All Forum Posts by: Oscar Cardenas

I feel the same as the other agents here. you get what you give. We realtors have those investors using multiple agents coming in wanting to do business all the time. For the most part, most realtors will come to the conclusion that even an investor that buys multiple properties a year is not worth a year long effort to close 1-2 deals with them when our effort can be placed on newer clients that will go under contract within a 0-3 month span. 

I have also personally noticed that the investors coming in with other agents typically have dedicated realtor that will take the bulk of their opportunities so I tend to show little interest in the multi agent investors. I doubt I am the only one who has noticed that. 

Don't think I agree with the other posters on this one. scarcity mindset issues.

Ultimately its about clarifying what you need out of your realtor to set expectations. If they are a decent realtor they would show obvious signs that you will not work well together. A realtor isn't like a regular job, we get our license that teaches us how to not get sued then venture off to do business our own style. Some realtors see themselves as professional contract negotiators, some see themselves as deal finders,  some as a guide, goal assistant, business partner, etc.

Since realtors deal in the realm of possible ethics violations, don't expect them to simply take advantage of a seller client to give you an under market deal with no competition. So, I would highly recommend you take charge of your own future and look for deals yourself but also find a realtor who is helping you in that search which it sounds like he is doing.

Another issue I take here is that you are looking for under market value from your realtor. If an under market deal hits the MLS then you are in deep competition with others which can then lead to the price climbing to near market value. If the realtor brings you one of their seller clients properties for you to put under contract at below market value then they are committing an ethics violation unless the seller knows they can get better by putting it on the market but decides to avoid that. So that leaves you with unconventional ways of buying like sheriff sales or preview status MLS deals. Since those are harder to avoid risk there is less competition, simple as that.

So, overall if I were the realtor analyzing your commentary I would have a goal setting and expectation setting meeting with you because the way it is now it would lead to disappointment. Personally, I think it sounds like the realtor is doing mostly fine from the little info you gave. The biggest issue is that you have to define what you expect and then think clearly if those expectations are reasonable.

There are a few from the Salem REIA meetings trying to start sessions at the coast. Right when it was set to start COVID happened. Maybe it will happen soon again.

tough stuff.. sometimes I give my clients the same recommendation but I always wonder in my head if it smells like commission breath lol.

The way that I see it is that at the lower end of the prices there is so much competition from people wanting to invest in real estate but not wanting to lose too much if they mess up. The issue is that the numbers simply don't make sense so the chances are loss are much higher at the lower end. The miniscule cash flow likely wont cover unforeseen expenses on cheaper properties, at least in my area.

In all honesty, I would stop and look at your goals and figure out why a 200k property or a 40k down payment is scary to you. That might be the real question which might have a legit answer as to why to not buy the 200k property. Ultimately, "should I trust my agents recommendation?" is not the real question since he gave you a valid reason that you can look up yourself. The real question is why are you personally hesitating on the larger property? It could be that you think your 40k can be put to better use elsewhere? which is a very valid reason.

By the time the crash comes, the market would have appreciated enough to offset any declines to come. You cannot time the market so its best to keep making money at all times. If you buy at a 10-20% discount now through networks and the crash happens tomorrow, instead of following the decline just sell at break even or keep it as a rental. I know some people who are still waiting since 2018.. well my market has increased about 25-30% since then so they have lost much more money in opportunity costs than they will save from a crash.. Then of course if you are new and have no experience, good luck finding money to fund the deals during a crash. Money gets tight for everyone during a crash. 

I have USDA in my area.. I have never heard of USDA being used as an investment.. unless you mean as like a househack type thing. I might be wrong since I am not a lender, but from my understanding it needs to be a good condition, single family home only, and in specified areas, and you need to be within an income amount. 

Overall from all my househack clients USDA has not been a valid option but that might be due to most of my househackers go into small multi.

I would suggest finding an investor friendly agent who understands househacks first. With househacking and in particular small multifamily owner occupied, I have met more lenders pretend to know and give bad info than ones who actually have experience with it. The first househack loan can be important so plan your strategy for this first one but also how you will buy the next few.. My test I tend to do is ask a lender is if I can buy an owner occupant 2-4 unit with a conventional 5% down payment. if they say yes, they have not fully helped a househacker and it would be best to move on to the next.

Highly recommend speaking to your agent. The process can be different in different states. 

aww dangit. Here is a response from a second lawyer opinion. This from is from an Oregon Association of Realtors Lawyer.

"Thanks Oscar. I interpret this to mean that this only applies if the landlord already lives in the unit. Unfortunately, “primary residence” is not defined for the purposes of ORS 90.427. However, generally the term “primary residence” applies to a home that someone already occupies as their main home, whether they rent or own it. For example, for the tenant that lives in the unit, it is probably their “primary residence.”

I could see someone advancing an argument that this is the primary residence of the new owner because they purchased it to be their primary residence and they fully intend for it to be their primary residence. However I’m not sure if they would be successful with that argument in court. It may be an uphill battle and if it was unsuccessful they could be in violation of the law and owe the tenant damages. "

Guess its mostly a matter of comfort with messing in a badly worded gray area of the law.

Hmm, I can see why you interpret that way. Going to send this to a different attorney to see if you are correct, where I read the exception was from a realtor site looked like a copy/paste version of the law but your picture looks to be coming directly from the source. Good stuff, hopefully you are right! now I am excited.