All Forum Posts by: Tim Czarkowski

Wayne Brooks

Yes I have noticed that some of them are getting bid up rather high but the are still deals to be had, as with anything. I have pretty consistently seen people bid over $10,000 and one for a beach front penthouse where they bid $30,000. Here in Jacksonville I can go online and look at the foreclosure case. Right now it doesn't seem like they picked up any speed but you never know when it might change. I'm really surprised they are moving that quickly down there. That should help get the market in better shape much more quickly.

My broker made it sound like the insurance company set the value and there wasn't anything he could do about it. Do I maybe need to seek out another broker, maybe someone focused on investors?

Wow that never occurred to me. NOW THAT IS UNETHICAL. It doesn't seem like it would be illegal however. I mean they own they own the place at the time and you can strip your own property if you feel the need. Did anyone try to go after them, file criminal charges, etc?

That is in no way what I am looking to do. I want to rent them out and I plan to treat them like any of my other rentals. I stay on top of maintenance and if there is a problem my contractor is out the next day.

I just can't believe that, some people are so creative but use it in the wrong manner.

It is 2000 sq. ft.

I just spoke with my insurance broker about a duplex I own. I purchased it last year for $35,000 and it's currently worth $60,000. It is currently insured with a replacement cost policy for a whopping $265,000. I asked him about going to an ACV policy and he said that because the building was built in 1934 the depreciation would wipe out any claim I received. Is that true? I there any way to change the policy so that I am not over insuring the property by $200,000?

Michael Buckland

The special status relates to the HOA lien not being wiped out in a foreclosure case like most subordinate liens are. A third party bidder has to pay the full amount after the auction. I understand that banks get some type of discount. According to my title agent they can only be charged up to one year of back dues plus attorney's fees. I wish it was the same for third party bidders as the late fees, attorney's fees, etc. can be two or three times the amount of the original lien. This all applies in the case of a bank foreclosing.

I haven't heard anything like that. I can't imagine how they could come after your for a deficit on someone else's mortgage.

@K. Marie Poe

I have spoken with two real estate attorneys here in Florida. Both agreed that it does not apply in this case. HOAs are also renting in these case to recoup the dues that were owed to them. I am not ignoring it, it is just not applicable.

@Robert Per

1. No I haven't purchased any more. I am waiting to finish a flip before I get started.

2. No that law would not apply in this case. It would apply to original owners of the property, however.

I would obviously want to rent at FMV, my goal would clearly be to maximize cash flow during my holding period not set a tenant up with some sweetheart deal. I think that type of arrangement is more likely from non-arms-length leases I don't see how it isn't fair to the tenant as long as they are aware of the situation. I could understand if they were going to be thrown out on the street when the bank takes possession but that is not the case. Honestly I think the bank gets the short end of the stick on this because after waiting three years to foreclose they may have to wait another year or so to finally have it vacant. That is an unbelievable long and ridiculous process. Although most banks don't know there *** from a hole in the ground.

@NedCarey Yea that's the idea. If you buy right it seems like you should be in the black after six months or so.

@Eddie P. I believe that used to be the case but from my understanding of the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 that is no longer the case. Also I am not certain but I believe leases of more than two years for residential properties are not enforceable. As far as being served what you said makes sense. As long as they understand the situation I don't see that as a problem.

"Before President Obama signed the "Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009," most renters lost their leases upon foreclosure. But this legislation provided that leases would survive a foreclosure. The tenant could stay at least until the end of the lease, and month-to-month tenants would be entitled to 90 days' notice before having to move out (this notice period is longer than any state's non-foreclosure notice period, a real boon to tenants)."

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/renters-foreclosure-what-are-their-30064.html