All Forum Posts by: Sarah Williams

I'm actually looking to perhaps do the same thing.  I'm from Michigan originally,  not that far from South Bend. I don't know the area very in depth, but I do know they're building a casino to the southwest of the city right now. I know parts of SB can be pretty rough, but if you stay around Notre Dame it's fine. South Bend, and Mishawaka kind of blend into one big city. 

@Melvin List - Ok. The link didn't open to anything (just a webpage that kept 'loading'). Very well may be my computer, it's acting strange today. 

Thanks again so much for the info and the reply. 

@Melvin List - Thanks so much for the reply.  It doesn't surprise me that she was wrong, she kept getting Indiana and Idaho mixed up (red flag, right?)

Are these rules set above the lender level - like by the government? 

Hello good people, 

I took the plunge and called a lender today. It's a Federal credit union that is next door to where I work, I figured what the heck. 

Here's the long story short - I want to invest out of state, and I was told today that I should apply for a "second home mortgage", as in one for a "Vacation home" even though I don't really plan to use it for a vacation home (at least not in the too near future), and I don't have a first mortgage. I rent my 'first home'. Is this a real thing?

Here are the details:

I am currently living (and renting) in Orange County California. I've never bought a home.  

I want to purchase a single family or small multi-family in the Northern Indiana or Southwest Michigan region - because that is where I am originally from. I know the area, and I have a lot of family there to help the process. Also, the numbers work. 

I have 10k currently saved, and it was my plan to save perhaps 10k more in order to have 20% down and the ability to buy something up to 100k. Right now I just wanted to start talking to lenders to get my facts straight and make sure I was on the right path. I've seen a few properties that caught my eye around 50-60k also, and I know I'm close to having the down payment in that bracket. 

The lender says that for investment properties, they require 25% (not that shocking)  but we could apply for a "second home loan" which only required 10% down. She mentioned because my family is in the area, and because I mentioned that perhaps one day I could use the property as a vacation rental (and would be using it myself from time to time) that it qualified. I made sure she understood that I don't actually own a first home, and she said that was fine. 

I also questioned:  "But, I can rent it out in the mean time? This isn't like ... illegal?" and she confirmed it was not. She noted I would just need to most likely write a letter of intent to eventually move to the property in the future...even if that might not ever happen. 

I guess technically it's not really lying. That is a possibility in 30 years or something. 

Well ... as I thought more it felt weird, and I came on here to do some further research. I've only seen one post and it mentioned that you must live in the second residence for X amount of time out of the year. Do these things just depend on the lender? 

Any way, sorry for the long question, but any help you could share will be greatly appreciated. 

Thanks kindly in advance!

I honestly don't know the first thing about it,  but the realtor said whatever fix was done was "inspected and approved by the city"

I'll probably still stay away, but it made me curious.

Hello All, 

I was chatting online with a real estate agent today, and I asked him to look into a property that, to me, looked "too good to be true." 

He looked at the seller disclosure which stated the property had been exposed to  - his words - "Meth Lab exposure which has been remediated". 

Has any one else dealt with something like this? The deal is still just a little out of the price range I was considering - I was just kind of asking out of curiosity. 

But it got me thinking, because it's been on the market for 6 months, and the numbers make it a good deal. Is this something I could actually use to my advantage because others are frightened?

It just has me kind of reeling too though, because it's in an area I otherwise know to be a decent area. I'm investing out of state (back in my home state area) - so I'm going on the little I remember of the area from 10+ years ago, as well as some info from friend and fellow investors. I've had several people tell me it's an ok area though. I guess no mater what real estate is full of quirky surprises

Anyway - has anyone else bought a property like this? How did that work out?

@Rachel M. - do you mind if I also pick your brain in the future as I go on this journey? I'm going to request a 'connect' with you after I post this. 

@Timothy Swindle - I'm new here, but I'm originally from New Buffalo, MI. I see most people seem to be focusing on you being from Chicago. 

Maybe this is standard - but one thing you should know is your taxes will be higher than someone who lives there full time. The town knows it's a hot spot for summer vacationers from Chicago and has worked the tax code so that taxes are higher for people who don't live there year-round - and the taxes are close to double. I'm not sure if it happens on "second properties" or just one not lived in year round by the resident. Just - something to look into for your numbers. 

That being said, I know the vacation rentals do very very well here - even not actually in New Buffalo. Union Pier and Lakeside are still beach towns. Sawyer, Three Oaks, and Bridgeman are all still close enough to the lake, but they have this kind of budding nightlife thing going on with Greenbush and journeyman distillery. I mean ... nightlife is a relative term, so nothing like Chicago or anything (I also lived in Rogers Park for a few years before moving to California). 

I have to run, but if you have any other questions on the area from a formal local, message me.