Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here
Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties. Try BiggerPockets PRO.
x
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Reza Push

Reza Push has started 2 posts and replied 4 times.

Originally posted by @Dan Schweit:

Hey Reza, I can empathize with your dilemma. I have been in Los Angeles my whole life. I spent my early 20's living by the beach, renting, then just got further and further away, till now when we are in santa clarita. Which obviously is much more bang for our buck, but not really LA anymore. I think Grant Cardone says that owning the home you live in is one of the worst investments possible. So, if you decide to rent, and just use the money to invest, you can really jumpstart things. I honestly wish i would have done that when I was younger. But, I also had a pretty good ride on So Cal appreciation over the last 12 years as well. I personally don't invest in CA anymore as I was able to develop some good relationships in NV and buy some stuff out there over the years. Your decision really comes down to your specific goals. Build your portfolio faster, or do it slower but have a place you own to call home.

Dan I appreciate the information and your thoughts. Grant Cardone says a lot of things, but I don't see how owning your own home is classified as the "worst investment possible" since here in LA I have a known quantity of spending at least $4k/month to live. 

Basically the LA market is nuts and cannot decide what is the best decision for us. Through Covid we have been staying in a family member's vacant home here in LA and previously rented. Obviously as things open up, we will need our own place. SO's job is on the westside where things are insanely expensive. I have maybe $300k cash on hand.

The way I see it, we have a couple of options:

  • Buy a primary SFH that we can rent out at some point for a house hack. Problems are that even up to $1M, it's not going to be a very nice place. I have tried for a year to find these illusive "off market" of "fixer" gems. They do not exist unless you go deep in the hood. Sorry, but I am just not going to live there.
  • Buy another rental or two in the other market (or any market, really) I have some SFH and rent a place for ourselves at around ~$4000/month. This is obviously a huge amount of money to spend on an apartment, but allows us to acquire another 1-2 units and increase cashflow, though at a large living cost.

I like the idea of a primary because I can get a HELOC for quick access to my equity as needed. But in this market without spending $1.25M+ I won't be able to live in a very desirable part of town. This would drain my cash reserves, which I don't want to do. I have no problem with a duplex or triplex, but it's the same issue. You'll have to spend ~$1.5M or more to get something decent here.

Surely others of you live in LA and understand trying to balance living in a safe area but also trying to expand your rental portfolio. Interested in what you may be doing.

    Originally posted by @Russell Brazil:

    That condo would be whats called nonwarrantable.  That means Fannie Mae will not issue a loan on it.  Liquidity of nonwarrantable condos is typically really low. They will need to typically be purchased in all cash.

     Russell,

    Thanks for the info, that's definitely what's going on. Basically I'll have trouble selling it because of the same reason I will have trouble buying it. Can you enlighten me further of the specific reasons why this is a bad enough reason that FM won't lend on it? Is it in case the entity that owns the rest of the building folds? In case they are bad at managing it?

    I found a condominium unit I am interested in buying to rent out. It is in a great location in a major city. There are 15 units total and 13/15 are owned by one corporate entity. The agent told me that due to this, it will not be possible/easy to get a loan. I am trying to figure out what that means for me other than the fact that they are essentially the entire HOA. What am I missing in this picture? It does not sound ideal but hardly seems to be so bad that a bank wouldn't lend on it.