All Forum Posts by: Jaqueline Price

Thank you John, I appreciate your insights.

The home has been vacant for a few months and is 2 years old so I guess assuming the offer is accepted, the inspection will hopefully reveal if there is indeed a problem or not.

The previous owner did indeed pull up the carpeting from the entire upstairs and took the stove which is presenting an obstacle right now as we were hoping to go FHA. However it's still in much better condition than some of the REO's we've looked at. Hopefully the only damage is that which is visible.

Thank you! I just wanted to be sure it was a CYA thing and not a red flag.

Absolutely!

I actually found one REO that was listed by 2 different agents, 2 different prices on the same website. After doing my due diligence I found that one of the agents was no longer an active agent and he never removed the listing.

Run the numbers, pull comps, estimate repairs (with a cushion), bottom line - offer what you are willing to pay but more importantly what you can afford. I would say stick to the 70% rule as much as possible and don't sweat it.

Is this common being that the property is sold "as-is"? We just submitted an offer and "oh by the way we need you to sign...a mold disclosure/indemnification agreement".

I am simply wondering if this is customary or a red flag. We realize we are buying the property "as-is" but this will be our first home and our primary residence. I'm hoping this is just a standard disclosure and an inspection will cure my qualms but if not, I'd rather keep the couple hundred dollars :blush: .

TIA

I don't know which site you are referring to but we have been looking at purchasing a couple of different REO's and often time the listing agent simply hasn't updated recent price reductions, not all of the sites have been updated. We just submitted an offer on an REO and it is listed in a few different places, all with different prices. So more than likely the "re-sale" price has not been updated. But I am by far an expert :wink:

Thanks so much for your input! I know banks don't look to kindly on assignments anymore and figured I may meet some resistance if I approached my Realtor with the idea. The addition is complete structurally, just needs finishing touches. I kind of figured it would be best to just call it a day and pass the lead on but we may decide on attempting the assignment, what's the worst they could possibly do but say "no" right?! :lol:

Ok, I'm still in the beginning stages of REI, haven't even gotten my feet wet yet :wink: .

There's an REO listed at about 60% ARV however, there is an addition to the home that was not complete so we estimate finishing/rehab to be in the 30K range. Bottom line is there's a good 60K+ profit in this deal. We were going to purchase it as our primary residence and rehab it, because of the somewhat blank canvas we would have to work with and also to gain rehab experience. But we are finding the taxes on the ARV will not be affordable for us just starting out, as it would be our first home.

We were set to submit the offer today but after reviewing the numbers with our mtg broker decided that we would be getting in over our heads. Now I am wondering how to approach this deal (and the Realtor) with an offer in which we can assign the contract or if I should just cut my losses and pass the lead off to an investor.

Any thoughts/ideas are greatly appreciated. TIA

Jaqueline

Yes, I was referring to non-subsidized housing. In reviewing the proposed 2008 table (Section 8 ), the numbers weren't too far off. A little high for some areas of town and just about right on for others. My question was posed simply for purposes of calculating a fair market rent. Thanks for the input.

For the experts, would you factor in average rents based on Section 8 guildelines as well?

for your insights. I was more or less referring to a non-compete/non-disclosure as far as bringing an attorney into the mix, not to specify in a legal document how or when I would be paid but [/i]that I would be paid. I see everyone's point though and ultimately for the amount of the fee versus the cost to ensure payment, it's a wash.

There's a difference between being paid for a lead and being paid for a sale, so why can't it be both? Without of course placing a condition for payment on closing.

Good information here, thanks!