Tennant acceptance question, shady seller deal

After a complicated closing with a less than forthright seller, we just closed on a park. A few days after closing the seller informed us that a new tenant had purchased another residents home and moved in before closing but had not signed a lease. So now we’re trying to go through the application process so we can get them to sign a lease even though they have already purchased the home and moved in.

The wife has an eviction on her record. We don’t accept any history of evictions. In a normal application flow we would reject them but with them already moved in, our next step would be to give them notice to vacate. I hate that they just bought this home but the seller was the one at fault for not notifying us or the buyer otherwise we could have gotten ahead of it.

Anyone else encounter this? Is there a better way to handle this?

I think letting them stay is the best option for now. Talk them about your ‘no pay, no stay’ policy and let them know that under normal circumstances they would not have been allowed in the park… so you are keeping a close eye on them and have zero flexibility regarding non or late payment of rent. My guess is that you might have many tenants with evictions on their record given the previous park owner’s lack of screening.


If it was a murderer it’d be a different story, but where it’s an eviction from the past, I’d be inclined to give them a shot. Just make sure you’re on top of them and taking action as soon as a payment is missed.

1 Like

The first 2 years after closing on any MHP deal are the riskiest. Who knows what the seller did before you bought it? Sometimes you have to clean up some messes.
It’s part of the deal.

Shame on the Seller for doing this to you. I wouldn’t be surprised if the seller has/had some personal connection to this person. IE Black Sheep of the family.

I can’t tell you how many folks over the years have Dumped a problem family member on me.
Please accept “Cousin Eddie” we will guarantee you will always get the rent. They guarantee it because if they don’t pay Cousin Eddie moves right back in with them. lol…

1 Like

Keep them but keep them tight. Happened to me.

I would not categorize this as anything shady. This happens all the time in almost every acquisition. It doesn’t mean that the seller was being fraudulent. More commonly than not, the seller does not control things as closely as you would, and these things slip through the cracks during the acquisition process. It is merely a cost of doing business in this industry.

Absolutely do not file eviction! If you do, you are automatically inviting yourself to pay legal bills, and the refurbishment of a home. If the person is already living there, the damage is done, and you might as well let them stay to see if they pay the rent. If they don’t pay the rent, then you evict them. There is no point to evict somebody because you have a hunch that they are not going to pay the rent.

1 Like

I think you’re right on all counts here.

1 Like

Same happened to me but worse. Seller had 3rd party (not disclosed) owner who then sold to a mom just before I closed who then put her on-the-spectrum son in a home who then deeded him the home who then said he’s your problem.
We’re trying to work it out without lawyers but free advice I’ve received and my own experience tells me I’ll have little choice but to burn $$ on lawyers with this.
Your situation sounds ok if the tenants you inherited play by your rules. I’d have a direct conversation with them letting them sign off on all the documentation so you’re within your legal rights should something go sideways. Depending on your state and county a judge may choose to side with them if you try to evict them now.