All Forum Posts by: Alexander Zeisberg

I appreciate the suggestion that someone should pay me for my services, but I’d like to share my perspective. For me, being part of this forum is about much more than transactions—it’s about community. We’re all here to learn, share, and grow together, whether it’s buying homes, fixing them up, or helping our friends and neighbors create better living situations.

Honestly, it brings me joy to contribute and be of service, even without expecting payment. I truly believe what goes around comes around. Sometimes, we may give freely, and at other times, we find ourselves receiving—perhaps even overpaid—and that feels like the good energy coming back full circle.

For me, it’s not just about what we get, but how we choose to use it. So, while I value the sentiment behind the comment, I’m here to be a resource, to share, and to keep this spirit of collaboration going strong.

I was waiting for your comment @Drew Sygit. Didn’t know what we had in store but nice to see your comment and hope your doing well 

http://www.legalnews.com/

This is the Detroit legal new site. You can use the websites search feature with “Berrien” as the search term and it’s pulling up a bunch of foreclosures for the area.

More info is behind a paywall but addresses show up 

I just called the Berrien County Sheriff’s Department to get the details for you about foreclosures. Here’s what I found out:

• They update the foreclosure list on their website every Wednesday, usually after 1 p.m. If nothing’s there, it just means there’s nothing new.

• The info comes from Detroit Legal around 11 a.m., and they post it later in the day, so it’s best to check Wednesday afternoon or evening.

• If you see something interesting, you’ll need to move fast—by Thursday, you’ll want to be digging into the property info and investigating as much as possible.

• Sometimes, properties are sold via quitclaim deed before the sale, so you might need to have someone check the records office to verify the status.

• Make sure you learn about the redemption period, which can last anywhere from 6 months to a year (you can Google it for more details).

• The Berrien County Record newspaper might have foreclosure notices early because some lawyers advertise there, so it could be worth checking that too.

Hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions or need more help figuring it out.

https://www.berriencounty.org/555/Sheriff-Foreclosure-Auctio... 

 Thank you for your response! I just asked a title rep in the area and she says they wont handle a close even as a transaction coordinator unless they write a policy for it which they cant do on a manufactured home on a rented lot. Currently the plan is to use a lawyer the selling agent recommended. 

So how do you know there isnt a lien on the title? and how do you know your getting the real title and not an old title which the seller later filed for a lost title and got a new one which then had the recorded lien? Or even crazier they sold the home already. Would you contact the "DMV" or here in Michigan its called the Secratery of State office but same same?

Im representing a client who is purchasing a mobile home and i asked the selling agent to see title on the manufactured home which is on a rented lot. The sellers agent said "Any encumbrance on the title at this point is the sellers business and will be handled buy us prior to closing. I appreciate you thoroughness in the matter but we will handle everything as far as that is concerned and give your buyer a clean title at closing."

This is sending up some prickly hairs on my back. The last manufactured home on a lot i sold i gave the title to the closing company before we even listed, so it was up for grabs for anyone to see. 

Would you be worried or do anything? 

All i have done was said, "I appreciate knowing that the title will be clear at closing."

Anyone with more experience know if this is the norm? Anythoughts?

@Don Konipol

I actually laughed out loud at your comment about the seller being 'compensated' $100 when a buyer exercises their option to withdraw—it's such a painfully accurate observation. When a deal falls through, especially for reasons beyond the seller's control, it can really impact the MLS record and even stigmatize the listing. Personally, if I see a property that went back on the market after being under contract, my first assumption is, 'What did the buyer find wrong with it?' I don't immediately think it was due to a medical issue or some unexpected personal circumstance, even though I have been there; it's usually more along the lines of, 'They must've found something unsatisfactory with the property.'

In fact, I've seen this happen frequently, where properties are marketed as eligible for specific financing options, like VA loans, only for buyers to realize later that the home doesn't actually meet those requirements. Buyers might see 'VA eligible' and think it's ready for their financing, but then during inspection, they discover it needs more work than they expected. This only adds to the frustration, as it affects buyer confidence and raises doubts about the property's condition and eligibility.

I also didn’t realize that, in other countries, buyers are often required to put down a significant portion of the payment upfront before even getting under contract. That approach seems like it would reduce the chance of deals falling through, and I can understand why it would be standard practice. If everyone was following that same rule, I’d gladly do my due diligence ahead of time. In fact, I think it would be beneficial for everyone involved and could really reduce the stigma on sellers who end up with a failed transaction through no fault of their own.

But in a hot market like the one we’re in now, where homes are practically flying off the shelf, it can feel like a waste of money to do all the inspections and checks up front, especially if someone else might snap up the property before you’ve even finished your due diligence. There’s also the added pressure of not wanting to lose out on a property, which makes it harder to justify putting up serious money before going under contract.

On the other hand, if such a system were standard, it might push sellers to be more transparent from the start, so buyers know exactly what they’re walking into. I remember a presenter in a real estate class recently saying, 'Buyers are liars, and sellers are even worse,' which got a good laugh from everyone because it rings pretty true in this business. Transparency could go a long way in creating a smoother process and ensuring fewer surprises down the road.

Thanks for bringing up this perspective, Don—it's definitely made me think about how different market standards could impact the way we handle transactions here. This kind of system could really shift the dynamics and possibly make the process fairer for both buyers and sellers."

I think thats a great idea for the weekly schedule blocks for showings on occupied properties! I have not heard of that before but ill be using it! Great idea! 

@David Cheng, I get your position on requiring proof of liquidity for a high-value property like your $2 million fourplex. It makes sense to have standards, especially when you’re working with tenant-occupied properties and need to minimize unnecessary showings. A straightforward response like, 'Thanks for your interest, but we’ll need confirmation that the buyer can cover the full (or close to full) listing amount,' seems fair. This way, it saves time for everyone and keeps expectations clear.

That said, I understand the frustration others are expressing, especially around proof-of-funds requirements for more conventionally priced properties—those under $750K, for instance. I recently looked at a property in the $260K range that didn’t require proof of funds for a showing, though it would’ve needed one for an offer since it had to be a cash purchase. For properties like these, the condition and price often don’t warrant upfront financial vetting, and too many barriers can add friction to the process.

When it comes to lead times, I agree they’re essential for occupied homes—if tenants are involved, a 12-24 hour heads-up allows everyone to prepare. But for vacant properties, I think a 'show and go' policy would be ideal: the buyer’s agent can confirm directly with the listing agent, and then they’re free to view the property without delay. It keeps things flexible and accessible, which can make a big difference for everyone’s schedules.

At the end of the day, I don’t think your approach is unreasonable at all, David, especially for higher-value properties. And for conventionally priced listings, a bit more flexibility on showings could make it a smoother process. Just my thoughts—appreciate everyone’s insights on this topic!

Yes, I know a property manager! And if you’re looking into rentals, Coloma is a solid choice for both short-term and mid-term rentals (think 3-6 month leases). The city is very open to this setup, with a clear permit process: $500 initially, plus a $100 inspection fee. After that, it’s $150 each year if paid by January 1, with a $100 reinspection. So it’s about $250 a year going forward. This setup works great for seasonal or mid-term stays during the offseason, and with Coloma’s location near Paw Paw Lake and Lake Michigan, it’s a fantastic spot year-round. Let me know if you’d like more details!

https://colomatownship.org/ordinances/short-term-rentals/

I know of one for the Coloma and SW Michigan area. Id be more than happy to share their info!