Little

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of defendant City of Los Angeles (City), entered after its demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint was sustained without leave to amend.

*940 The Complaint

The complaint alleges: In November 1978 the real property involved in this action 1 was owned by the “late Grover C. Toomes.” On November 6 of that year the property was sold to plaintiff at a “Treasurer’s Improvement Bond Sale.” 2 A certificate of sale was issued to plaintiff on December 14, 1978. The last day on which a redemption from the sale could be effected was December 26, 1979. On December 24, 1979, the City accepted a personal check for $2,223.49 from one Frederick D. Milman in redemption of the property. 3 Milman was not an owner of the property, nor did he have an interest in it. He had, however, made an offer to purchase it from the “former” owner which offer had never been accepted.

On December 27 plaintiff applied for a treasurer’s deed to the property but was refused.

The complaint goes on to allege that there is a controversy between plaintiff and the City in that plaintiff contends (1) that the City was not authorized to accept Milman’s personal check; and…

I concur in the result. However, it is unnecessary to argue at length the meaning of “bank check.” Whether the city accepted payment in a form other than that set forth in Revenue and Taxation Code section 2504 does not control the result. As stated in Fernandez Co. v. Montoya (1938) 42 N.M. 524 [ 82 P.2d 289, 290 ]: “The treasurer [City] was the agent of [the tax deed holder] for the collection of the taxes [citations] and in view of the facts herein, the [tax deed holder] cannot complain that the tender was not made in money and at the office of the treasurer. Knowledge of the custom of accepting money orders in payment of taxes was chargeable to [the tax deed holder], and if the treasurer had accepted the money order, payment to [the tax deed holder] of the amount due it would have been made in money if so demanded.”

The purpose of the section (§ 2504) is to protect the treasurer from bad checks and the tax deed purchaser has no interest in it; his interest on a redemption is solely that he get his money back.

Fernandez Co., supra, cites supportive authority for its analysis from Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, Washington, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and we see no reason…

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of defendant City of Los Angeles (City), entered after its demurrer to plaintiff's complaint was sustained without leave to amend.

The complaint alleges: In November 1978 the real property involved in this action [1] was owned by the "late Grover C. Toomes." On November 6 of that year the property was sold to plaintiff at a "Treasurer's Improvement Bond Sale." [2] A certificate of sale was issued to plaintiff on December 14, 1978. The last day on which a redemption from the sale could be effected was December 26, 1979. On December 24, 1979, the City accepted a personal check for $2,223.49 from one Frederick D. Milman in redemption of the property. [3] Milman was not an owner of the property, nor did he have an interest in it. He had, however, made an offer to purchase it from the "former" owner which offer had never been accepted. [4]

On December 27 plaintiff applied for a treasurer's deed to the property but was refused.

The complaint goes on to allege that there is a controversy between plaintiff and the City in that plaintiff contends (1) that the City was not authorized to accept Milman's personal check; and…