What a really lame job they did with this half of a story! Tell the new owners to give the tenant a 30 day notice. Renters don’t get deeds. Something is fishy about this story. It sounds like the seller both sold & rented the house to cover his expenses or mortgage. If the seller didn’t disclose the rental agreement he could be in trouble. Being in escrow is not “sold” the buyers don’t own it or take possesion until they close unless otherwise agreed, which is very rare. (In theory buyers could agree or sellers could require a later possesion after close of escrow.) Have the agent show the details in the sales contract to the buyer.

P.S. That’s not evena picture of the real house the news story is supposed to be about.! Don’t you hater it when they manufacture news like this? What if it was a story about a stolen red car & they showed a picture of a blue truck as an example? It’s unethical to mislead people and use a fake photo even with a dsiclaimer most people will never notice. You have to ask why would they do that? Do they think we are juveniles who can’t read without pictures?

This is a trick squatters use to occupy empty houses. The police should have asked the “Tenant” to show the check he gave the landlord. No proof of payment, no rental agreement. Out he goes!

My son was almost victimized by a fake realtor. He answered a for rent ad in Craigs List for a house in Chatsworth, CA. He looked at the house with a for rent sign in front. This fake realtor wrote a rental agreement and he paid the first month rent and security deposit with a cashiers check. He showed me and my wife the rental agreement and it says Fannie Mae realty, no office address. We googled the house address and found its for sale. He contacted the selling realtor and was told to report it to the police. He immediately reported it to the bank. Luckily, the check has not been cashed yet as it was Sunday and the bank returned my son’s money. I looks like this guy has not been caught yet.

Who buys a property without a walk-through right before closing. Nobody was there for 10 days before closing.
Once there living there the cops can’t do anything, you must evict them in court.

Agree with lat post – this is a Civil matter and the police can’t get involved unless its the County Sheriff exercising the Default Jedgement – in which case the Tenant would’ve been notified (at least) 5 days prior to execution byt the Sheriff. This falls back on the current Owner and lets hope he/she is found and prosecuted.

This is a civil matter, police can’t do anything.

all of you saying the police cant do anything ARE WRONG the only way the RENTER has the right to stay pending an eviction is IF he/she can show proof that he/she paid a form of rent to the legit owner if the proof of payment is to someone other then the legit owner or no proof of payment is shown at all the police can and should haul the renter out in cuffs

@WK p.s. comment. …if you were to google the address on the deed listed in this story of 39311 Victoria Street, Palmdale CA, you will find the picture of this house in the houses for sale section, and it shows it listed as of today for $189K.. so it has not even been sold yet.. and even more interesting about your stolen car theory, is the picture in the real estate photo shows the same blue sedan in the driveway… Maybe befor mouthing off about the media you should check YOUR facts first

[...] Source: http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/05/13/2-families-stake-legal-claim-to-same-palmdale-house/ [...]

[...] Source: http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2011/05/13/2-families-stake-legal-claim-to-same-palmdale-house/ [...]

I want to give a different analogy so that maybe you can understand the severity of the issue.
Lets say that you go on vacation and come home to find someone living in your home. They are able to produce a rental agreement and a grant deed which shows that you are not the owner of the home but the person on the rental agreement is. To go even further they have used this grant deed to turn the water on in their name as well as placed the other utilities in their name. The tenant stresses that they answered an add, gave a deposit, and moved in as a normal tenant would, and maybe they did.
You on the other hand visit your local Realtor or Title Company and produce a grant deed that shows you own the home. But now you are out in the street with nowhere to live while someone is in your home doing who knows what.
Who is right and who is wrong? Do you as a homeowner want to take this trough a civil trial or go through the eviction process while you wait to move back into your own home?
What if the home is vacant because you have been going through a shortsale process and the home is soon to close escrow and prevent a foreclosure?
You as a homeowner are not able to complete the sale because the buyers seeing someone move into the home ruining their plans of moving in will more than likely bail and purchase another home. This is your last ditch effort to prevent a foreclosure and the squatter is now preventing the sale of the home which will cause the foreclosure. How do you feel now? What do you do?
Lets go back to the car analogy that was given above. If a car is stolen, then sold, then recovered. Does the purson that purchased the car get to keep the car or is it taken away from them?
What is the right thing to do with the home?

It looks like both of them are the victims and the last owner is the one responsible for this issue. However that hardly solves the problem. It will take time and money to get the person responsible. A while this is going on someone is out of a home.