Skip to content
×
Try PRO Free Today!
BiggerPockets Pro offers you a comprehensive suite of tools and resources
Market and Deal Finder Tools
Deal Analysis Calculators
Property Management Software
Exclusive discounts to Home Depot, RentRedi, and more
$0
7 days free
$828/yr or $69/mo when billed monthly.
$390/yr or $32.5/mo when billed annually.
7 days free. 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.
Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation
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 over 6 years ago on . Most recent reply

User Stats

140
Posts
119
Votes
Megan Hirlehey
  • Pittsburgh, PA
119
Votes |
140
Posts

Does High Equity Increase Your Liability Risk?

Megan Hirlehey
  • Pittsburgh, PA
Posted

A lawyer (family member) who works in personal injury once told me that one of the first things a lawyer will do when you come to them with a personal injury case is to look into the kind of insurance/assets the potential defendent holds. Basically, how lucrative would this case be, if they were to win? And if said defendent doesn't have any "good" assets, most lawyers won't go after them because even if they win, they likely will not get paid and neither will their client.

I am curious if and how this translates to real estate. Is there any benefit to keeping your properties reasonably levaraged (50-60% in my opinion) even if you can afford not to, to reduce your assets' risk against libility claims? To put it another way, does someone with 100% equity look more attractive to a potential lawsuit because if the plaintiff wins, and a sale is forced, they would essentially have "first dibs" on the proceeds, as opposed to forcing the sale of a highly leveraged property and being left with the banks' sloppy seconds?

Does anyone consider this when strategizing how to protect themselves and their assets? Or is this not really ever a factor in a potential lawsuit?

Loading replies...