All Forum Posts by: Andrew Tothill

@Wes Blackwell Thank you for your post.  It brings up some very interesting points and certainly has led to a discussion here.  I'd love to answer your questions before I give my thoughts.  So here goes:

1. I am personally a "single" male in his early 30's, with no children.  It would hardly effect my life at all to be honest.  Although, I am in the very small percentage of people that do not consume very often.  I would likely use the money to invest into long-term investments.  To be honest, investing in the Targets, Walmarts and gaming industry companies is not the worst idea.  They will likely boom in the near future if this was to be implemented.  

2. The local market in my area would be even more competitive and expensive than it already is I believe.  The Washington D.C. area is already a very tough area to get a decently priced place in.  It would be great for the sellers though. 

3. I personally would not, although I am certain I'd be in the minority.  Even now I don't charge anywhere near what I could charge for rent as I have more interest in helping others have affordable housing as opposed to creating a few extra dollars for myself.

I personally think that people will certainly vote for him because of this, but I don't think it's the best use of that amount of money.  I think that increasing the literacy rate and education budget is the best use of that kind of money.  Handing out money to people that do not know how to harness its imaginary power is never going to end well.  I am very much for helping people in a tougher situation than I am in (see above), but hardly ever is the answer to give them money to help their situation.  

Thank you for the reply.  Let me address some of the concerns:

We are absolutely weighing the family factor, although this has happened in the past with the same group and it worked out well.  So hopefully that will continue.  

Person 3 can do the renovations is their main contribution.  Person 3 can also be a cosigner so that person 2 doesn't have the full responsibility of managing the investment.  Person 2 cannot afford to buy any property in cash, it will have to be financed in some way (Another way person 3 may be helpful).  Person 1 is in their 30s, but just hasn't had credit to begin with at all, beginning now and isn't ready to take on a mortgage on their own.  Has no problem paying rent in their history and has a very consistent job that will always be in demand.  The idea would be that eventually person 1 builds credit enough to buy something else on their own, freeing up the property to be the first asset in this new business for person 2 and 3.  

Just a matter of the way to structure it legally...

Thanks again for your suggetions!!

Hello,

I have a unique scenario where 3 people are involved in acquiring a property, just looking for the best way to go about it that satisfies all three parties.

Person 1: Bad credit, Mid-40s income, never owned and hoping to buy a home on their own in a metropolitan area (Fixer upper).  

Person 2: Great credit, Business owner with assets, Home owner, family member to Person 1.  Hoping to help Person 1 acquire a home but wants them to pay to a company, not to them. 

Person 3: Great credit, no income, home owner with a small passive income, and capable with home renovation.  Also has a desire to create a home for Person 1. 

How do these three people fairly go about purchasing something for Person 1, but allow person 2 and 3 be able to benefit (even slightly) from the mortgage payments made? A trust, a company? What is the term for a very watered down REIT?

Side note: Ideally this is just the first scenario.  Person 2 and 3 have plans to create a real estate investment company together to add doors / help low income or low credit people get into homes.  Just in case this helps direct the ideas.  Thank you everyone!