In the state of Pennsylvania, it is the purchaser’s right to initiate a procedure in the Court of Common Pleas called “Ejectment,”
When evicting a tenant under the Landlord Tenant Act, rather than initiating Ejection procedures, the process moves much quicker. Instead of waiting 6 months or longer, the Credit Union would be able to see that she was removed from the property within 30 days. In order to make such a complaint, however, the Credit Union needed to allege that the client owed back-rent on the property. Unfortunately, the woman attended the hearing without the assistance of legal counsel, so she did not stand much of a chance against the well-funded corporate law firm that had been representing the Credit Union.
The Credit Union was able to successfully show the Judge that they owned the property, but they did not present any evidence to suggest that a tenant-landlord relationship existed, nor that any rent was due. Even so, they continued to claim that they were also entitled to $1,000 in attorney’s fees. After reviewing the evidence, the Judge decided to rule in favor of the Credit Union, and subsequently ordered the woman to evacuate the home and pay $1,000 in back-rent. At this time, the only way to contest this decision would be to file an appeal of the Judge’s order within 10 days and post a bond—which she was unable to afford. For this reason, she decided to find out if Attorney Forbes could help.
Once he was contacted, Mr. Forbes decided to take on the case on a pro bono basis. He was infuriated with the circumstances that the woman had been caught up in, and he knew that she could not afford to hire the legal representation that she would need to fight the decision, so he chose to take on the case for free. After thoroughly reviewing the facts of the case, he moved quickly to formulate a plan. He recognized that the Magisterial District Court did not have jurisdiction to hear Ejectment cases, but rather only Landlord Tenant Eviction cases. Since a tenant-landlord relationship had never existed, the court technically did not have jurisdiction to rule on the case.
As such, Attorney Michael Forbes decided to send the Judge a Petition for Reconsideration, outlining all of the problems with the Credit Union’s original case and highlighting the need for urgency. Soon thereafter, the Judge decided to vacate the judgment and dismiss the Credit Union’s charges. As a result, the client and her sister’s children are able to stay in the foreclosed home while they look for a new place to live. Additionally, Mr. Forbes is now preparing a lawsuit against the Credit Union and the law firm that represented them for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act.
If you believe that your rights have been violated by a bank or a credit union under similar circumstances, you should not hesitate to find out how The Law Office of Michael P. Forbes, PC can help. They understand how these well-funded corporations operate, so you can rest assured that your case will be in competent hands when you enlist the help of a Pennsylvania debt collector abuse attorney at the firm. To learn more, simply pick up the phone and contact their office at (610) 991-3321 or visit their website at http://www.mforbeslaw.com. From there, Attorney Michael P. Forbes can advise you on how to proceed with your case. The firm specializes in all matters related to debt collection, bankruptcy, the FDCPA, foreclosure defense and more, so do not hesitate to get started today.