One Case Could Change Everything: A Pro Se Litigant’s Battle with Harrisburg Exposes 400 Expired Liens
In the heart of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, a quiet but consequential legal battle is unfolding in the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas—one that could expose systemic failures in municipal lien management and deliver justice for hundreds of property owners. At the center of the case is a pro se litigant, Beau M. Brown, who is challenging the validity of a municipal lien filed over two decades ago, arguing that it has expired due to the failure to meet statutory revival requirements.
But this is no ordinary legal dispute.
A Tale of Two Liens
The lien in question dates back to 2000, when the Harrisburg Authority—a now-dissolved municipal entity mired in allegations of financial mismanagement—issued a series of municipal liens against property owners for alleged unpaid trash collection fees. In 2006, the City of Harrisburg sold the lien, along with hundreds of others, to Pun Collections V, LLC, a Maryland-based debt collection company. Fast-forward nearly 20 years, and that same company, now dissolved, continues to hold and allegedly enforce these liens.
A Systemic Issue
Through diligent research, Brown uncovered that there are over 400 similar liens in the Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, all assigned to Pun Collections V, LLC. These liens have not been revived within the statutory 20-year window mandated by Pennsylvania’s Municipal Claims and Tax Liens Law (MCTLL). The law is explicit: liens not revived within this timeframe are deemed “wholly lost” and unenforceable. Yet these liens remain active on the docket, casting a shadow over hundreds of properties in Harrisburg.
A Dissolved Company, A Persistent Problem
Adding another layer of complexity, Pun Collections V, LLC was dissolved in 2022, leaving no active corporate entity to enforce the liens. This raises serious questions: Who is accountable for these liens? Why are they still on record? And why is the City of Harrisburg, which no longer has a financial stake in these liens, siding with a defunct Maryland company rather than protecting its own taxpayers?
The City’s Role
The City’s involvement in this case is troubling. Despite having sold the liens nearly two decades ago, Harrisburg has aligned itself with Pun Collections in opposing Brown’s efforts to strike the lien. The City’s arguments hinge on broad interpretations of lien enforceability, sidestepping the clear statutory language of the MCTLL. Brown argues that this alignment perpetuates a system that prioritizes protecting expired debts over ensuring fair treatment for property owners.
The Harrisburg Authority’s Shadow
At the heart of this case lies the legacy of the Harrisburg Authority, a once-powerful entity implicated in financial scandals, including the incinerator debacle that saddled the city with millions in debt. The Authority’s questionable accounting practices and lax oversight are directly tied to the liens in question. Brown’s case has the potential to expose whether these liens were part of a larger pattern of improper debt assignments.
What’s at Stake?
This case is about more than one lien. It’s about safeguarding the integrity of property rights and ensuring municipalities and their contractors comply with statutory requirements. If the court rules in Brown’s favor, it could set a precedent forcing municipalities and lienholders to adhere to the law, potentially nullifying hundreds of improperly maintained liens across the state.
The Human Cost
For Brown, this fight is personal. The existence of this expired lien has prevented him from consolidating parcels, pursuing development opportunities, and even accessing basic rights as a property owner. The financial and emotional toll underscores the broader harm inflicted on property owners when municipal systems fail to operate transparently and lawfully.
Moving Forward
This case shines a light on the need for systemic reform. Whether it’s ensuring proper revival procedures, protecting property owners from predatory practices, or holding municipalities accountable, the outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for Harrisburg and beyond.
Call to Action
As Brown awaits the court’s ruling, the broader public has an opportunity to reflect on the balance between municipal enforcement and taxpayer rights. Should cities side with dissolved corporations or their own residents? Should expired debts continue to haunt property owners indefinitely? This case may hold the answers—and set a precedent that echoes far beyond the bounds of Dauphin County.
Harrisburg100 