Bankr. Code 544(a) gives the bankruptcy trustee the powers of a "hypothetical bona fide purchaser" at the time of filing of the bankruptcy petition. Because your "bond for title" was never recorded, there was neither constructive nor actual notice for the trustee, which means that, based upon existing case law, the bank would have priority over your claims, and you would be reduced to an unsecured creditor of the debtor. See, e.g., IN RE STANPHILL, 312 B.R. 691 , 694 (2004). ("The focus is not on the Trustee, but whether a hypothetical purchaser would have constructive notice of Plaintiffs claimed interest as of the commencement of the case.")
That said, I see an interesting argument here, because in a Chapter 11, the debtor is
the trustee (i.e., "debtor-in-possession
"). And, your debtor had "actual notice" of your bond for title contract. It seems to me that it would elevate form over substance to suggest that the debtor should be able to avoid your bond for title as unsecured, given that the contract was between you and the debtor. However, the case law at the moment, suggests that the absurd reverse outcome should prevail.
Your facts don't suggest that you were ever contacted by the bankruptcy court concerning the Chapter 11. This could give you the opportunity to move to modify the debtor's Chapter 11 plan and ask the court to void the foreclosure
sale. That could be a dicey proposition, but, it seems very odd that you had no notice of the bankruptcy from the court. It suggests that the debtor may have filed a fraudulent petition, which could be used as grounds to completely undo the bankruptcy. Whether or not this would undo the foreclosure, however, is a difficult question, because under state law, the bank would have priority to foreclose you out of the property, due to the bank's mortgage having a superior position to your bond for title (whether or not it was recorded).
What I'm getting at here is that I can see the possibility of your getting the bankruptcy set aside, and suing the debtor for fraud. But, that won't allow you to keep the property. it would only give you the possibility of collecting something from the debtor/former owner.
Assuming that you don't want to go through all of this hassle, then you would have 90 days to vacate, per federal law (12 U.S.C. 5220 note). As for purchasing the property from the bank, you can contact the bank's Real Estate Owned (REO) officer and see if there is any interest. My experience is that the property will be turned over to a local real estate broker to sell, and the only thing that the broker will care about is whether or not you are willing to pay fair market value for the property -- and whether or not you can qualify for institutional lending, if you cannot pay cash. There is little likelihood that you would be able to continue your bond for title contract.
It's a very messy deal, you've outlined. I really had to think about this one for a while, but after giving it about a half hour -- I'm pretty confident in my answer here.
Please let me know if I can clarify anything or further assist.