Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
Private Lending & Conventional Mortgage Advice
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated 11 days ago, 12/08/2024

User Stats

6
Posts
3
Votes
Andrew Pierce
3
Votes |
6
Posts

Doctors Loan/Conventional Loan = You Must Occupy the Property forever?!?

Andrew Pierce
Posted

Hi BP Mortgage pro's,

theoretical scenario: a doctors loan was used to buy a primary residence rental portfolio piece, while talking with the loan officer @ big bank name about how it would be used as a rental portfolio piece after eventually moving out.  Then a couple years later, discovered that a piece of paper was signed at closing which was never read and in fine print says something about the home being owner occupied throughout the duration of the mortgage... wtf?   

Is that necessary terms for all doctors loans?   Does that make any sense to put in a 30 year loan package, or standard by any means?  I thought all 30 year mortgages require only 12 months occupancy.

It seems to be a lose-lose since the lender loses the interest on an otherwise good loan if it had to be sold, and they gain nothing.  Or if they already sold it on the secondary market, still, what could be the reason for this having been added into the fine print?

Loading replies...