The state of Illinois, as well as others, has a division in their Treasury Department which keeps track of unclaimed properties. They publish a list of what they have and it's up to you to find it. I go looking every so often but never found my name on any lists until recently. Then again, it wasn't exactly my name.
It turns out the Treasury of Illinois has the sum of $9.61 waiting for Vera Bara to claim it. I'm not Vera Bara but I do recognize the name. We bought the property on which our old house was built about ten years prior to building on it. Everything was in order and we had no problems. Then we built the house. The tax bill went up significantly. LOL I expected that but there was a surprise on the first tax bill. It listed Vera Bara as the property owner. I think I just ignored it the first year and sent them a check. Next year, the same bogus owner appeared on the bill. This time I sent the bill back with the form on the reverse side filled out to indicate who the proper named owner was. Next year, same Vera Bara appeared on the bill. This went on for maybe ten years. Finally I got one of those Sharpie pens to fill out the form on the back. As you may know, those pens leak through the paper and the information I put in appeared on the front of the bill as well as the back. Well, that got through to the powers that be. The next bill had the right owner stated. LOL
Meanwhile, back to the future, I filled out a form claiming that $9.61 was mine. I sent the proper ID's they required and waited more than a month. Yesterday I got a letter from them asking for information about Vera Bara and how exactly am I related to that person. They believe I am who I claim to be, but I wasn't claiming to be Vera Bara. Hmm. That never occurred to me as a possible problem, but I guess it is. LOL So, anyway, I wrote back today to explain what I know about Vera Bara. It remains to be seen if they believe me, but I think they will. What I also think will be a problem is that they have no way to issue checks to mistaken identities. They can't write a check to me because I'm not the recorded owner of the property. But, the recorded owner does not exist, probably.
To me this is all in fun. I don't need the $9.61 and have no idea why they owe it to me. It will be interesting to see how this can be resolved, or if it can. Stay tuned in for future developments.
Unclaimed Property
Forum rules
Post a new topic to begin a chat.
Any topic is acceptable, and topic drift is permissible.
Post a new topic to begin a chat.
Any topic is acceptable, and topic drift is permissible.
Unclaimed Property
Last edited by yogi on 13 Oct 2019, 19:12, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Unclaimed Property
We have a similar problem with our back lot. It still shows one of the owners names of which we filed a quit claim deed from eons ago now. I still have the copies so if there ever is a problem I'm covered.
I have not pursued changing it, because I know if I do, they will want me to merge my back lot with the front lot which will cause my taxes to go up by at least another 4 or 5 hundred dollars.
I have not pursued changing it, because I know if I do, they will want me to merge my back lot with the front lot which will cause my taxes to go up by at least another 4 or 5 hundred dollars.
Re: Unclaimed Property
The property I'm talking about is like yours in that it is two parcels of land. The house is on the greater 90% of the total, and this claim I'm making refers to a small parcel between the house and the street. The Board of Ed owned it but gave it to us so that we can build. Over the years I considered consolidating it all into one lot, but never did. Then I had the idea of dividing the full acre lot into two half acre parcels. I talked to the assessor about it and they told me it would matter very little as far as the taxes on the house are concerned. Thus I never did it. So, in Illinois at least, the size of unused land doesn't affect the property taxes to any significant degree.
Re: Unclaimed Property
There are a few things to consider here.
Not sure about Illinois, but in MO and TN the amount of improvements (meaning structures) cannot exceed 30% of the lot. There are exceptions to this inside certain city areas.
A property having a structure is considered Improved Ground, and taxed accordingly for the improved land, plus taxes on the structure itself.
A property having no buildings or sheds of any kind on it is considered unimproved ground, and normally the taxes are very low. Even lower if it not cleared and still considered a wooded area or natural habitat.
If it was a farm, it would be taxed as farming ground, which is like a non-commercial tax, although farming is a business.
The Caveat Here Is: Once a property has been improved, removing all structures does not normally make it revert back to unimproved land for a period of several years, and then often only if it became a natural habitat, aka woods again.
Like in my case: My front lot contains the house, garage, and two storage sheds. No buildings are on the back lot at all.
If I merge the two lots as a single lot, then all of the land would be considered improved ground and taxed as such.
This is why I was so careful about how I went about changing the names on the deeds, and doing so legally so as not to trigger an exchange which would have taxes to do the exchange.
Not sure about Illinois, but in MO and TN the amount of improvements (meaning structures) cannot exceed 30% of the lot. There are exceptions to this inside certain city areas.
A property having a structure is considered Improved Ground, and taxed accordingly for the improved land, plus taxes on the structure itself.
A property having no buildings or sheds of any kind on it is considered unimproved ground, and normally the taxes are very low. Even lower if it not cleared and still considered a wooded area or natural habitat.
If it was a farm, it would be taxed as farming ground, which is like a non-commercial tax, although farming is a business.
The Caveat Here Is: Once a property has been improved, removing all structures does not normally make it revert back to unimproved land for a period of several years, and then often only if it became a natural habitat, aka woods again.
Like in my case: My front lot contains the house, garage, and two storage sheds. No buildings are on the back lot at all.
If I merge the two lots as a single lot, then all of the land would be considered improved ground and taxed as such.
This is why I was so careful about how I went about changing the names on the deeds, and doing so legally so as not to trigger an exchange which would have taxes to do the exchange.
Re: Unclaimed Property
The house, and all the improvements to that one acre lot, were located on the front third of the property. Thus, about two thirds of my property was unimproved. It was wooded and a natural habitat. I have photos of the deer, pheasant, skunks, and various other critters that roamed around back there. You said it as it really is interpreted. The taxes are on the improved structures. So, even if I cut off the 2/3rd acre of forested land, and even if they assessed it for zero taxes due, I'd still be paying a high price for the all brick ranch house on the improved property. In other words, the unimproved land is worthless as far as the assessor is concerned. In reality it would be taxed, but at something like $100 or so. The bottom line is that it would not reduce my taxes.
However, being a parcel onto itself means I could sell it off for whatever the market will bare. Normally that's a good thing. In my case that parcel would have no access to the streets and could not be improved. However, again, my neighbor offered to buy that back parcel for a tennis court he wanted to build. That's what he told me anyway, but I'm sure he had ulterior motives. It turns out he had a crap lawyer who couldn't write up a purchase contract so that the deal never was completed.
However, being a parcel onto itself means I could sell it off for whatever the market will bare. Normally that's a good thing. In my case that parcel would have no access to the streets and could not be improved. However, again, my neighbor offered to buy that back parcel for a tennis court he wanted to build. That's what he told me anyway, but I'm sure he had ulterior motives. It turns out he had a crap lawyer who couldn't write up a purchase contract so that the deal never was completed.
Last edited by yogi on 15 Oct 2019, 20:16, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Unclaimed Property
My one/half acre back lot is taxed by both the city and the county.
The city tax is $4.31 - The county tax is $4.00 even. Last year combined it was only around $7.47.
If I add the back lot to the front lot on one deed, those two taxes on the back lot will jump by a little under $200.00 each.
It would raise my overall taxes by $381.00 a year if I combine front and back.
I won't get into what my front property taxes are, but they are super high here, higher than in Creve Coeur, MO.
The city tax is $4.31 - The county tax is $4.00 even. Last year combined it was only around $7.47.
If I add the back lot to the front lot on one deed, those two taxes on the back lot will jump by a little under $200.00 each.
It would raise my overall taxes by $381.00 a year if I combine front and back.
I won't get into what my front property taxes are, but they are super high here, higher than in Creve Coeur, MO.
Re: Unclaimed Property
Avoiding a $381 increase in property tax is well worth whatever effort, or lacking thereof, it takes. I can only add that the assessor didn't sit down and calculate what the new tax rate would be if I changed the way my land was broken up. I was happy to know the trouble of subdividing the lot to lower its cost was futile. The village didn't bother taxing real estate or personal property. They had a sales tax and probably some other source of income. Whatever it was, it was transparent to me. The county, on the other hand, was like paying protection to the Mafia.