County of Butte v. North Burbank Public Utility District

Opinion

PUGLIA, P. J. Are delinquent sewage service charges in all cases a lien upon the real property upon which the service was used? Under the circumstances of this case, the trial court held they were not. We affirm.

Defendant, North Burbank Public Utility District (District), is a jiublic utility district formed pursuant to Public Utilities Code section 15501 et seq. Located within the District boundaries is a mobilehome park known as the Oaks at Lake Oroville (Oaks), which the District provides with sewage service.

The Oaks became delinquent in sewage service charges incurred from March through June 1978. On or about July 1, 1978, District, pursuant to Public Utilities Code section 16469, notified the County of Butte to add to the assessment roll , unpaid charges in the amount of $3,136. [345]These charges were added to the District taxes and included in the tax bill for 1978-1979. By June 30, 1979, the delinquent service charges accrued to the Oaks had increased by an additional $17,046. These charges were ordered to be added to the tax bill for 1979-1980. On August 2, 1979, District caused a “Notice of Delinquent Charges, Taxes and Services” to be recorded.

In a letter dated August 6, 1979, the District threatened to terminate service to the Oaks because of the unpaid service charges. On August 8, 1979, plaintiff, County of Butte, sought an injunction to prevent District from discontinuing sewer service. On August 14, 1979, respondents (hereafter collectively referred to as Roberts), intervened in the county’s action, seeking (1) to quiet their title in the Oaks as against the District, and (2) to declare void the delinquent service charges as they appear on the secured tax rolls.

Roberts’ interest in the action came about as follows. On June 10, 1974, title to the Oaks was vested in “The Oaks at Lake Oroville, Ltd.,” a limited partnership. On that same date, the partnership encumbered the property with a deed of trust in favor of Central California Federal Savings & Loan Association, to secure an indebtedness of $550,000. Apparently, sometime between 1974 and 1979, the partnership became delinquent in payments on the deed of trust. On August 8, 1979, a trustee’s sale was conducted and the deed of trust foreclosed. On that same date, the purchaser at the trustee’s sale conveyed the property to Roberts. It was then that Roberts intervened in the present action.