All Forum Posts by: Brent Coombs

@Diorca Gonzalez, have you bought your own primary yet?  If not, shouldn't that be a focus?  [You must have come across a lot of "house hacking" threads, right?]  Good luck...

@Chad Maghielse, let's say that you raise the $2.2M and it's then worth $8M.

My guess is you'll still want to do everything in your power to stay there and own it!

So if raising $2.2M proves difficult, how will you go about raising your promised $8M to pay out your investors / partners (less your contribution)?

ie. I reckon you need to determine before you buy what will be its outcome.

At least, that's what I suspect any potential investor will demand (in writing).  Good luck...

@Ziad Hamati, a lot of 2500sqft properties I've come across are already 4 Bedders.

ie. Why go for 3 when you could get even more creative to arrive at 4?

Just a thought.  Good luck...

@Jon Joro, a "Quit Claim Deed" means that the "Seller" may not have any part of the property's Ownership!  ie.  It may well be a scam from start to finish!

I suggest: Run away from "Quit Claims".  Often/usually not worth the paper they're written on (unless the history of the Ownership is known within the actual Owner's family, and one family member "quits" their interest in the property to another family member - which was the original purpose of "Quit Claim Deeds").

Thanks for asking.  Hope this has helped.  Welcome to BP.  Good luck...

@Gail Shulski, traditional financing, but only cost you $3k out of a $200k cost?  How can we all get in on this?

To avoid said CGT, your son would need to be on the Title too (unless you're also living there for at least one of the two years), right?  Cheers...

You're getting way ahead of yourself when you say you could "hand over the deal to them".  But I get that the reason for for your post is - you already know that.  My question is: Can YOU close on any deal you strike?

If not, I suggest - forget wasting this or any Seller's time.  Save up the old fashioned way so that soon, you WILL be able to close on any deal you make, so Sellers are never left in the lurch if and when you fail to find another Buyer in time. 

[Meantime, I guess there's no harm in sharing theoretical 'deal' details here - to see if you're on the right track].  Welcome to BP.  Good luck...

@Rommel R., at this rate, it looks like your family may continue to be prioritized over your BRRRR ambitions. Many times, a pool becomes a liability rather than an asset.

This time a pool, next a new safe (read: expensive) car, then a much deserved cruise...

Lifestyle choices can smother otherwise good intentions to become an investor.

[I'm not suggesting you sacrifice lifestyle; just continue with what's really important].

Note: $50k theoretical increase in equity does not translate into $50k extra borrowability.

Using Marson's formula above, how much borrowability does result?  Good luck...

@Maurice George, wow.  So as well as the Buyer having to cough up at least 95% of the home's actual value, they have to pay off any Owner IRS Bill as well?

[This directly from the FHA Site regarding HECM: "If the loan balance is more than the home is worth, the estate or heirs may sell the home for at least 95-percent of the current appraised value and the lender will accept the net proceeds as satisfaction of the loan"].

I didn't see the bit you mentioned about all Liens having to be paid out before the actual first mortgage Lender gets anything!  

I thought the concept of FIRST mortgage actually meant something!

This from Investopedia: "A first mortgage is a primary lien on a property. As a primary loan that pays for the property, the loan has priority over all other liens or claims on a property in the event of default".

Apparently you're saying that ANY Lienholders actually get priority over HECM, even though HECM are the bunnies who lent the owner $950k on a home later only worth $700k (to use your earlier example).  Go figure...

[Of course I know that lots of Liens can be paid out of deceased Estates.  I just didn't know that first mortgages could ever be put at the bottom of the payouts regarding proceeds of the sale of a specific home a Lien is placed against].

@Maurice George, if I'm distorting what you said, then you must have meant that the Owner can in no way benefit from a short sale, right?

In which case, that's what I've said all along.  You can't have it both ways!  

eg. If the Owner's friend gets the 3% Commission, how can that help the Owners or their heirs?  [Be very careful how you answer that question].  

As for Buyers volunteering to pay any Liens not paid out by the Bank, I ask again: why would they volunteer?  That's not credible.  But my main point about that is:  So what if the Buyer does volunteer?  It's obvious from your posts that those Lienholders had no recourse anyway, so the Owner is not impacted in any way. Cheers...

@Maurice George, you wrote "HECM law allows buyer to pay liens attached on the property as long as the payment properly disclosed to the bank (eg, on HUD-1)", but I ask: Why would a Buyer volunteer to pay any liens (on top of the purchase price agreed)?  [But, if payment of said liens is made as part of the agreed purchase price ie. forced by the Lienholder/s, then your point is moot, right?]

But I do agree that it is interesting when you say the Owner can force the the Buyer (in a roundabout way) to end up paying the Owners' representative 3% of the value of short sales.  I would have thought that laws were worded so that even 3% Commission was completely "at arms length" ie. leaving no possibility of letting the Owner get ANY revenue from a short sale.  Not so?

Per your last sentence, good luck with the IRS in your circumstance.  Cheers...