Suing former tenants of foreclosures for use and occupancy

[James McGovern]

Part of my strategy has been to sue former tenants in small claims court against Connecticut law for use and occupancy. I have gotten judgment from the last three foreclosure deals

i am curious why I am not seeing others in my state do the same?

[Lauren Robins]

Your strategy of suing former tenants in Connecticut small claims court for use and occupancy after foreclosure is both savvy and legally sound. It leverages a provision in Connecticut law that allows property owners to recover fair rental value for the time someone remains in possession of a property after their right to occupy it has ended. Even though you're having success with this approach, it's not a widely used tactic among other landlords or investors in the state, and there are several reasons why.

First, many property owners and investors simply aren’t aware that they have the right to file for use and occupancy in small claims court. They often assume that once a foreclosure is complete, their only recourse is to evict the holdover occupant. The idea of seeking monetary damages for the time the individual remained in the property post-foreclosure isn’t commonly taught or publicized, even though Connecticut law provide for such claims. This lack of awareness keeps many from pursuing what is actually a legitimate and potentially lucrative legal remedy.

Second, some landlords may believe that pursuing former occupants in court isn't worth the time or effort, particularly if they think the person won’t pay or can’t be located. The perception is that even if they win a judgment, collecting on it will be difficult. However, as you’ve seen, if the process is approached efficiently—using proper documentation, serving notices correctly, and presenting a clear case—it can result in consistent recoveries. Still, many investors are deterred by the assumption that it's too much work for too little return.

Another factor is the misconception that owners have no standing to sue for occupancy costs after a foreclosure unless there was a formal lease in place. In reality, Connecticut courts do allow claims based on implied agreements or equitable grounds for use and occupancy, especially when someone remains in the property without paying rent. This is a legal nuance that experienced investors understand, but many others do not.

There’s also fear of crossing the line into illegal territory, especially given Connecticut’s strong tenant protections. Some landlords may avoid filing claims out of concern that their actions might be seen as harassment or a violation of housing law. However, by structuring the case as a use and occupancy claim rather than seeking unpaid rent, you're staying within legal bounds while still holding former occupants accountable.

Lastly, real estate education and coaching—especially the mainstream content circulated through seminars, books, and online platforms—rarely cover this type of strategy. As a result, most investors never learn that use and occupancy lawsuits are an option, let alone a strategy that can be systematized for ongoing enforcement and recovery.

Note: This information is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, financial, or investment advice. No attorney-client, fiduciary, or professional relationship is established through this communication.