I just purchased my first home and the previous owner was given 30 days to vacate. Time's up and they haven't packed anything. What can I do?

Let’s pretend, for example, that Kara just bought her very first home, but the seller, Marcus, negotiated with Kara to stay for 30 days after closing. Now, Kara paid her money a month ago, has taken title to the house and is dealing with a former owner who won’t leave despite the fact that 30 days are up.

The big question is, what are Kara’s rights as the new owner and how can she get Marcus out of the home for good? Unfortunately, experts say it may not be so simple.

The post-occupancy clause will determine the remedy

As Kara is finding out now, she may have made a mistake when she agreed to allow Marcus to stay.

“When you purchase a home, you’re really just transferring title and the goal is to do that ‘free and clear’ from any encumbrances,” Barry E. Janay, Esq., a real estate lawyer and founder of The Law Office of Barry E. Janay, P.C., told Moneywise. Unfortunately, that’s not what happened here. Instead, Janay said, “in this scenario, there’s a tenant or holdover.”

Essentially, when Kara allowed the former owner to stay, this decision may have created a landlord-tenant or occupancy relationship, depending on state law and the terms of the agreement — which were hopefully laid out in a post-closing occupancy agreement that became part of the purchase contract.

If Kara and Marcus included a clause in that document giving Marcus the right to remain on the premises, then the terms of their agreement will dictate what happens next. Jonathan White, managing partner at the real estate firm Jordan & White, LLC, told Moneywise that a post-closing occupancy agreement might characterize Marcus as a tenant or a licensee.

If Kara and Marcus had no written agreement, but Marcus was allowed to remain temporarily and then stayed longer than he should have, many jurisdictions treat him as a type of holdover occupant. However, the exact classification depends on state law.

For example, he could be treated as a tenant at sufferance, or someone who stays at a property after their legal right to occupy it has ended.

“That characterization [as a tenant, licensee, or tenant at sufferance] drives whether you proceed through the summary eviction process or a different court action, and the two move at different speeds,” White said.

The eviction process is likely going to be needed

Regardless of how Marcus is characterized under the law, Kara is most likely going to have to go through some type of formal legal process to get him out. And, this process may not begin the way you’d expect.

“Buyers are frequently surprised that calling the police accomplishes nothing,” said White. “I’ve seen it many times. Officers arrive, look at the deed, listen to both sides, and tell the buyer this is a civil matter. That’s the correct answer under the law in most places, and it is the moment the buyer realizes owning the property and having the right to occupy it are two separate things.”

White explained that Kara is looking at a “court process” that could take anywhere from several weeks to several months, depending on whether she must go through a full eviction process or can take advantage of summary eviction. Summary eviction is faster, and if Marcus is a tenant at sufferance, Kara is more likely to qualify for this option.