Short answer. Yes, ordinary continued use is allowed. The court may enjoin actual waste, but it is not waste for someone in possession during the redemption period to keep using the property as before, use it in the ordinary course of husbandry, or make necessary repairs while occupying it.

What the law says

Until the expiration of the time allowed for redemption, the court may, as in other proper cases, restrain the commission of waste on the property by injunction, on the application of the purchaser or the judgment obligee, with or without notice; but it is not waste for a person in possession of the property at the time of the sale, or entitled to possession afterwards, during the period allowed for redemption, to continue to use it in the same manner in which it was previously used; or to use it in the ordinary course of husbandry; or to make the necessary repairs to buildings thereon while he occupies the property.

Rule 39, Section 31 — Manner of using premises pending redemption; waste restrained. Read the full provision →

Waste can be enjoined

Until the time allowed for redemption expires, the court may, as in other proper cases, restrain the commission of waste on the property by injunction, on the application of the purchaser or the judgment obligee, and it may do so with or without prior notice to the person in possession. This gives the purchaser or obligee a direct remedy if the occupant starts stripping value from the property, such as removing fixtures or letting it fall into serious disrepair.

What does not count as waste

The Rule is careful to say that it is not waste for a person in possession of the property at the time of the sale, or for someone entitled to possession afterward, to keep using the property during the redemption period in the same manner it was previously used, to use it in the ordinary course of husbandry, or to make necessary repairs to buildings on it while occupying the property.

Who this protection covers, and why the line is drawn this way

This protection covers a person in possession at the time of the sale, or someone entitled to possession afterward, for as long as the redemption period runs. Drawing the line this way balances the purchaser's interest in eventually receiving an undiminished property against the occupant's ongoing right to normal, non-destructive use while the redemption clock is still ticking. The moment the redemption period actually expires without redemption, this particular protection ends along with it, since the purchaser's ownership then becomes absolute.

The line between normal use and waste

The dividing line the Rule draws is between using property the way it was already being used, and actively diminishing its value beyond ordinary wear. Continuing to farm land as before, living in a house as before, or making necessary repairs all fall on the protected side; stripping fixtures, cutting timber for sale, or letting structures deliberately fall apart would more plausibly count as waste the purchaser or judgment obligee could ask the court to enjoin.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.