All Forum Posts by: Jeff B.

 Clearly you have never done one :sigh:  Yes there's pressure to find and identify the replacement - - which is why you have to burn both ends of the candle at the same time.  Use a Letter of Intend to capture both ends before you start the clock!

Anyone with a 1031 transaction will be welcomed to the MFU party as that's tried and true funds. The sole caveat will be the buyer's reserves and of course the specific DSCR of the property. Present your 1031 to commercial RE agent and a local commercial bank and this is a smooth path - - at least it was for me

smacks of a wholesale variation

 Me too.  Friends or not, when things go bad, it's only the documentation and collateral left to help make things straight.

As you are finding, that data is near impossible to find...

IMO, the behavior of the landlord AND the tenants are leading indicators of this risk.

That's 16k * 42 = a deal worth 672k.  2% per annum would be 13.4k return.

Now, what will you offer as security?

Subject to: risk vs reward?

The Contract of Sale, The All Inclusive Wrap, The “Subject To” -- innovative means to begin REI.

As Tom Standen Says:

It could even be argued that selling a property “Subject To” is really not a very smart thing to do.  Just think, you have transferred your ownership interest in the property to someone else (usually someone you do not know); however, you have remained responsible for the underlying loan on the property. If they don’t make the payments, guess whose credit is ruined? You’re right, yours!

No, It’s not a crime.

No, writing a sale on a Wrap Around, a Contract or with a Subject To is not a crime. But the buyer needs to understand, and the seller needs to disclose in the selling agreement, that there is, or may be, a right on the part of the lender to “call” the note due if the property is sold without express written consent of the lender.

See the other risks at this site

[I am not associated with Mr Standen in any way whatsoever]

"in-house" implies an employee.  That takes you into State Employment regulations, workman's comp and ssi withholding.

If you elect to also grant an apartment as compensation, you need to verify the limitations allowed by the State.

@Jack B. A conservative approach to Risk Management is a probability of 1.0 -- certainty. Listening to those in denial of a DOS invocation, the probability is nil, but that advice is cheap as those saying it have nothing at risk.

Playing the game with you, you would need to know:

1. number of landlords in the given area
2. number of law suites in that same area (unqualified as to reasons)

and calc the Area probability as item2 / item1

Don't think it's reasonable to expect to find either datum.

The most common factors that courts consider in determining whether to pierce the corporate veil are:

• whether the corporation or LLC engaged in fraudulent behavior
• whether the corporation or LLC failed to follow corporate formalities
• whether the corporation or LLC was inadequately capitalized (if the corporation never had enough funds to operate, it was not really a separate entity that could stand on its own), and
• whether one person or a small group of closely related people were in complete control of the corporation or LLC.

Some corporations and LLCs are especially vulnerable when these factors are considered, simply because of their size and business practices. Closely held companies are more susceptible to losing limited liability status than large, publicly traded corporations. There are several reasons for this.

• Failure to follow corporate formalities.
• Commingling assets.