We've got this from two investors so far. How are those of you in Chicago going to handle this? Does this effectively dry up the lending market? I would think we'd be hearing a lot more about this. And isn't this perilously close to red-lining?

Wow.
I knew about the ruling, but hadn't heard this sort of fall-out yet. We were just going to add something about it in our foreclosure checklist. But we have maybe a dozen loans with property that could be affected. Maybe. It's just not our market.

Check this out TR - http://www.chicityclerk.com/headlines/2011/oct/O2011-8066.pdf

It looks like they took out the "owner" section, but the whole thing looks terribly onerous to banks.

This is just a snippet of the fun

13-12-126 Vacant buildings - Mortgagee required to act - Enforcement authority.

(a) (1) The mortgagee of any residential building that has become vacant and which IS not registered pursuant to this section or Section 13-12-125(a) of this Code shail, within the later of 30 days after the building becomes vacant and unregistered or 60 days after a default, file a registration statement with the department of buildings on forms provided by that department for such purposes and pay a registration fee of $500.00 The registration shall remain valid for six months from the date of registration. The mortgagee shall be required to renew the registration every six months as long as the building remains vacant.

The best part is the City of Chicago is determined to get a state-wide law passed as soon as possible. Does that mean investors will pull out of the entire state of Illinois?

Do you think it applies to only foreclosed properties? The ruling states "vacant" properties. That's the part we're trying to unravel. I would appreciate your insight.

Nope, it's for abandoned properties for which the bank is the mortgagee. The properties do not have to be foreclosed on or be part of the bank's OREO to be covered... part of why this is so burdensome.

I think there still may be some confusion as to whether the ordiance applies to abandoned properties or simply vacant properties. How does one determine that a property is abandoned vs. simply vacant?

What a mess, and now Las Vegas has joined the fray.

From the IBA:

The term "vacant" is a defined term in the ordinance, and it bears repeating: As a mortgagee or servicer, you will have to determine on a monthly basis whether a residential property that is in default is "vacant." This includes when "the structure is empty or otherwise uninhabited by persons and the structure or lot is in need of maintenance, repair or securing," and at least one of the following exists: (a) doors or windows are smashed through, broken, unhinged, removed or continuously unlocked, (b) gas, electrical or water services to the entire premises have been terminated, (c) there has been no legal construction for over 6 months, (d) law enforcement officials have received at least one report of trespassing or vandalism or other illegal acts on the property in the last 6 months, or (e) there has been a judicial or city administrative order declaring the property unfit for occupancy.

And now this:

FHFA Sues City of Chicago Over Abandoned Property Ordinance
http://www.fhfa.gov/webfiles/22832/Chicago_Lawsuit_121211.pdf