All Forum Posts by: Kelly G.

My cousin is a hoarder.  The apartment is packed - apparently.  My family is thinking of paying Sept. rent in order to provide more time to clean out the apt.  I am thinking this is a really really really bad idea.  They are not on the rental agreement - I don't think they can 'pay rent'.  Seems to open a whole can of worms.  I agree that 'notice' is irrelevant since the tenant has no $$;  but if the family pays Sept - . . .   really have to convince them not to do this!

Thoughts?

Thanks @Scott Weaner and @Dennis M.- I appreciate your comments.  

When a tenant dies (Milw, month-month), and has no $$ other than soc sec., is 28 day notice to the landlord really necessary?  My cousin is dying of cancer and the family is confused about how to handle notice to the landlord.  The statutes seem to indicate 60 days notice, but there would be no $$ to pay the rent as Soc Sec would terminate payments immediately.  The statutes also indicate 28 day standard notice. But all of this seems irrelevant if tenant has no $$.  I do see that the landlord cannot demand rent of tenant's family.  Perhaps I'm being overly cautious, just trying to give 'peace of mind' and a clear answer to my Aunt/family.  Aug rent was paid.  She will not survive till Sept.  landlord/tenant lawyer ref also appreciated - just in case. 

Thanks

So . . we are clearly talking different scales here.  @Russell Brazil - Clearly you are dealing with much higher $$ properties than I am. At the level you are dealing - I probably be OK paying your $350/hour - you're talking about saving more than I might even pay for a property! That's a very different animal. Further - even I would not likely buy or sell a property in a market I am not familiar with. I sold my house in CA FSBO - no agent help, cuz I lived there for years and had time to study the market before I sold. I'm now trying to sell my rental in Milw - a market I know Nothing about - so I'm looking for an agent to 'consult' with: what's the retail market like, where's it been - where is it at; how are houses moving; what kind of buyer am I likely to attract etc etc etc. Yes - you'd be 'capable' of handling your own transactions in "other markets" - but you are clearly Not ignorant which is why you use an agent in "other markets" (and maybe even in your own). You're not likely to be a 'victim' of the scheme either because you are an insider; you know how the business works. As I tried to explain in my last post; I'm talking more about the 'retail' side with your average joe/jane doe home owner/buyer who knows next to nothing about this business. I 'maybe' know just a little more than jane doe, but not too much. I am at risk of falling prey to the 'scheme' which I think operates more at the 'retail' home buyer/seller level than the investor side - but I may just be showing my ignorance of the investor side here too.  

BTW:  "ignorant" - does not mean dumb or stupid; by definition, "ignorant" simply means uninformed or uneducated;  I am clearly ignorant of the Milwaukee RE market - 

Same for @Joel Owens; you are dealing at a much different level. I am tiny little small fry here - again - I'm Not an investor; I just happen to own 1 SFH rental that I am now selling, in a market I am unfamiliar with; but not unfamiliar (read ignorant) of the process.

@Brie Schmidt - good points - and I think your fist one, at least for me, is part of the problem I Want to know what my agent is doing and why.  But then, maybe I'm not your average jane doe buyer/seller.  I like the details, I like to understand what's going on and I will/have fired an agent making decisions or hiding information behind my back - Not that You are doing that, please do not misconstrue this.    and yes, most agents do work for the bigger brokerages and have no say in how things work.  I avoid the larger brokerages (generally). 

I consider myself pretty savy - sure I miss some things, but I learn and move on.  and clearly I thought that I had vested each agent I've worked with; and yet I've usually felt screwed in the end.  

Wow!  What an awesome discussion!  Lots of good points out there, but hard for me to go back and pick out who said what . . .

Some clarification from my view point: I'm not really an 'investor' (maybe some day) I had 1 SFH rental - more out of necessity, cuz I didn't want to sell at/near the bottom after having to buy (also out of necessity) at the top-top-very top!. So now I'm selling it . .

But I've bought now 4 houses in my life (a small pittance compared to a serious 'investor') - so I come at this Q from the 'retail' side.  But I'm not sure that really matters (retail vs investor)

I find that the whole (retail) RE market is rigged - against the buyer and the seller and favors the agent who expects to make thousands of $$ with little 'work'.  On average, I doubt that the agents who made $$ on my transactions put in more than 12 hours of work.  And even when I try to do my 'due diligence' - in 'hiring' a Broker w/ 20 years experience and all these accreditations, classes, awards  "x" transactions/year; knowledge of 'local' market etc - they STILL  screw me - selling me a house at $10k more than it's value because they skewed the comps they showed me!  If they're making $$ on my transaction, I shouldn't have to double check their work!  My only recourse is to take them to small claims court - good luck w/ that!

I think the RE market could be Greatly Improved - by going to a 'fee for service' structure.  I'm sorry but Any professional who thinks they should earn $300 - $400+/hour da%^n well better provide that level of service.  But more often than not, the RE agent will tell you time and again "i'm not a lawyer and I can't give you legal advice".  Then why am I paying you a 'lawyer's' fee?  Further, with the Buyer's agent and the Seller's agent working maybe  30 hours total (combined), at even 5% commission (split) on my $175k house, that's $8,700 tacked onto the price of the house and nearly $300/hour each for the agents. That's NUTS! (IMHO). Gee - that's not $$ going into my pocket and it's My Asset!. Yet I know - even though I will sell my house FSBO, that I will HAVE to pay the buyer's agent at least 2 - 2.4% or I won't get a buyer.  the whole darn system is rigged.  The public has been kept "ignorant" and sold this scheme that they "must" have an agent to buy/sell real estate.  . . .  sellers are discouraged from going FSBO (no selling agent to pay) or a 'fee for service' structure, cuz the saved $$ "screws with the comps".  Or the agents feel they need to make "500 to 1000 a day or 10 to 20k a month which is bare minimum to be in this business"   Really!  you think you Need to make $10-$20K/MONTH to be in business -   at My expense!

. .   It's all rigged. 

I think if you took the big $$ Out of the profession, everyone would win. . . . Well, maybe not the top 10% of agents, but hey . . . the rest of us will take that $$ to the bank!

way past my bedtime . . .

Good Discussion

Kelly

 Exactly my point!!  Must be why I don't gamble.  Also - I am a very analytical person; scientist by profession.  I have the time, and the smarts (which I don't think really takes much) to sell my own properties.  But, I do like having an agent to confer with, to be sure I'm not missing something. Too bad you're not in Milwaukee!

Interesting . . .  $350/hour is close to what I might pay my lawyer . . .  I will say that NO agent I've ever worked with was 'worthy' of that kind of $$ for the 'less-than-stellar, but adequate' work they did selling a property of mine, and at least one of those was "agent of the year".  Still  Of those 90% of remaining agents, a good portion of them probably have a decent number of transactions/year; for a few years.  Seems to still leave alot of room for optional business structures.  

This is kinda a poll - more than a post.  I'm curious to know why more agents aren't willing to work (when they can under their broker) or why more brokers don't allow their agents to work "a la carte" - or a fee for service structure.  There are clearly far far far more agents than transactions out there.  Yet I can't find a broker/agent willing to do a 'fee for service' type contract.  I'm really curious as to why an agent would not offer their services (negotiation strategies; staging guidance; reviewing offers etc etc etc) on an hourly basis?  I'm not talking 'chump change' here - I'm thinkin' $100/hour for 'consulting' services.  

Enlighten me please . . .

Thanks all

I'm not familiar w/ the Mke market so I wanted to get a comp analysis for a property I own, to start.   I realize these are often/generally done for free, but, being self employed myself, I don't like to take up someone's time if they are hoping for a full listing, which isn't going to happen.  Maybe silly but .  .   

I'll be selling the house myself, soon, so am looking for info regarding the the Mke market; what I should fix/update, - staging advice, maybe some negotiation strategy conversations.  

Kelly

I'm finding few truly independent RE agents/brokers in the Milw. area. They all seem to be tied to the larger offices (Remax; Shorewest; First Weber) I'd prefer an 'a la carte' agent/broker - is there such a thing in Milw or is that too 'new' for this ol' town?  kinda looking around SW milwaukee area RE

thanks