in California.

The Context: Tax Sales and Surplus Funds in California

When property taxes become delinquent in California, the county tax collector has the authority to sell the tax-defaulted property. If the property sells for more than the amount of the outstanding taxes, penalties, interest, and costs of the sale, the excess amount is considered 'surplus proceeds' or 'excess proceeds.' California Revenue and Taxation Code (R&TC) sections 4671-4676 govern the distribution of these funds.

Before AB 1832, the assignment of these surplus funds was less regulated, allowing assignees to acquire claims from former owners, often for a fraction of their value. This practice raised concerns about transparency, fairness, and potential exploitation of individuals who might not fully understand the value of their claim or the complexities of the legal process.

Key Provisions of California AB 1832

AB 1832 introduces significant restrictions on the assignment of surplus proceeds from tax sales, primarily by amending R&TC Section 4675. The core changes focus on limiting who can be an assignee and how assignments can be executed.

• Limitation on Assignees: A crucial aspect of AB 1832 is its restriction on who can receive an assignment. The law now generally prohibits the assignment of a right to claim surplus proceeds to anyone other than:

  • An heir of the original owner.
  • A beneficiary of the original owner's estate.
  • A bona fide lienholder.
  • A person with a recorded interest in the property at the time of the tax sale.
  • A governmental entity.

  This effectively curtails the ability of unrelated third-party businesses or individuals to purchase claims to surplus funds from former owners.

• Timing of Assignment: The law specifies that an assignment of the right to claim surplus proceeds made before the date of the tax sale is void. This aims to prevent speculative assignments where the value of potential surplus funds is unknown.

• Required Disclosure and Notarization: Any valid assignment must be in writing, fully disclose the terms of the agreement, and be acknowledged before a notary public. This ensures a level of formality and transparency in the transaction.

• Notice to Tax Collector: The tax collector must be provided with a copy of the assignment agreement. This allows the county to verify the legitimacy of the assignee's claim.

• Court Scrutiny: AB 1832 introduces provisions that allow the court, during the process of determining entitlement to surplus funds, to scrutinize the terms of any assignment, particularly if there is a concern about unfairness or undue influence. The court may refuse to enforce an assignment if it finds it to be unconscionable or not in the best interest of the assignor.

These provisions collectively aim to ensure that the former property owner or their direct successors receive the maximum benefit from the surplus funds, rather than having a significant portion diverted through discounted assignments to third parties.

Who Can Claim Surplus Funds? The Claimant Hierarchy

California law establishes a specific hierarchy for individuals and entities entitled to claim surplus funds. This hierarchy is critical, as claims from higher-priority claimants must be satisfied before those of lower priority. AB 1832 does not fundamentally alter this established order but reinforces who can legitimately participate in the claiming process.

The general order of priority for claiming surplus proceeds is:

1. Original Owner: The person who was the owner of record of the property at the time of the tax sale.
2. Lienholders: Holders of valid liens on the property at the time of the tax sale, in order of their priority (e.g., mortgage holders, judgment creditors). These claims are typically limited to the amount of the outstanding lien.
3. Heirs or Beneficiaries: If the original owner is deceased, their legal heirs or beneficiaries of their estate may claim the funds.
4. Other Recorded Interests: Individuals or entities with other legally recognized, recorded interests in the property at the time of the sale.

It is important to note that all claims must be filed with the county tax collector within one year from the date of the recordation of the tax deed to the purchaser. Failure to file within this period typically results in the funds escheating to the county's general fund.

Implications for Claimants and Assignees

AB 1832 has several significant implications:

• For Former Owners: The law offers increased protection. Former owners are less likely to be approached by third-party assignees offering lowball sums for their claims. This shifts the focus towards direct claims by the owner or their immediate successors, potentially ensuring a larger recovery.

• For Lienholders and Other Recorded Interests: These parties generally remain unaffected in their ability to claim surplus funds to satisfy their outstanding interests, provided they follow the established filing procedures and their liens are valid.

• For Third-Party Assignees: The business model for many third-party surplus fund recovery services, which relied on purchasing claims from former owners, has been severely restricted. Such entities must now carefully review their operations to ensure compliance with the new assignment limitations or pivot their services to other aspects of the surplus fund recovery process, such as providing assistance to legitimate claimants without taking an assignment of the claim itself.

• For County Tax Collectors and Courts: These entities face an increased responsibility to scrutinize claims and assignments to ensure compliance with AB 1832. This may involve more rigorous review of documentation and, in some cases, judicial intervention to validate assignments.

Navigating the Process

Claiming surplus funds, even without an assignment, can be a detailed process. It typically involves submitting a formal claim form to the county tax collector, providing proof of ownership or interest, and possibly supporting documentation like death certificates, wills, or lien instruments. If multiple claims are filed, or if there are disputes, the matter may be referred to the superior court for a judicial determination of entitlement.

AB 1832 underscores the importance of understanding legal rights and obligations in the tax sale surplus context. For former property owners, it's crucial to be aware of the funds potentially available and the regulated process for claiming them. For anyone considering assisting a former owner, it's paramount to understand the limitations on assignments to avoid engaging in practices that could render an agreement void.

Conclusion

California's AB 1832 marks a significant legislative shift aimed at reforming the landscape of tax sale surplus fund assignments. By limiting who can be an assignee and imposing stricter requirements on the assignment process, the law seeks to safeguard the interests of former property owners and ensure that surplus funds are distributed equitably. Understanding these provisions is essential for anyone involved in a tax sale surplus situation in California, whether as a former owner, a lienholder, or a service provider.

---

Disclaimer: This article provides general information and is not intended as legal advice. The law is complex and constantly evolving. You should consult with a qualified legal professional for advice tailored to your specific situation.