All Forum Posts by: Account Closed

Good times. It is my understanding/interpretation from reading the order and the FAQ that the order only applies to a) long term leases and b) non-payment of rent and c) persons known to be infected. Anyone disagree?

I have two circa 1925 duplex homes in Milwaukee. In general, I love them. Better over-all construction and quality than today, with older plumbing and electrical. It's not too tough to upgrade those. Most of the houses have hardwood floors that can be refinished, painted, or used as a really awesome underlay for floating floors. The other thing I like about 100 year old homes is that if there was going to be a foundation issue, it would have already happened.

I hope you find your gem. Good luck! I'm actually putting mine on the market.

Riverwest Stein is my favorite beer. My friend lived next door to the original brewery 30 years ago, and back then you could walk into the brewery and drink for free, which we did of course. I'd say my generation made Lakefront Brewery. Bruce might have a different story to tell - lol. 

They say Riverwest is up and coming. They have been saying that for a very long time, all my years anyways. I'm sure it will be true very soon - lol. But if an old house is what you want, you will find them there, just like you can find them anywhere in the city. 1st street in Riverwest has some of the finest examples of old wood-clad homes in the city - some are in good shape and some are heartbreaking to see. Riverwest is basically UWM overflow - you get the students with less money so if you're looking for student rentals and cheaper purchase prices, Riverwest meets those desires.

I was an appraiser for 14 years. An appraisal is nothing but a tool, a tool in the form of information. Not only is the tool simply information, it's an opinion. The bank (lender) appraisal is the banks appraisal, they order it for themselves, it is not yours (even if you pay for the cost) and they use it to determine if and how much money they might lend on the property. Bank appraisals are (typically) the least reliable in terms of "accuracy", as they are designed by the bank, for the bank, to suit the banks needs, which is typically to lend 80% of the value. What I'm getting at here is don't put too much faith in any appraisal. Markets are by their nature variable, so when an appraiser says the property is worth $127,457.20, you gotta wonder how the appraiser seemed to be so sure of that opinion in a variable environment. The best way to appraise a property is to incorporate a valuation defined as a range of value, for instance $100k to $125k. That type of valuation is actually more "accurate" as it accounts for the variations observed in the market. When you know the range, you are more informed. Banks don't do it that way because they don't. They go out and get an appraiser to give them an opinion down to the dollar. They also don't lend 100% of the value unless an insurance policy is purchased to cover the top 20% (PMI - Private Mortgage Insurance). But none of that was really your question was it?

In general, the appraiser is going to look at your property as a whole, even if it appears they may be breaking it down to components (as is the case in a bank appraisal). Location usually weighs in first, then size, quality and physical condition. The "extras" like porches and garages and decks and gold toilets are often extras, as not everyone who needs a house needs all those things. However and as I said, at the end of the day the property will likely be valued as a whole, not a sum of individual components, just like a buyer would look at it.

I would suggest focusing on what you do have, then look at what the market is paying for that. Then you can look at properties that are both superior and inferior to yours and see what the market is paying for that. The thing to keep in mind is this, we love to talk about the "market" as if it's this sort of "collective thought" type of thing - it's not. The market is made up of individual buyers who all have their different ideas and reasons why it may be worth something or not to them. When we analyze the market, we tend to lump these individual opinions of buyers together and call that the "market", and the flaw there is to believe that the average is the norm. Ask any realtor, all it takes is one interested buyer to sell a property.

I'll end how I started, appraisals are nothing more than an informational tool. There is nothing stopping you from calling an appraiser yourself and having them do an appraisal. They are not agents of the bank, they are (generally) all independent operators. Not sure if that helps but there you go. Good luck.

I feel like the vegan who walks up on the fisherman and starts throwing rocks in the water...

The flow of stupid from California when it comes to investing out of state appears endless. Investing out of state as a beginner is about the worst idea there is in the entire industry. Investing is not easy as a beginner when you do it in your own back yard and do it all yourself. When you invest out of state, not only do you need to learn all there is about real estate, you have to go out and find other people, strangers, to do all the work for you because, you know, it's sort of tough to do from 1000 miles away.

BP is full of property management companies ready and willing to take your money though. Some are legit. Some are not. All charge fees for their services and make additional money when things go wrong for you at your property.

The truth is people like you attract sharks. People like you might even cause an otherwise honest person to become a slime ball. Why? Because tomorrow there will be another one of you asking the same stupid question and at a certain point a person might just ask themselves, why not? Why not just take these people's money. Think I'm wrong? Go back in time on this forum and you will find a brand new person everyday for years asking the same question - "I'm a newbie from CA and want to invest out of state. Where should I invest?"

If you understood how to invest in real estate, you would understand how there is rarely any money left over after paying other people to manage the investment for you. This is because real estate markets include owner occupant buyers who compete with investors for the same properties, and can afford to pay more for less (puts pressure on the margins). What usually happens to out of state investors is they use the money that ought to be set aside for long-term repairs to pay for management, then when the big repair comes along they lose their fanny. Run the math and tell me I'm wrong. 

The only real play for people like you is to hopefully break even on a monthly/yearly basis, consider yourself lucky it doesn't cost you out of pocket big along the way, and after 10, 15, 20 or 30 years, depending on your length of mortgage, will own a piece of real estate free and clear from the burden of the mortgage, but not free and clear from the burden of physical  depreciation, management expenses, insurance and property tax. If you have cash and have a partner you could trust, maybe an out of state investment could work. You don't have cash, you have a down payment, and it doesn't look like you have a partner either, and instead flaunt yourself on an online forum. Be mad at me if you wish. I'm still going to say you're welcome.

I haven't posted in almost a year and sure enough, the flow keeps a flowin'

Sorry fisherman. Storm screwed up your catch today. No worry, tomorrow is but a day away and this post will be drowned in the sea of posts in no time.

Tempting to come here for the easy answer, but the hard truth is you need to go and learn your specific laws like yesterday. Most places have this information available online, for instance usually the statutes and sometimes even specific landlord/tenant law guides published by the government. Sometimes you can find publishers that have looked into it and have written a book. This forum is about the worst place to find this type of information, unless you get lucky and find a person who a) is from your same locale and b) understands what they're talking about. If you can't seem to find the information you seek, perhaps a few bucks to a lawyer for a consult would be a good investment. What is true in all cases in all locales is this, time is of the essence and cases not brought forth in the right way are almost always thrown out. Tick tock.

Good luck.

I'm inclined to believe the management on this one. The motion sensors at the floor make the door open, not close. There is also a sensor in the motor to detect pressure, also triggering the door to open. If the springs somehow busted, the locking mechanism on the chain and the gears of the motor would hold the door in place - the springs ease the weight, they don't hold it, the lock is designed to hold the weight without the springs. So finally the only explanation is that the locking mechanism somehow became unlocked halfway through an open cycle, which would be generous to call that unlikely, but perhaps not impossible. However what is certainly plausible, common even, is that the driver either by misjudgment, distraction or operational error, drove into the door before it was completely open. Not only did they damage the door panels, they shattered their windshield too. Then, embarrassed, scared of the landlord/consequences and perhaps unable to pay for damages, claimed it was not their fault and it must have been the door. If the door came crashing down as the tenant claims, there would likely be some evidence on the hood of their car, at the very least some scratches when the door rubbed as they backed out, maybe even shards of glass stuck under the rubber scratching as the weight of the door dug them into the paint job...see anything like that on the hood of their car?

I dunno. Who knows. I'm just saying the more likely scenario is that the tenant drove into the thing.

IMO, I'd say it's more important to rate the individual property than it is the neighborhood. The neighborhood factor plays as a feature to the property, not the other way around. You can easily pay too much in a "good" neighborhood or make a profit in a "bad" neighborhood. With that being the case, it sort of blurs the popular/typical/knee jerk ideas of what "good" and "bad" are. Seems to me the only metric that really matters when it comes to "good" or "bad" is a profit or a loss. Turns out that metric has more to do with the investor than anything else. I might say start by assessing what you can afford and then search for deals where you can afford them (I tend to look in areas that are a convenient distance from my place of business as a starting point). Try hard not to pay too much for what the property is and perhaps you'll earn a profit. As a general and vague statement, the only type of neighborhood to truly avoid would be one that is void of housing demand. I hope that was helpful - good luck.

I don't even bother to check credit scores. Where I own few people use bank accounts, few have credit cards, few have loans of any kind. Yet, people pay their rent every month just the same - how about that? LOL.

One thing I consider about "credit" is this - is it more fiscally responsible to live using perpetual credit or is it more responsible to pay everything up-front with cash? That thought has always made me chuckle with people who heavily weigh a credit score - good credit is built by using credit. I'm not going to ding someone because their strategy is to never use credit. I happen to think people who believe paying for things on today's money instead of tommorrow's money are more fiscally responsible than those who rely on credit for everyday purchases.

What I am shifting to is 1st, last and damage up-front. I currently charge 1st and 1.5 damage. I think asking people to come up with that amount of money, and their ability/willingness to do so shows a) they can afford to do that and b) they see the fiscal wisdom in the practice - those are the renters I want.

In addition to asking 3x rent up-front, I am shifting to allow the deposit held for last month to be used as an emergency fund. While I expect tenants to be fiscally responsible and plan for unexpected expenses, I also recognize mistakes happen too. So, perhaps I will allow a draw on those funds say, 1 time a year? This use of deposit funds will of course have a repayment plan that must be met.

The other change I am making is returning the damage deposit within 2 business days from unit transfer instead of the default 21 days. This will of course have conditions, like a pre-move inspection and a subsequent post-move inspection. I think the default 21 day law is ridiculous and beyond unreasonable. There are few instances when a landlord ought not be able to assess damages and return money in a much shorter amount of time.

The reason I am choosing to make these changes is because the current practice of 1 month damage and zero last month and 21 day return of damage deposit just causes too many problems. When a tenant is worried they will not even receive their deposit back AND know it will not come until 21 days has elapsed, that places the tenant in a tough spot. This is why we so often see otherwise good tenants skip out on last months rent, which of course affects their reference rating and perhaps their public record too. It also drains the damage deposit. When the tenant knows the damage deposit is drained, their incentive to not damage the property on the way out decreases, added to the fact they have already skipped last months rent and screwed up their reference anyways!!! And of course, the lack of damage deposit funds is very bad for the landlord, which in-turn becomes bad for the neighborhood, as property is unnecessarily damaged and funds for repairs are no longer present.

Finally I only use month to month leases. I know some areas require long term leases - perhaps people (owners and renters) ought to fight to have that changed in those areas - it's a horrible law that serves nobody well.

This thread is about tenants with no credit. The presence of a good credit score is not something that equals a qualified tenant. That said, the presence of a bad credit score does indeed say something, so for that reason I understand why many landlords strictly use them to determine eligibility.

I check for unpaid judgement's and evictions. Those two things show if people are going to address their problems the right way and if they will make good if something goes wrong. Then I verify employment and past landlords. After that they need to come up with the money. Once I rent to someone I can easily send them packing if they prove an inability to afford the unit, an inability to preserve property, or an inability to refrain from infringing on the rights of others, which are my three and only three criteria for renting one of my units.

I hope that was helpful. Good luck!

Aint no sinkhole here...anymore...we filled that in...did I not make that clear? Whoops. I thought you meant are there any sinkholes presently! Well I got some dirt for sale if you need some.

Florida and it's sinkholes. I'm trying to make light of this sinking proposition...   too soon?

In all seriousness, there has got to be some precedent for cases like yours in FL. I'd start there. Perhaps lawyer up? Lawyer consult might be worth every penny if you can't find answers quickly.

 Well, no. The building is an upper/lower duplex, not a side-by-side, so there's a lot of common area on the premises. Laundry/Storage in the shared basement, vehicles in the shared garage. Each unit has a front entry to the shared open porch, then a rear entry to the common back hall/stairs. The back stairs is the only access the the basement. The garage and trash are located at the rear of the property. So, they will at least need to be extra careful when doing the laundry, they will touch the same handrails and steps, breathe the same air. I say the whole thing is not good. While the virus is in fact everywhere and around us all the time, having it in the building is one very large step closer.