All Forum Posts by: Seth Tucker

If you are buying your next home as OO, and want 100% Financing you can always try going through Rural Development. Obviously has limitations but it works. Or did you mean buying your own investment without using your own money?

Welcome Corey Paquette !

It's technically not allowed if you are just assigning your purchase to someone. Doing a double closing is allowed in NH--but good lucking finding an attorney that'll do it. Ann Bellamy does the transactional funding you need to pull off legal wholesaling in NH.

Cory Scribner thats cheap enough to use a self directed 401K to buy it or some other cash from friends/family. But that's also so cheap it's alarming. $3-4K into the property for only a $25/month rent increase? The increase in rent doesn't justify the excess debt you are taking on. Why do the repairs at all if it's already rented out and cash flowing? If you do the repairs, could you flip it? Why won't the bank finance it? Is it a mobile home?

Wait, Renee R. Have they been late 3 or more times in a 12 month period? If so that gives you grounds to not renew their lease--and that is very well documented with case law in NH. I also believe that a third late allows you to refuse to accept it as a cure and continue with an eviction. You might not be able to do that because of the late fee mistakes, but I do know the 3 late payment rule should keep you safe. Also, just raise the rent insanely high. No rent control laws whatsoever in NH, and you can turn around and re-rent to someone else for a fair market value. I hope that helps :)

Originally posted by @Renee R.:

Since I only have two years of REI under my belt, this is more of a check in to see if I'm going down the right path here and if there's anything else I could be doing.

I have trouble tenants that I inherited and their lease expires 3/31/16. I'm hoping they will not renew by raising the rent significantly—thinking of going from $1,295 to $1,500, the median rent for the area. I would give them more than 60 days’ notice (and would also provide the new lease at least 30 days in advance with the new rent amount). Any experience with how effective this will be? I’ve been told to raise the rent to $2,000, but I really wouldn’t be able to rent to new tenants at that rate. How would that look to a judge if I ultimately have to go to court?

I previously offered cash for keys due to other issues, but they wouldn’t budge. Due to the angry texts and phone calls from them, not to mention their other criminal behaviour (assaults, shoplifting with child in tow), I don’t want to reason with them or talk in person any more. 

I’m hoping the rent increase and the extended notice to find something else will get them out.

Anything else I should be doing?

 This answers my question, I should have read it more clearly. Their angry texts to you could be 'good cause'.

Their criminal behavior could be cited as effecting other tenants ability to feel safe and quietly enjoy the property could be 'good cause', and hell you could even argue that they possessed stolen goods in the unit (a crime) which gives you 'good cause'.

So, tell them the new rent will be $2,000 per month and watch them leave :)
Also, add in a clause that says you are not required to provide them with a front door if they are late on their rent. That is a legal way of getting people to pay up or get out (seriously).

Also, you don't have to offer the place for rent to new tenants at the $2,000 (or whatever) amount once they leave.

Originally posted by @Renee R.:

First, I appreciate everyone's comments. But, this issue falls in the category of be aware of your own state laws. Even then, laws can be interpreted differently by the courts. The statute is NH RSA 540:2, II. The law is specific about reasons for eviction, and expiration of lease is not one of them.

My information is correct and verified by both the lawyer at the seminar I took, who specialized in evictions, and my own real estate lawyer: In NH, expiration of a lease is not 'good cause' for eviction. And, this was tested in the court case AIMCO Properties v. Kasha Dziewisz. The decision said:

       Ultimately, the AIMCO majority concluded that evicting a tenant from a restricted property for no reason other than the expiration of their lease would be “arbitrary,” and as such, contrary to the purpose of the statute. 

More info on the issue can be found at: AIMCO court case  https://www.nhbar.org/publications/archives/displa...

As I mentioned earlier, a bill was introduced in the NH legislature to remedy this, but it died. 

Since expiration of lease is not an option for getting my deadbeat tenants out, I am hoping that raising the rent beyond what they can likely pay is my only option at this point. If they can't or don't pay the rent, I will have to go through the normal eviction process for nonpayment of rent.

 What exactly makes them deadbeat tenants anyway? If you read the case notes, it says they had not listed "good cause", so find something. Especially find out if they have people living on the property that aren't on the lease! That's a violation for sure, or make all new occupants go through a new screening and require proof of income.

There are plenty of ways around this situation, especially since all of the courts were re-organized a few years ago. Landlord tenant issues are now handled in a Small Claims/Circuit court instead of Supreme, and it takes a LOT of legal know-how and $$ to bring it that far.

A lease not renewing is NOT AN EVICTION. That's really key when you read NH's statutes.

FYI, in NH the law that applies to leased tenants is *almost* exclusively related to eviction. I have read through the statues many times and have never found anything that provides a tenant with a legal right to always renew their lease. A lease is a contract and will be read and interpreted in court almost literally to the word in the contract. I know from many personal experiences that if you have in your contract that either party needs to issue notice of a non-renewal within a certain period (usually 30 days but some use 60 days). 

But seriously, consider these scenarios as black and white (if your 'bad tenants' are simply just annoyances and you want to get rid of them legally):

1. Your lease with them says it expires 3/31/16 and requires a 30 or 60 day notice to quit (aka written notice of vacating the property and not renewing the lease AND not becoming a tenant at will), read the lease to say something like "notice from either party XX days before the expiration of the lease is required". Send them a notice saying that you will not be renewing their lease and that you need them to vacate the premises by the expiration of their lease, anything beyond the end of their lease is not acceptable and will be considered trespassing. Do NOT give any reason why you are not renewing, you aren't required to.

2. Your lease has an automatic renewal clause but does not say that "either party" can send the notice to quit. Send them a notice that their rent is going up to some absurdly high amount with their renewal. DO NOT USE MARKET VALUE. Why would they move out if you raise it to the median rent? That's just stupid.

3. You can also send them a notice to quit the lease and that if they remain in the property after the lease expires they will be considered a tenant at will and their month-to-month rent will be something like $2,400. There are NO rent control laws in NH, you can raise the rent to any level you want.

In NH, the lease you have is considered a legal contract (obvious right?) and the terms are considered BEFORE the standard landlord tenant laws, unless there is some sort of breach of the contract. If the courts don't uphold the terms of a lease, then what would be the point of making a lease? ;)

Disclaimer: I'm not an attorney, and obviously get legal advice if the terms of you ending your tenants lease is not clear in your lease. 

I'll give you a great personal example: I had a lease that expired in June (years ago) and at the beginning of that month my landlord asked if I was renewing my lease. I said, no I had planned on going month-to-month. He said he does not allow month-to-month (tenant at will, these are the same thing in NH) and that I would be required to sign a new lease or I would owe an additional months rent for not giving 32 days notice, and he would keep my security deposit. Now, I had read the lease very carefully and the terms were clear. I was to give 32 days notice if I was vacating the property before the expiration of my lease and would be held financially responsible for the apartment until he found a new tenant or the lease expired. The lease clearly said that if the lease expired I would automatically become a tenant at will in what's called a "holding over period" and that the lease would be month to month, as long as he agreed (which he didn't). So I left before the end of my lease and left it in tenable condition.

It did end up going to court, I sued him to get my security deposit back. I ended up winning double the deposit back plus court costs because:
1. He took more than 30 days to send me a letter stating why he was keeping my security deposit (which is why he owed double the amount back to me) and he kept it for an invalid reason.

2. The judge used our exact lease to make a determination on how the ruling should go. 

3. I spoke with 5 different attorneys, all of which stated the samething: in NH the lease is viewed as a contract between consent adults and those terms are considered first. Most landlord law is meant to protect a tenant from being abused, and prevent un-lawful evictions and that is all.

Just follow your lease, and make sure you actually know what your own lease terms are! This guy didn't :)

FYI, I tried settling with him many times prior to going all the way to the judge, he specifically kept saying 'let the judge decide' thinking he was in the right. 

Do you have a realtor to comp the property and the rents for you?

Maybe check Rent-O-Meter for a general rent guidlines to see how close it is. Are the tenants under leases or month to month?

Seems like a great program! How do you define LTV? Property purchase price or the appraised value?