Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 16%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$39 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Try Pro Features for Free
Start your 7 day free trial. Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties.
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Daniel K.

Daniel K. has started 3 posts and replied 16 times.

Quote from @V.G Jason:
Quote from @Adam Michael Andrews:

You’re going to buy back a bond from them worth X and reissue one worth Y. The difference in value is going to be about $235k. I wouldn’t touch a 3% mortgage under pretty much any circumstance on a 30 year term. There’s no free lunch here, just you making a bet against bonds and doubling down on real estate. That may be a bet you want to make but thinking about it as “tax free $235k” is the wrong way to analyze it







That plus the asset is the debt, not the triplex. I hold onto the note before the property.

Assuming you have reserves for the property, if you want to convey your view as pro-property or pro other assets-- I would take the net cash flow from rentals and invest that eventually into another property/equities/assets,etc.

Last, but not least, you're likely not the sharp at the table but you have the best hand. The bank knows the 10 year is going to come down in the short term(3 months to 36 months) and are selling you it before it drops. Like Adam said you're betting against bonds. And I'm saying you're betting against the house, yet you have the pocket aces in hands. In the event the 10 year rises, your note is even more valuable for you to keep.

 Don't fumble this one.  It's never clear, especially not in this administration, but you'd be basically buying a falling knife in re-fi form.

Your return would need to be gross 10% to break-even(tax adjusted 7%). 

These are also some great points. I suppose if I were to refinance out to 90% LTV I'd be unable to refinance if rates drop below 5%.
Quote from @Don Konipol:
Quote from @Adam Michael Andrews:
Quote from @Don Konipol:
Quote from @Daniel K.:

During the pandemic, I bought a 3-unit house hack on the north side of Chicago for $580k with a 10% down portfolio loan through a local credit union. I renovated it, moved out, and it's since been a great investment, now cash flowing significantly with a 3.625% 30 yr FRM. Earlier this week, I got an email from the credit union holding the loan with an unexpected offer. They are willing to allow me to cash out refinance the property with a 30 yr FRM at 5% at up to 90% LTV. A recent comp sold that leads me to believe a reasonable valuation for the property of $800k. My loan balance is about $485k. These terms sound almost too good to be true, the catch being that I need to replace my rate with one nearly 140 bps higher (which is still significantly below market).

Were I to refinance at 90% LTV, my cash flow would evaporate entirely, and I might be slightly cash flow negative until next year when I can raise my below-market tenants’ rents to market, at which point I’ll be modestly cash flow positive again. But at the same time, I will have $235k tax-free in my bank account to put towards another deal which I intend to be cash flow positive. That same amount of money would probably take 10 years to earn via cash flow, and even then I’d have to pay tax on it.

What are the risks of taking this offer and leveraging up again? 140 bps interest rate increase doesn't seem all that bad. I know home values have been softening across the country, thankfully Chicago still seems to be going strong (at least for right now). Should interest rates drop below 5% for conventional mortgages, I know I can't refinance down if my LTV is too low, but other than that? Thanks.


My estimate of what you’ll be paying for the additional $235,000 is 7.9%.
The math works like this

Current annual interest on $485,000 @ 3.625% is prox $17,500
Annual interest on $720,000 @ 5% is $36,000
Difference is $18,500 for $235,000 is equal to 7.9%.

the math isn’t exact because we haven’t accounted for amortization or the difference in term of the new loan vs the existing loan. 
This is the right way of looking at it. Incrementally, this isn’t much of a deal at all. It’s equivalent to taking a second mortgage at 7.9%, but much worse because you’re giving up your 3.25% rate completely. If you really have means of clearing that hurdle rate you should just take a second or HELOC and leave your permanent financing alone in my opinion. The bank is betting on you getting enamored with the 5% figure and want you to forget you’ve got them on the hook for 3% for 30Yr
Good points.  A second lien is in my opinion preferable because if you end up paying it off you still have the 3.65% mortgage loan in place.  The amount of loan paydown makes me think that the 3.65% loan is a 15 year, while the bank is offering a 30 year, which can change the dynamics. 

The other thing is that the OP states that the bank offered a loan up to 90% - I wouldn’t be surprised if (1) after he applies they decide that 80% is max and (2) they add points and closing costs which further ups the break even higher than the 7.9% I calculated and (3) the banks appraisal of the property is a lot more conservative than a “unbiased” appraisal.  Look, appraisers hired by banks know what the lender is “looking for”.  Appraisals can easily vary by 20% on all but “cookie cutter” type real estate.  


Thanks for this insight. The existing loan is a 30 yr amortization. I'd thought about a second lien option as well to tap some equity, but I don't think I'd find anything close to the terms of this one with 90% LTV, most seconds on investment 3-unit properties seem to max out around 70-75% CLTV.

Quote from @Erik Estrada:

A 5% rate when rates are hovering in the mid to high 6s on a conventional refi is very good. The real question is, where would you put the money and will it yield you a higher than 5% return? Also is that rate on a 30 year fixed term or an ARM?


 The refinance was offered as a 30 yr FRM

Quote from @Adam Michael Andrews:
That would be for a fresh 5% loan. For most of the balance you’re looking at giving up a 2% spread (3->5), so you need to get 7% just to break even. To make it worth it, you probably need a risk adjusted 7% return.
That's actually a great point that I didn't consider. I need to consider the opportunity cost as it relates to the existing loan balance that is riding on a 3.625% rate.

It's sounding like the consensus is that if I can find a return higher than 5%, it makes sense to refi, potentially not all the way up to 90% LTV

Quote from @Aaron Zimmerman:

Can you share the name of this lender?

id make sure this lender is reputable first. Other than that, you're paying more in interest, so id make sure there's at least some cash flow.

the question becomes what property can you buy with the extra cash and how much wealth and cash flow can that generate? 

the only downside would be you're paying extra interest if you don't find a deal but tbh, you can put in a money market for 4% and the spread between what you can earn vs pay in interest is pretty low. 

The lender is definitely reputable, they’re the same people I originally financed the property with. This is a program offered by Great Lakes Credit Union only for those who have an existing low-interest rate mortgage that GLCU has on their books. Presumably it’s a way to get some of their pandemic-era mortgages off their books. 
Quote from @Brie Schmidt:
Quote from @Daniel K.:

During the pandemic, I bought a 3-unit house hack on the north side of Chicago for $580k with a 10% down portfolio loan through a local credit union. I renovated it, moved out, and it's since been a great investment, now cash flowing significantly with a 3.625% 30 yr FRM. Earlier this week, I got an email from the credit union holding the loan with an unexpected offer. They are willing to allow me to cash out refinance the property with a 30 yr FRM at 5% at up to 90% LTV. A recent comp sold that leads me to believe a reasonable valuation for the property of $800k. My loan balance is about $485k. These terms sound almost too good to be true, the catch being that I need to replace my rate with one nearly 140 bps higher (which is still significantly below market).

Were I to refinance at 90% LTV, my cash flow would evaporate entirely, and I might be slightly cash flow negative until next year when I can raise my below-market tenants’ rents to market, at which point I’ll be modestly cash flow positive again. But at the same time, I will have $235k tax-free in my bank account to put towards another deal which I intend to be cash flow positive. That same amount of money would probably take 10 years to earn via cash flow, and even then I’d have to pay tax on it.

What are the risks of taking this offer and leveraging up again? 140 bps interest rate increase doesn't seem all that bad. I know home values have been softening across the country, thankfully Chicago still seems to be going strong (at least for right now). Should interest rates drop below 5% for conventional mortgages, I know I can't refinance down if my LTV is too low, but other than that? Thanks.



I am familiar with the credit union and loan program you did. Do they know you no longer live at the property? Either way I can tell you that is the best deal you will find unless rates go down significantly. Typically cash out refi are .5% higher than the market rate and for non owner occupied properties that LTV is limited to 70%


 Yes, when I spoke with them on the phone I was clear that I no longer live in the property, and they were alright with it. 

During the pandemic, I bought a 3-unit house hack on the north side of Chicago for $580k with a 10% down portfolio loan through a local credit union. I renovated it, moved out, and it's since been a great investment, now cash flowing significantly with a 3.625% 30 yr FRM. Earlier this week, I got an email from the credit union holding the loan with an unexpected offer. They are willing to allow me to cash out refinance the property with a 30 yr FRM at 5% at up to 90% LTV. A recent comp sold that leads me to believe a reasonable valuation for the property of $800k. My loan balance is about $485k. These terms sound almost too good to be true, the catch being that I need to replace my rate with one nearly 140 bps higher (which is still significantly below market).

Were I to refinance at 90% LTV, my cash flow would evaporate entirely, and I might be slightly cash flow negative until next year when I can raise my below-market tenants’ rents to market, at which point I’ll be modestly cash flow positive again. But at the same time, I will have $235k tax-free in my bank account to put towards another deal which I intend to be cash flow positive. That same amount of money would probably take 10 years to earn via cash flow, and even then I’d have to pay tax on it.

What are the risks of taking this offer and leveraging up again? 140 bps interest rate increase doesn't seem all that bad. I know home values have been softening across the country, thankfully Chicago still seems to be going strong (at least for right now). Should interest rates drop below 5% for conventional mortgages, I know I can't refinance down if my LTV is too low, but other than that? Thanks.


Post: Section 8 related

Daniel K.Posted
  • Posts 16
  • Votes 10

Is this a 2 bedroom apartment that is currently being leased (in the eyes of the CHA) as a 1 bedroom apartment? If so, you will need to apply for a change of number of bedrooms on the standard CHA rent increase form. They will schedule an inspection to verify that the second bedroom does in fact exist in the apartment.

@Scott Byer I'm a little confused on your numbers here--the expenses including P&I you list total to $1525/mo. If it rents for $1600/mo, how're you cash flowing $200/month?