A U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year that invalidated the way Massachusetts cities and towns seize real estate for back taxes may end up getting a couple in Marlborough much more money than they would have had otherwise – and they may end up keeping their home.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled Monday that the couple in Marlborough is entitled to the full value of their property minus back taxes owed and related costs, and that one of the family members should be allowed to redeem the property by paying the back taxes and costs, if he wishes and is able.
The result of the case, which the appeals court sent back down to Massachusetts Land Court for further adjudication, is a far cry from how state law treated such cases even two years ago.
In August 2022, the same Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled that the heir of the owner of a home in Bourne had no right to any proceeds from the town government’s sale of the property even though the amount of back taxes and costs owed was less than 1 percent of the value of the property, as New Boston Post reported at the time. That’s because a state statute (which is still on the books) allowed a municipal government to take properties whose owners were more than six months’ behind in paying local property taxes and sell the property, without giving the property owner the difference between the sale price and the amount owed in taxes and costs, as happens with a bank foreclosure.
