All Forum Posts by: Larry Moore

The only thing I carry is my butt out of bad neighborhoods. If I am in an area or going to an area where I feel I might need a gun, I leave or never go there. I have had extensive training in martial arts, weapons use and defense against weapons, and the top two strategies have always been avoidance and escape. Running is a good defense, particularly when most of these bad guys have a hard time hitting a stationary target. I have been through countless drills and have seen training videos of police officers and other professionals in close quarter scenarios, and having and using a pistol is often a bad first choice. We use to train to take someone's weapon from them, and in close quarters it's not that hard. Sometimes you just end up arming your assailant when he takes the gun from you as you struggle to get to it. I understand that there is money to be made in the bad areas as well, I just prefer to pass.

I have seen these lists of provisions and others regarding tentative bills, and to me the provisioins are just a big smoke screen; bargaining chips to ultimately get the final bill passed. Don't like the "death panel", OK, we'll take it out. Don't want ACORN receiving funds, fine, they're out. After much compromising and deletions to the bills, a bi-partisan agreement will be reached with much made of how the Democrats reached out to the Republicans so health care could be reformed for the good of the Nation. The most important aspects to the Democrats, Gov't controll and the creation of a new entitlement, in some version will exist in the final legislation. And when all is said and done, that is what they are really after.

I agree. I believe it will not only destroy our current health care system, but create an additional entitlement that will bankrupt our country. There are legitimate concerns and problems with our health care system and the insurance companies that have the greatest influence over it, but the Democrats are more concerned with controlling health care and creating an addtional entitlement to the tune of a trillion plus dollars, than addressing those problems. The biggest issue with business owners and policy holders is cost (I know, I have been a benefits consultant for 22 years). How does increasing the overall cost by a trillion + address that problem? How does raising taxes to pay for it address that problem? As one example, why don't the Democrats address the need for tort reform, eliminating defensive medicine, and the escalating malpractice insurance costs which drive some specialists out of practice, all a huge drain on the cost of health care (maybe because they won't go up against the trial lawyers who benefit). I could go on and on, but what the Democrats are proposing won't fix the problems, just create new ones.

Sure isn't here!

Personally, I would hold the realtor's feet to the fire and remind her that the contract requires that the appliances stay, or does she endorse her client's violation of the contract she had them sign? If the realtor came back and said that the sellers really needed them for their new home, I would tell her that she then will need to submit a new lower offer to Countrywide to account for the lost appliances (assuming that the realtor is handling the negotiation, otherwise, I would tell her that I will be submitting the lower offer). Bottom line, this situation just made it more difficult to negotiate a successful short sale. I would ask her to go back to the sellers with that new information (I would prefer to speak with them myself) and see if they still need to take the appliances. If yes, then I would look at my numbers one more time and decide if I need to reduce my offer. Even if you played hardball and said a contract is a contract and the appliances are staying, if the seller really needs them, they will probably disappear before closing.

I agree with Jeff. When I meet with a short sale candidate, I tell them that although we will try to negotiate away the deficiency, it is ultimately up to the bank and they may still pursue it. When the bank accepts our offer, they will spell out the terms, which will let us know(we include a clause in the contract requiring they wave it, but they may not). Regardless, if we are unable to negotiate it away, if the lender is that set on pursuing a deficiency that they will sabotage a cash offer now, then they will obviously come after it later, particularly since no one will try to negotiate it away for you then. So, if they refuse to waive it, your choice is basically either to have a deficiency and no foreclosure with a short sale now, or, a deficiency and a foreclosure later. Obviously they have options regarding dealing with the deficiency after the dust settles.

Here in IL, the foreclosure process takes 7 months or longer, so many preforeclosure prospects don't respond until they are a little further into the timeline (sometimes too late), for various reasons. Many times, when someone responds, they will tell me on the phone or when we meet, that they had received several postcards (which is what I use) over time and finally decided to call and see what it was all about. Work the timeline with repetitive marketing.

I have purchased new construction homes twice, and even they have had a few critters to evict. My parents just cleared their attic of mice in a home they built years ago, and my mother is a cleanaholic. Unless you live in a glass bubble, they will find a way in. We have been using one of those plug in devices that supposedly sends some kind of signal through the wiring to keep critters out; it seems to work.

Sounds like the realtor is just trying to keep you from walking if the short sale takes too long by requiring a deposit. Since short sale offers don't require earnest money, just proof of funds, I would ask the realtor point blank if the bank requires it, or is he requiring it. If he said the bank, I would ask for proof. If he requires it, I would remind him that he now has a full asking price offer, and that I require that he submit it with no earnest money, just proof of funds. Maybe the market is different where you are, but realtors are hurting here and are not inclinded to chase away business. From what I understand (never have gone through a realtor on a short sale), realtors are required to submit all offers to the bank on a short sale, so there may not be anything you can do to discourage other offers anyway. Having my money tied up in escrow for who knows how long is not worth a "pending" on the listing.

Preston, I would be interested in hearing how it turns out. I am considering staying away from FHA shorts for the time being unless I hear that they have become more investor friendly. Unfortunately, in my area (probably in most), FHA now seems to be the dominate source of financing, and down the road, most foreclosures will probably be on FHA loans.