Contract4Deed Wiki

Pennsylvania

25 min read

Pennsylvania — Contract for Deed / Land Contract

Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the cited primary sources before acting. Statutes in this area are frequently amended. Last verified: 2026-06-08.

0. Identity & Terminology

  • In-state name(s): “installment land contract” is the statutory term of art (the 1965 Act is titled the “Installment Land Contract Law”); “installment sales agreement,” “land sales contract,” “land contract,” “articles of agreement,” and “contract for deed” all appear in Pennsylvania practice and case law for the same instrument. The seller is the vendor, the buyer the vendee/purchaser.
  • Recognition: statutory_and_common_law. Recognized by a geographically limited consumer-protection statute (the Installment Land Contract Law, Act of June 8, 1965, P.L. 115, No. 81, 68 P.S. §§ 901–911 — applicable only in cities of the first class and counties of the second class), by the statewide recording act (21 P.S. § 351), and — critically — by a controlling body of appellate case law that treats an installment land contract as a mortgage.
  • Statutory home: Installment Land Contract Law — Act of June 8, 1965, P.L. 115, No. 81, 68 P.S. §§ 901–911 (Act §§ 1–11; the operative provisions are §901 short title, §902 findings, §903 definitions/application, §904 notice to terminate, §905 seller’s remedies, §906 defaulting-purchaser action, §907 implied covenants, §908 payment allocation, §909 existing remedies, §910 incorporation, §911 effective date) (https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/PDF/1965/0/0081..PDF). Statewide residential-mortgage cure/notice overlay (applied to land contracts by case law) — Loan Interest and Protection Law (Act 6 of 1974), 41 P.S. §§ 101, 403, 404 (https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/HTM/1974/0/0006..HTM). Recording — 21 P.S. § 351 (https://codes.findlaw.com/pa/title-21-ps-deeds-and-mortgages/pa-st-sect-21-351/).
  • Remedy regime: treat_as_mortgage. This is the deal-defining fact in Pennsylvania. Two appellate lines converge to make forfeiture/ejectment the wrong remedy against a defaulting installment buyer who has taken possession and the incidents of ownership: (1) anderson-contracting-co-v-daugherty-1979, 274 Pa. Super. 13, 417 A.2d 1227 (1979), held that such a contract “will be treated as a residential mortgage for purposes of curing default” and gave the vendee the statewide Act 6 cure rights of 41 P.S. § 404; and (2) the recent zanicky-v-skopow-2025, 339 A.3d 998 (Pa. Super. 2025), held flatly that “an installment land contract is a mortgage for all substantive and procedural purposes,” that the vendee “never forfeited her equitable title” on default, and that the holder could extinguish that equity only by foreclosure, not by ejectment. Within Philadelphia and Allegheny County, the 1965 Act layers a statutory-cancellation overlay (notice-and-cure termination with a partial payments-refund floor; §§ 904–906). See forfeiture-vs-foreclosure and the Pennsylvania analogue of sebastian-v-floyd-1979; contrast strict forfeiture in skendzel-v-marshall-1973.

1. Formation & Mandatory Disclosures

  • Statute of frauds: Writing required. Under the Pennsylvania Statute of Frauds (Act of March 21, 1772, 1 Sm.L. 389, § 1; 33 P.S. § 1), no interest in land may be assigned, granted, or surrendered except by a signed writing (https://codes.findlaw.com/pa/title-33-ps-frauds-statute-of/pa-st-sect-33-1/). An agreement to sell real estate, including an installment land contract, must be in writing and signed by the party to be charged.
  • Mandatory disclosures: Geographically split.
    • Statewide — none specific to land contracts. Pennsylvania has no statewide installment-land-contract disclosure schedule of the Texas SB-198 type. The statewide Real Estate Seller Disclosure Law (Act 2000-114, 68 Pa.C.S. §§ 7301–7314, https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=68&div=0&chpt=73) requires the seller of a residential property of 1–4 units to deliver the statutory Seller’s Property Disclosure Statement before an agreement of sale is signed; a transfer by installment land contract is a sale that triggers it. Penalty for omission: a buyer harmed by a willful or negligent nondisclosure may recover actual damages (68 Pa.C.S. § 7311); nondisclosure does not by itself void a completed contract.
    • Philadelphia & Allegheny County only — statutory implied covenants/accounting. The Installment Land Contract Law applies “in any city of the first class or county of the second class” (68 P.S. § 903 / Act § 3). It imposes implied covenants that the seller’s title be good and marketable for the contract term and that, on the purchaser’s written request (no more than once every six months), the seller (i) state the unpaid balance in writing, (ii) furnish a complete itemization of all installment components, and (iii) make tax and insurance receipts available (68 P.S. § 907 / Act § 7). Penalty for omission: where the seller fails to perform these covenants and does not comply within 30 days of written demand, the purchaser “may at any time thereafter terminate the contract” and recover all installment payments paid (less amounts allocable to taxes, water/sewer rent, insurance, and repairs the purchaser was responsible for) (68 P.S. § 907(g) / Act § 7(g)). (https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/PDF/1965/0/0081..PDF)
  • Recording requirement: Not a condition of validity, but priority-protective and time-sensitive. Pennsylvania’s recording act (21 P.S. § 351) provides that an unrecorded conveyance/agreement is void as against a subsequent bona fide purchaser, mortgagee, or judgment creditor without notice who records first (https://codes.findlaw.com/pa/title-21-ps-deeds-and-mortgages/pa-st-sect-21-351/). A separate recording statute (21 P.S. § 444) directs that instruments be recorded within 90 days of execution, but recording is permissive for the land contract itself; the operative consequence of delay is loss of priority under § 351, not invalidity. Who records: either party in practice; the vendee has the incentive to record the contract or a memorandum to protect equitable title.
  • Annual accounting statement: Statewide — not mandated by statute. In Philadelphia / Allegheny County, the seller must, on the purchaser’s written request at intervals no more than once every six months, furnish the unpaid balance and a complete itemization of installment components (68 P.S. § 907 / Act § 7), and § 908 (Act § 8) prescribes the allocation of monthly payments — taxes, water/sewer rent, interest, insurance, repairs, and authorized assessments are deducted first, and the net balance is applied to principal (https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/PDF/1965/0/0081..PDF).
  • Prepayment: No statute prohibits prepayment of an installment land contract or bars a prepayment penalty; the right and any penalty are contract-governed. (No prohibitory primary source located — flagged under needs_verification rather than asserted.)
  • Usury / interest cap: Pennsylvania’s general usury ceiling is 6% per annum where there is no written contract rate, for obligations of 329,411 for 2026 (312,159 for 2024) (https://www.pa.gov/en/agencies/dobs/media-resources/act-6-information.html).

2. Buyer’s Equitable Interest

  • Equitable title passes: Yes. On execution of a Pennsylvania installment land contract the vendee acquires equitable title and the burdens and incidents of ownership; the vendor retains bare legal title as security and a duty to convey by deed on full payment. zanicky-v-skopow-2025 confirms the vendee “never forfeited her equitable title” notwithstanding default, 339 A.3d 998 (Pa. Super. 2025).
  • Equitable conversion recognized: Yes — long-settled Pennsylvania doctrine; the vendee’s interest is treated as realty and the vendor’s as a security/personal interest. See equitable-conversion.
  • Buyer’s interest recordable / insurable: Recordable (the contract or a memorandum may be recorded under 21 P.S. § 351 to protect priority) and insurable — the vendee’s equitable title is a recognized insurable interest in Pennsylvania’s active title-insurance market.
  • Risk of loss: contract_governed in practice; under equitable conversion the default common-law allocation places risk of loss on the vendee/equitable owner after execution, but contracts routinely address it. (Default-rule case citation flagged under needs_verification.)
  • Improvements & waste: The vendee in possession holds the ownership incidents and bears responsibility for the property; the vendor’s retained security supports a waste claim against a defaulting vendee. (Specific Pennsylvania waste citation flagged under needs_verification.)

3. Default & Remedies → see forfeiture-vs-foreclosure

  • Primary remedy: judicial foreclosure (treat-as-mortgage), with a statutory-cancellation overlay inside Philadelphia and Allegheny County. A Pennsylvania installment land contract is “a mortgage for all substantive and procedural purposes” (zanicky-v-skopow-2025); the vendor’s path to extinguish the vendee’s equity is mortgage foreclosure, not forfeiture or ejectment.
  • Forfeiture available? No — barred for a possessory vendee. Where the vendee has taken possession and the incidents of ownership, the vendor cannot reclaim by forfeiture/ejectment; the equity must be foreclosed (zanicky-v-skopow-2025, 339 A.3d 998; anderson-contracting-co-v-daugherty-1979, 417 A.2d 1227). A confession-of-judgment / power-to-confess clause does not override this — Anderson involved exactly such a clause and the court still applied mortgage-cure protection.
    • Substantial-equity bar: Effectively categorical, not equity-threshold based. Unlike the Skendzel “substantial equity” test (skendzel-v-marshall-1973), Pennsylvania does not measure how much the buyer has paid before barring forfeiture — the treat-as-mortgage rule bars forfeiture of a possessory vendee’s equity outright, paralleling sebastian-v-floyd-1979 (Kentucky). Leading case: zanicky-v-skopow-2025.
  • Statutory cancellation (Philadelphia / Allegheny County only — 68 P.S. §§ 904–906): Where the 1965 Act applies, the seller’s remedies are limited by statute to (1) termination per § 904 or (2) an action for the installment / repair expenditures (68 P.S. § 905 / Act § 5(a)). Termination requires a written notice of termination as a condition precedent (§ 904 / Act § 4):
    • Cure period / runs-from: the termination date “shall in no case be less than thirty days” after service of the notice where default is nonpayment, and not less than sixty days where default is failure to make repairs (68 P.S. § 904(c) / Act § 4(c)). Runs from: service of the notice.
    • Notice form prescribed: Yes — the notice must specify the nature of the default, and where default is failure to keep the premises in repair, contain a “reasonably specific statement of the items in disrepair” (68 P.S. § 904(b) / Act § 4(b)).
    • Service method: personally, or by registered mail, or by certified mail sent to the purchaser’s last known address (68 P.S. § 904(a) / Act § 4(a)).
    • Forfeited-payments floor (the 25% rule): A purchaser who has surrendered possession and paid more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the purchase price may recover that portion in excess of 25%, less the seller’s actual damages, by an action instituted within one year of default — the retained ≤25% is deemed liquidated damages, not a penalty (68 P.S. § 906 / Act § 6(b)).
  • Statewide cure overlay (Act 6, 41 P.S. §§ 403–404): Because a land contract is treated as a residential mortgage, the statewide Act 6 cure regime attaches where the obligation is within the base figure (§1 usury): before accelerating / foreclosing, the holder must give a 30-day written Notice of Intention to Foreclose by registered or certified mail (41 P.S. § 403), and the debtor (or anyone on the debtor’s behalf), not more than three times in any calendar year, may cure the default up to one hour before the sheriff’s sale by paying the past-due sums, performing other obligations, and paying reasonable fees and costs (41 P.S. § 404) (https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/HTM/1974/0/0006..HTM).
  • Judicial foreclosure required when: To extinguish the equity of a possessory installment vendee, statewide — always, per zanicky-v-skopow-2025 (ejectment is improper; foreclosure required).
  • Acceleration enforceable? conditional — an acceleration clause may drive foreclosure, but acceleration triggers the Act 6 § 403 notice and § 404 cure rights as a precondition where the obligation is a residential mortgage.
  • Restitution offset on forfeiture: In the Philadelphia/Allegheny statutory track, the 25% floor of § 906 is the offset — the seller keeps ≤25% as liquidated damages and must refund the excess (less actual damages) to a vendee who surrenders possession and sues within one year. Outside that track, the treat-as-mortgage rule means the vendee’s equity is realized through the foreclosure sale surplus rather than a forfeiture/refund offset.
  • Seller’s other remedies: mortgage foreclosure (statewide), suit for the unpaid installment / repair expenditures (68 P.S. § 905, where the 1965 Act applies), and an action for damages limited by the statutory measure (68 P.S. § 905(e) / Act § 5(e) — excess of contract price over market price, unpaid installments due before surrender, repair costs; the unpaid balance of the purchase price is expressly NOT a recoverable damages item).

▸ For Sellers / Operators — This is the deal-defining module, and Pennsylvania is a treat-as-mortgage state: you cannot forfeit or eject a defaulting buyer who has taken possession — you must foreclose like a mortgage (zanicky-v-skopow-2025, anderson-contracting-co-v-daugherty-1979). Before foreclosing you must send the 30-day Act 6 Notice of Intention to Foreclose by registered/certified mail (41 P.S. § 403) and honor the buyer’s right to cure up to three times a year, until one hour before the sheriff’s sale (41 P.S. § 404). In Philadelphia and Allegheny County, the 1965 Installment Land Contract Law also applies: your remedies are statutorily limited to a §904 notice-termination (≥30 days nonpayment / ≥60 days repairs) or a suit for the installment, you must furnish the §907 accounting on request, and a buyer who paid >25% can claw back the excess over 25% if they surrender and sue within a year (§906). Confirm your rate against the Act 6 residential ceiling if the balance is ≤ the base figure ($329,411 for 2026), deliver the statewide Seller’s Property Disclosure Statement (68 Pa.C.S. §§ 7301–7314), and record a memorandum to protect priority (21 P.S. § 351). The path to a clean re-sale here is foreclosure, not a forfeiture clause — drafting a forfeiture remedy you cannot enforce is the central Pennsylvania trap.

▸ For Buyers — You hold equitable title that survives default (zanicky-v-skopow-2025); the seller can take the property only by foreclosure, where you keep any sale surplus over the debt. Your core protections are the Act 6 30-day notice + cure rights (41 P.S. §§ 403–404), and — in Philadelphia/Allegheny County — the §904 notice-and-cure termination and the 25% payments floor (§906).

3b. Remedies — Advanced

  • Election of remedies: In the Philadelphia/Allegheny statutory track the seller’s remedies are mutually limited by § 905: a seller who sues for the installment (clause 2) may later terminate per § 904 only if the purchaser has not cured a subsequently declared default (68 P.S. § 905(b)). Statewide, the treat-as-mortgage rule channels the seller into foreclosure.
  • Deficiency after forfeiture or foreclosure: Because the deal is foreclosed like a mortgage, a deficiency judgment follows mortgage-foreclosure law, subject to the Deficiency Judgment Act (42 Pa.C.S. §§ 8103) fair-value procedure. (Specific Pennsylvania authority applying the Deficiency Judgment Act to a foreclosed land contract flagged under needs_verification.)
  • Equitable relief from forfeiture: Pennsylvania supplies relief structurally by recharacterizing the contract as a mortgage (Anderson; Zanicky) and through the Act 6 statutory cure windows, rather than through a discretionary anti-forfeiture decree.
  • Ejectment vs. eviction path: A defaulting installment vendee is neither a tenant nor subject to ejectment — the vendee is an equitable owner whose interest is extinguished only by mortgage foreclosure (zanicky-v-skopow-2025 holds ejectment improper). This is the sharpest practical takeaway of Pennsylvania law.
  • Quiet title after cancellation: In the Philadelphia/Allegheny statutory track, § 906 provides that a defaulting purchaser’s residual right of action “shall not be deemed a cloud on seller’s title, nor prevent seller from conveying a clear title” during the action’s pendency (68 P.S. § 906(b)); elsewhere, title is cleared through the foreclosure sale. (Quiet-title court/timeline flagged under needs_verification.)
  • Forfeited payments treatment: In the 1965-Act counties, the portion of the price retained by the seller (capped at 25%) is liquidated damages, not a penalty, by statute (68 P.S. § 906(b)). Outside those counties, the treat-as-mortgage rule means the buyer’s payments are realized as equity through the foreclosure sale rather than retained as forfeited.
  • Intervening seller-lien risk to buyer: A vendee who fails to record (contract or memorandum) risks subordination to a later conveyance, mortgage, or judgment lien by the vendor under 21 P.S. § 351; recording is the defense. Zanicky itself arose from the vendor deeding the property to a third party after the contract.

4. Federal Overlay (as applied in-state) → see dodd-frank-seller-financing, safe-act-mlo

  • Dodd-Frank exposure: A Pennsylvania installment land contract on a 1-to-4-unit owner-occupied dwelling is residential “credit” within the dodd-frank-seller-financing seller-financer framework. An individual vendor selling one property in any 12 months (no balloon, fixed/qualifying rate) may fall within the § 1026.36(a)(5) one-property exclusion, and a vendor (incl. entities) selling three or fewer may fall within the three-property / ability-to-repay exclusion (12 C.F.R. §§ 1026.36(a), 1026.43(a),(e)). The state’s Act 6 residential ceiling (§1) and the treat-as-mortgage rule (§3) operate independently of and on top of any federal exclusion.
  • SAFE Act MLO licensing: Pennsylvania implements the federal SAFE Act through the Mortgage Licensing Act, 7 Pa.C.S. §§ 6101 et seq., administered by the Department of Banking and Securities (DOBS); a vendor originating dwelling-secured seller financing above the de minimis threshold may trigger MLO-licensing exposure. See safe-act-mlo. (Exact Pennsylvania de-minimis seller-financer count flagged under needs_verification.)
  • State consumer-protection overlay / CFPB notes: The 1965 Installment Land Contract Law (Philadelphia/Allegheny) and the statewide treat-as-mortgage doctrine are the in-state guardrails. Zanicky expressly situates Pennsylvania within the national CFPB / state-AG predatory-CFD scrutiny wave (2016–present), noting the post-2008 growth of corporate installment-contract portfolios. Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (73 P.S. §§ 201-1 et seq.) is the general consumer-fraud backstop. (UTPCPL application to a specific CFD practice flagged under needs_verification.)

5. Title, Recording & Wraps → see garn-st-germain-due-on-sale

  • Memorandum recording: Permitted. The contract or a memorandum of installment land contract may be acknowledged and recorded; under 21 P.S. § 351 recording protects priority against subsequent purchasers, mortgagees, and judgment creditors without notice (https://codes.findlaw.com/pa/title-21-ps-deeds-and-mortgages/pa-st-sect-21-351/). A recorded memorandum is evidence of the contract, not itself a conveyance of fee title.
  • Garn-St. Germain due-on-sale: A land contract is a transfer that triggers a due-on-sale clause in any underlying mortgage; see garn-st-germain-due-on-sale (12 U.S.C. § 1701j-3). The residential exemptions (e.g., transfer into an inter vivos trust where the borrower remains a beneficiary/occupant) generally do not reach a sale on land contract to a third-party buyer, so wraps over an existing institutional mortgage carry acceleration risk.
  • Underlying-mortgage / wrap: Permitted but risky. A wrap installment contract while a senior institutional mortgage remains in place exposes the deal to due-on-sale acceleration (above) and to the vendee’s loss if the vendor stops paying the senior lien; disclosure of the underlying encumbrance is essential (a recorded prior mortgage is constructive notice under 21 P.S. § 351). The §907 implied covenant of marketable title (in the 1965-Act counties) gives the vendee a lever where the senior lien clouds title.
  • Deed delivery: deliver_at_payoff — the vendor delivers a deed on full performance; escrow of the executed deed is a common contractual mechanism. The realty-transfer-tax rules below assume the deed is recorded at payoff.
  • Marketable title at payoff: In the 1965-Act counties the seller impliedly covenants good and marketable title for the contract term (68 P.S. § 907(a) / Act § 7(a)), and title “shall be deemed marketable even though there is a lien or encumbrance” extinguishable by paying a definite sum not exceeding the unpaid balance (§ 907(f)). Title search/insurance at payoff is standard statewide.
  • Title insurance: Available to the vendee (equitable-title interest) and to the vendor; Pennsylvania has an active regulated title-insurance market.
  • Seller death or bankruptcy effect: The vendor’s interest is legal title held as security plus the right to payments; on the vendor’s death it passes by estate/devise subject to the contract, and the vendee’s equitable title and conveyance right survive (see §7).

6. Tax Treatment

  • IRC §453 installment reporting: A Pennsylvania installment land contract is an installment sale for federal income tax — the vendor may report gain under IRC § 453 as principal is collected, subject to the dealer-property exclusion (§ 453(b)(2),(l)) and depreciation-recapture acceleration. See irc-453-installment-sale (26 U.S.C. § 453). (Pennsylvania personal income tax installment-method conformity flagged under needs_verification.)
  • Property-tax responsibility: contract_governed, but the vendee in possession is the equitable owner and typically pays property taxes by contract.
  • Homestead / equitable-owner treatment: The vendee in possession is the equitable owner; eligibility for Pennsylvania’s Homestead/Farmstead Exclusion (Taxpayer Relief Act, 53 Pa.C.S. ch. 85, subch. F) turns on owner-occupancy and is administered locally. (Express inclusion of a land-contract vendee as “owner” for the homestead exclusion flagged under needs_verification.)
  • Transfer / documentary-stamp tax: Pennsylvania imposes a 1% state realty transfer tax (72 P.S. § 8101-C et seq.) plus local transfer tax (commonly 1%, up to higher rates in Philadelphia/Pittsburgh). The realty-transfer-tax regulation excludes a “contract for a deed in which legal title does not pass until total consideration is paid” — but the exclusion is lost if (i) the purchaser obtains or retains possession of the realty or (ii) consideration is payable over more than 30 years (61 Pa. Code § 91.193(b)(29), https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/pennsylvania/61-Pa-Code-SS-91-193). Practical effect: because a typical installment buyer takes possession, the contract for deed is generally NOT excluded — transfer tax is due on the instrument, a notable Pennsylvania trap. An assignment of the buyer’s rights is excluded unless the seller releases the buyer (§ 91.193(b)(30)).
  • Mortgage registration tax: Pennsylvania has no mortgage recording/registration tax; recording is a per-document/per-page fee.

7. Bankruptcy & Death / Divorce

  • Buyer bankruptcy: secured-debt characterization favored. Because Pennsylvania treats an installment land contract as a mortgage (Anderson; Zanicky), a Pennsylvania-law land contract is well positioned to be treated as a secured financing rather than an executory contract under 11 U.S.C. § 365 — letting the vendee-debtor cure and reinstate in a Chapter 13 plan (11 U.S.C. § 1322). The national split is discussed in forfeiture-vs-foreclosure. (Specific Third Circuit / Pennsylvania bankruptcy-court holding flagged under needs_verification.)
  • Seller bankruptcy: If the vendor files, the vendee’s recorded equitable interest and conveyance right are generally protected against the estate (a recorded interest defeats the trustee’s strong-arm/BFP powers under 11 U.S.C. § 544); recording is again the protection.
  • Assignability by buyer: The vendee’s equitable interest is assignable unless the contract restricts it (an assignment is recognized for transfer-tax purposes, 61 Pa. Code § 91.193(b)(30)); anti-assignment / due-on-sale clauses in the contract are generally enforceable. (Pennsylvania-specific anti-assignment case flagged under needs_verification.)
  • Survivorship / divorce: The vendee’s equitable interest is real property for survivorship and marital-estate purposes — it may be held jointly with survivorship, devised, and is marital property subject to equitable distribution (23 Pa.C.S. § 3501) in a Pennsylvania divorce.

8. Case Law (real, verified)

CaseYearTopicHolding (plain English)Source
anderson-contracting-co-v-daugherty-19791979remedies / treat-as-mortgageAn installment land contract in which the vendees take possession and the incidents of ownership while the vendor retains title and a power to confess judgment “will be treated as a residential mortgage for purposes of curing default” — the vendee gets the Act 6 cure rights (41 P.S. § 404). 274 Pa. Super. 13, 417 A.2d 1227. (Appeal to Pa. Supreme Court dismissed, 492 Pa. 630 (1980).)https://law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/superior-court/1979/274-pa-super-13-2.html
zanicky-v-skopow-20252025remedies / forfeiture barred / equitable title”An installment land contract is a mortgage for all substantive and procedural purposes.” A defaulting buyer never forfeits equitable title; the holder can extinguish the buyer’s equity only by foreclosure, not by ejectment. 339 A.3d 998 (Pa. Super., decided May 30, 2025) (No. 1078 WDA 2023).https://law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/superior-court/2025/1078-wda-2023.html

9. Edge Cases (state-specific notes)

  • forfeiture-vs-foreclosure — Pennsylvania is a treat-as-mortgage state statewide (Zanicky; Anderson); forfeiture/ejectment of a possessory vendee is barred, paralleling sebastian-v-floyd-1979 and contrasting skendzel-v-marshall-1973.
  • Geographic split (the §901 trap): the 1965 Installment Land Contract Law’s notice-termination, accounting, and 25% payments-floor protections apply only in Philadelphia (first-class city) and Allegheny County (second-class county) (68 P.S. § 903); the treat-as-mortgage case-law rule applies statewide.
  • Realty-transfer-tax trap: a contract for deed where the buyer takes possession loses the §91.193(b)(29) exclusion — transfer tax is generally due on the instrument (61 Pa. Code § 91.193(b)(29)).
  • garn-st-germain-due-on-sale — a Pennsylvania land contract is a triggering transfer; wraps over an institutional mortgage risk acceleration.
  • dodd-frank-seller-financing — the one-/three-property exclusions may apply, stacked on top of the Act 6 residential ceiling and the treat-as-mortgage rule.
  • Manufactured/mobile homes, SCRA, seller insolvency — Zanicky itself involved a mobile home on land; deeper development to follow.

10. Operations

  • Where records live: county Recorder of Deeds (contracts / memoranda / deeds); mortgage foreclosure in the Court of Common Pleas (civil division) with sheriff’s sale; the §904 notice-termination (Philadelphia/Allegheny) is a contractual/statutory pre-suit step.
  • Public-access URLs: Pennsylvania General Assembly (https://www.palegis.us); Pennsylvania Code & Bulletin (https://www.pacodeandbulletin.gov); Unified Judicial System opinions (https://www.pacourts.us); DOBS Act 6 rates (https://www.pa.gov/en/agencies/dobs/media-resources/act-6-information.html); Department of Revenue Realty Transfer Tax (https://www.pa.gov/agencies/revenue/resources/tax-types-and-information/realty-transfer-tax).
  • Who may draft (UPL): standardized fill-in installment-contract and memorandum forms are used, but drafting custom terms or advising on the foreclosure/cure strategy is law practice — non-attorney form completion risks UPL exposure.
  • Typical costs / timelines: statewide enforcement runs on the mortgage-foreclosure track (Common Pleas complaint, Act 6 30-day notice, cure windows, judgment, sheriff’s sale) — slower and costlier than a forfeiture; the Philadelphia/Allegheny §904 notice-termination requires ≥30 days (nonpayment) or ≥60 days (repairs).
  • Key agencies: DOBS (Act 6 rates / mortgage licensing / SAFE), Department of Revenue (realty transfer tax), county Recorders of Deeds, Courts of Common Pleas.
  • Useful forms: Seller’s Property Disclosure Statement (68 Pa.C.S. § 7304), Memorandum of Installment Land Contract, §904 Notice of Termination (Philadelphia/Allegheny), Act 6 Notice of Intention to Foreclose (41 P.S. § 403), Realty Transfer Tax Statement of Value (REV-183).

11. Meta

  • sources:
  • needs_verification:
    • Zanicky v. Skopow official pacourts.us slip-opinion PDF (the Justia primary docket [No. 1078 WDA 2023, decided 2025-05-30] is now pinned and the holding/quotes are confirmed; remaining task is to attach the pacourts.us PDF and confirm precedential vs. non-precedential status).
    • Prepayment penalty: no Pennsylvania primary source confirming a default rule or prohibition for installment land contracts (left contract-governed).
    • Risk-of-loss default rule and improvements/waste: specific Pennsylvania case citation not yet retrieved.
    • SAFE Act / Mortgage Licensing Act (7 Pa.C.S. §§ 6101 et seq.) de-minimis seller-financer exemption count — exact threshold not yet retrieved.
    • Buyer/seller bankruptcy: specific Third Circuit / Pennsylvania bankruptcy-court decision characterizing a PA land contract as secured debt vs. § 365 executory contract.
    • Anti-assignment clause enforceability: Pennsylvania-specific case not yet retrieved.
    • Deficiency Judgment Act (42 Pa.C.S. § 8103) application to a foreclosed installment land contract — direct authority not yet retrieved.
    • Homestead/Farmstead Exclusion express inclusion of a land-contract vendee as “owner.”
    • Pennsylvania personal income tax conformity to the IRC § 453 installment method for land-contract gain.
    • UTPCPL (73 P.S. §§ 201-1 et seq.) application to a specific installment-land-contract practice.
    • 21 P.S. § 444 90-day recording window — confirm current text/applicability to land contracts (cited from secondary orientation; primary not yet pinned).
  • open_questions:
    • Post-Zanicky, does any Pennsylvania court permit a §904-style statutory termination (Philadelphia/Allegheny) to extinguish equity without a foreclosure sale, or does Zanicky’s “mortgage for all purposes” rule now require foreclosure even inside the 1965-Act counties?
    • Interaction of the Act 6 residential ceiling with the federal QM/ATR exclusions for a noncompliant individual-vendor wrap.
  • cross_links: forfeiture-vs-foreclosure, equitable-conversion, dodd-frank-seller-financing, safe-act-mlo, garn-st-germain-due-on-sale, irc-453-installment-sale, skendzel-v-marshall-1973, sebastian-v-floyd-1979, anderson-contracting-co-v-daugherty-1979, zanicky-v-skopow-2025
  • changelog:
    • 2026-06-08 — Initial authored page; remedy_regime = treat_as_mortgage (Zanicky/Anderson statewide; 1965-Act statutory-cancellation overlay in Philadelphia/Allegheny). Primary citations retrieved from legis.state.pa.us (1965 Act full PDF text + Act 6), codes.findlaw.com (41 §201, 33 §1, 21 §351), law.cornell.edu (61 Pa. Code § 91.193), and pa.gov DOBS (Act 6 base figure).
    • 2026-06-08 — Adversarial citation audit: re-verified every statute and both cases against primary text. Corrected 1965-Act codification range from “68 P.S. §§ 901-907” to the correct ”§§ 901-911” (Act §§1-11; page already relied on §908 allocation, so 907 was an under-inclusive cap). Confirmed 1965 Act §§3-8 line-by-line, 41 P.S. §403/§404/§201/§101, 21 P.S. §351, 33 P.S. §1, 61 Pa. Code §91.193(b)(29), 68 Pa.C.S. §7301 et seq., and DOBS base figures (2026 319,777 / 2024 $312,159). Upgraded Zanicky citation from a law-firm blog to the Justia primary docket (No. 1078 WDA 2023, decided 2025-05-30); holding quotes (“mortgage for all substantive and procedural purposes”; “never forfeited her equitable title”; foreclosure-not-ejectment) corroborated. Confirmed Anderson’s Supreme Court disposition: appeal dismissed as improvidently granted, 492 Pa. 630, 425 A.2d 329 (1980). No fabricated authority found.

Disclaimer. This page is legal information, not legal advice, and may be out of date. Contract-for-deed statutes are frequently amended and remedies turn on facts. Consult a licensed attorney in this jurisdiction before drafting, enforcing, or signing an installment land contract.

Graph View

Backlinks