All Forum Posts by: Reid Hanley

Don't buy a park that you can't check off all of the things @FrankRolfe listed above.   I'll expand on a couple of them though.

1) If you are getting a loan to buy the park, don't buy a park that you can't verify clean title on every POH (not just clean title to the property).  Require the seller to show you copies of the titles of all POH showing title is in their name before signing final contract. 

2) If park is on all septic currently, don't buy a park that will be required to be put on the public sewer system in the near future, unless that cost is factored into purchase price.  Many municipalities will require property owners to connect to the sewer once it is available to the property.  This can be very expensive, especially if grinder pumps/lift stations are required.

With all that said...go by the right mobile home park!

@Frank Rolfe Thank you for the response. I certainly value your opinion on the matter. 

I'm curious how other park owners view the idea of selling POHs to investors who would then rent them out.   I know there are downsides to this scenario.  I've consider that the actual tenants will still likely have a tenant mentality and no pride of ownership.  Also the reduced lack of control over who the actual tenants are.  But the upside of not owning the home is obviously very appealing. I'm wondering if anyone out there has had good experience with this strategy? If so, what safeguards did you implement to help ensure success?

Just now posted a similar topic before I started searching BP on this topic.  Lots of posts but relatively few replies, so I'm guessing this isn't widely used.   Have you done any bonds in lieu of deposits?  At first glance it seems like a win-win strategy, but as a landlord I have your same concerns about what happens on the back end of things when you need to make a claim.

I came across an ad for an apartment building in which the seller described that he used insurance bonds instead of security deposits.  This sounds interesting, but I'm sure there are other details to know about this approach.  The exact wording in the ad read as follows:

     "We also instituted a "no security deposit" program by using insurance bonds in lieu of deposits. These products allow the        tenant the option to pay a small monthly insurance premium to the insurer in lieu of a lump-sum full security deposit            payment at move-in. In addition to increasing rental incomes, these products give the landlord at least double the                amount of security vs a security deposit."

Anyone have any experience or input on this strategy?   I can only imagine having to file an insurance claim for repairs would probably be a longer and more painful process, but if increased coverage to the point you can actually recover the full costs of repairs it may be worth it?

Thanks BP!

One thing you should definitely do is put a test ad out on Facebook marketplace and Craigslist to see what the demand would be for what you are offering.  If there is enough interest and you can let the tenants know they have first choice to buy their home or otherwise their home will be sold and they will have to vacate.  That is assuming you aren't bound by a current lease term.  Assuming you are month to month you can provide them with 30 day notice their lease is about to be over.

I would advise you to sell these homes for the value they have, which is not insignificant if they are in good shape (70s-80s models included).  They are a safe, decent place to live.  So don't just give them away.  If the tenant is just given the home they will have no incentive to keep it nice.  Their mindset will still be that of renter and will easily walk away from the place once it is in bad enough shape due to their lack of maintenance.  You somewhat give up your ability to inspect the home once you sell it so you wont' be able to monitor its condition.  The last thing you want is a destroyed abandoned home in your park.

Just my opinion.  Interested in what others will say. I'm in process of doing the same.



 

@ Mason Carlson you're asking for input on how to finance 'these renos' but you're not giving any detail about what they are, so it's hard to help with advice. 

@DanielRyu

Hi Daniel.   We are still working on this. I've had multiple conversations with plumbers, engineers, the sewer company and the county. The "right" way to do this seems to not be a consensus among any of them. Have had two plumbers tell me they can pull the permits needed and do the engineering needed to make sure that the county will approve whatever we do.  This would eliminate the need for hiring an engineer, which I was quoted $10K for this service. I will post back when we pull the trigger.

I have a property in Florida under contract that the current owner has informed me has to be hooked into the sewer line  which was installed last month within the next year.  He has been told no further repairs or replacements to the existing septic systems will be approved by the county.  There are 12 homes sharing 6 septic systems currently.  The sewer line that would be connected to is under pressure so  I need to put in a pump system of some kind.  I'm researching two options: Option 1 is a pump at each pad or Option 2 is a whole park system.  This is going to be an expensive improvement either way and I'm wondering what others may have done in the past who have done this.

I've been advised that putting a grinder pump at each pad that connects to a central sewer line on the property that then connects the main line at the street is the best way to do this. That way we would be able to switch homes over as needed instead of biting the bullet (cost) all at once.  This makes sense to me for two main reasons:  I think there would be a single tap fee to tie into the main sewer line and spreading the costs out over time.

I'm sure there are variables I'm not addressing, so please let me know what I'm not thinking about yet.  Any input is greatly appreciated.   Thanks BP!!

Reid 

@Jerry W Thank you for your input.  My experience (about 16 months) is pretty much in line with everything you said.