All Forum Posts by: Eric G.

Jerry Padilla I think you and/or your underwriter is misinterpreting that 7 unit guideline. I don’t believe that is a blanket statement that prohibits more than 7 units. It explicitly states that there is a 7 unit limit ONLY when the borrower already owns units in or next to the same complex or subdivision as the subject property. And I can understand why. It would seem rather fishy if an borrower already owned multiple units in a concentrated area and then wanted to buy another as owner occupied. Smells of occupancy fraud, using fha to purchase an addition rental. But short of having 7 units in a concentrated area, I don’t think there is FHA limit on how many rental units one can own prior to getting a FHA loan. I’m not a lender, just interpreting the guideline as I read it. I’m interested to hear other lenders opinions...

This is absolutely fine. All that matters is that you intend to owner occupy and that you don’t currently have a FHA loan. You check both boxes. If you buy a 3-4 unit, make sure the property meets self sufficiency guidelines. No such guideline for a 2 unit, so a little more straightforward. Good luck!

I stopped reading the responses on this thread about halfway through, so this may be redundant: Ask the guy for your money back. Threaten legal action if you want. But if it doesn't provoke a favorable action, just move on. The $595 isn't worth the time and mental energy of actually pursuing legal action. Move on to another property manager, as your non performing tenants are your biggest problem now. Good luck!

Assuming the tenants deposit was documented in the lease, you are now responsible for refunding the money. In purchasing the property, you assumed the lease. Usually the original owner will transfer you the deposits during escrow. But that doesn't always happen. Sometimes these things are overlooked. Sometimes buyers purchase a distressed situation at a good deal and consider it a transactional cost. Whatever the case may be, it is now your responsibility.

This is a 1 bed plus a loft with 1256 square feet. The last two model matches sold this summer for $474k and $475k. Before I go to the open market, I'm offering it direct at $445k. I'm also offering a year of free management for anybody interested.

It's a very unique and desirable layout with multiple levels, vaulted ceilings and an attached 2 car garage. It's private master bedroom patio opens up to a stream. TENANT IS CURRENTLY IN PLACE and just signed a renewal through next summer at $2100 (market rate is probably $2200 now). I've already tenant proofed the property by installing laminate wood flooring and tile throughout. I do that in my rentals because carpet is one of the bigger costs to landlords, and this eliminates that item.

So for somebody looking for a rental property, there's built in equity, no vacancy cost and free management.

Professional property manager here. You're definitely not on the hook for 8-9 days of rent credit. If she reported the broken toilet Saturday and you fixed it Monday, then her max credit is 2 days. And that's only if it's the only toilet in the unit. If there is another bathroom, then it may be an inconvenience, but it doesn't make the home uninhabitable. Most of the other items on the tenants list are easy fixes. I'd stick to those. Forget about major work like flooring and tub replacement. It sounds like those issues are simply cosmetic. Upgrade those when the tenant vacates. If you had to displace a tenant due to circumstances outside of your control (like major water leak) the tenant is only entitled to a prorated rent credit. You don't have to pay for hotel stays. But if you are unnecessarily opting to upgrade the unit and it requires displacement, you should pay for accommodations. All in all, sounds like your tenant is being unreasonable. Stick to the basics. Upgrade when they leave.

3x rent is the criteria I look for during screening. I use pretax gross income. It's not a hard and fast rule. I'm willing to come down to 2.5 times rent if there are compensating factors. For example, healthy savings or excellent credit.

You can certainly buy an investment property first. That wouldn't prevent you from buying fha owner occupied next. However, depending on your financial strength you may need to wait a few years. If you're first time landlords, when you go to buy your primary residence they won't give you credit for the rental income unless it's been on your tax returns for 2 years. So if you buy your primary residence before that two year period you will need to be able to qualify for both mortgages. That's my understanding. Im sure a mortgage lender will chime in as well.

You asked for a second background check and clearly you never received it. But you went ahead and signed the lease anyway. Sounds like the mistake lies on your end. Sorry to be harsh. Maybe you were eager to cut your vacancy costs? Regardless, you took a gamble and it didn't work out. But good for you for taking things into your own hands. Mysmartmove is a good site for the independent landlord. Side note: I'm a property manager. We don't accept outside credit or background checks. We run our own. That's the problem with using an agent. As other posters have touched upon, most agents focus on sales. Rentals and tenant relations are a small side gig. As such, they're not your best resource.

The process was similar to a refi in terms of documentation. It took about 60 days. I don't recall any costs. Normally the biggest cost would have been appraisal, but it was included. I haven't had the opportunity to use my line of credit, but it's been live for about a year. Only cost is an annual $75 service fee.