Hempfield 115 Trust v. Westmoreland County Tax Claim Bureau
989 C.D. 2022
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Jun 20, 2025Background
- Hempfield 115 Trust (with Jan Ondra as purported trustee) owned property in Westmoreland County.
- The Westmoreland County Tax Claim Bureau tried to notify the Trust of a tax sale via certified mail to the prior trustee, Will Sanders; all mail was returned undeliverable.
- Sheriff's deputy posted notices on the property, and the sale was publicly advertised, but there were no additional attempts to locate or notify Sanders or the Trust after returned mail.
- The Bureau sold the property at an upset tax sale in September 2019.
- Ondra claimed he only learned of the sale after a tenant informed him; the tenant testified she informed Ondra after seeing a posted notice.
- Common Pleas Court denied the Trust's challenge to the sale, holding actual notice was received before the sale.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of Notice under RETSL | Bureau failed to strictly comply with notice provisions since mail was returned and no further efforts made | Actual notice (via tenant) relieved Bureau of duty to give formal, statutorily compliant notice | Actual notice received; formal defects excused |
| Requirement of Additional Reasonable Efforts (Section 607.1(a)) | Bureau was required to make reasonable efforts to locate owner after mail returned and failed to do so | Actual notice to property owner made additional efforts unnecessary | Bureau excused from further efforts because actual notice was established |
| Trustee Status/Proper Party Notified | Bureau sent notices to former trustee, not to Ondra (alleged new trustee), and took no steps to verify or find new contact | Only required to notify record owner/trustee; notices reasonably addressed | Bureau's failure excused by finding of actual notice to Ondra and the Trust |
| Due Process Implications | Failing to strictly comply with statutory notice violates due process and invalidates sale | Actual notice given satisfies due process, constitutes sufficient notice | Substantial evidence supports finding of actual notice; sale affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Farro v. Tax Claim Bureau of Monroe Cnty., 704 A.2d 1137 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1997) (tax claim bureau must strictly comply with RETSL notice requirements)
- Wells Fargo Bank of Minn., NA v. Tax Claim Bureau of Monroe Cnty., 817 A.2d 1196 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) (actual notice can excuse formal statutory notice defects)
- Sabbeth v. Tax Claim Bureau of Fulton Cnty., 714 A.2d 514 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998) (implied actual notice suffices to meet statutory notice requirement)
- In re Consolidated Reports & Return by Tax Claims Bureau of Northumberland Cnty. of Properties, 132 A.3d 637 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2016) (actual notice determination is a fact question, supported by substantial evidence on appeal)