Skip to content
×
Try PRO Free Today!
BiggerPockets Pro offers you a comprehensive suite of tools and resources
Market and Deal Finder Tools
Deal Analysis Calculators
Property Management Software
Exclusive discounts to Home Depot, RentRedi, and more
$0
7 days free
$828/yr or $69/mo when billed monthly.
$390/yr or $32.5/mo when billed annually.
7 days free. 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: Stetson Oates

Stetson Oates has started 1 posts and replied 47 times.

I tend to stay away from these posts because I think its attempting to stir up controversy within the forums.  I do see the benefit of conversing about strategy during any administration.  President Trump is a real estate guy at heart, I think he will continue to promote real estate investments.  I think he uses the US leverage to get what's due and best for the US citizens.  The tariffs are bargaining attempts that have worked thus far. Hopefully large companies will see that the US is worth investing in again.  What's bad about that? Doge is the wild card that could do real damage to some of the leaders this country has had in the last few years.  Personally, I see a lot of good happening right now, inflation is the one unknown that needs to get wrangled in.  I know we like to blame Biden on that, but in reality, its still the pandemic spending that both presidents approved.  Anyways, lets invest the way we see fit and not let this kind of thread divide.

I could see where the bottle of wine could get you in some grease. If you don’t have a liquor license and you are serving/providing, it could be an issue if someone is hurt. Insurance for sure wouldn’t cover you.


Just a thought and I could be completely wrong!

Post: Those of you on the sidelines

Stetson OatesPosted
  • Posts 47
  • Votes 41
Quote from @Scott Trench:

@V.G Jason - This is an outstanding observation and analysis. 

My belief for SFR is that prices simply don't move much and grow slower than inflation. Rents will rise much at a much faster rate, so the challenge of finding cash flow (enabling more investors to become "capable") will gradually recede as SFR cap rates gradually expand - it will be a process, not an event - over the next few years.

I like the SFR buy and hold model.  I’m willing to put enough cash down to make it cash flow. Usually B properties in good neighborhoods provide positive cash flow at 75% LTV.  My buy box is 3 bed 2 bath in the Midwest at around $200k. My main strategy is flexibility. If I need to sell, a SFH is a lot easier to sell than a multi-family boat anchor if you’re in a bind. Plus your 100% selling multi-family to another investor who will want a deal. It’s buying season in my opinion.

As a suggestion, when you refer to net cashflow, I would include maintenance, vacancy, and repairs.  If not I fear you will be caught in a cash flow issue once you have a vacancy.  Section 8 would tend to carry higher repair and as a result, additional vacancy.

I'm not in your position but you seem set on suing.  Its all good until he sues you, then you will find out how much you really want the property.  You need to move on. Spend your money elsewhere and don't get into this quagmire of a process.  Take his money an walk away. No property is worth 2 years of your life and, once he counter sues, all of your sanity. WALK AWAY.

Scaling with SFRs is tough. I stick to investing in SFRs and my goal is to buy 1 per quarter with an LTV no more than 65%. Since I buy $200K properties I'm fronting $60K to $70K per purchase. I'd love to get to 100 SFRs but the reality is I'll never get there. I'm reading a book now where the author purchased hundreds per year putting minimal amounts down, that doesn't work anymore. My strategy will need to change if I want to scale in a meaningful way.

It's good that you have thought about this, but its really a non-issue.  Just shorten the lease to a 6 month, or whatever term lands you in the spring/summer for renewal. Just let the tenants know why you are doing it and explain they will be renewed (if you like them) no problem.  Good question to post though!!

Quote from @Don Konipol:
Quote from @Jay Hinrichs:
Quote from @Nathan Gesner:
Quote from @Don Konipol:

Consider the audience.

99% of BP visitors are small-time investors who will never face lawsuits from investors with deep pockets. Their most common threat is a security deposit dispute. Their most significant risk is an injury lawsuit that will either be dismissed or settled out of court by their insurance provider for well below the liability limits.

If a mom-and-pop investor obeys the law and treats their tenants honestly, they'll never have to worry about asset protection beyond ordinary insurance and a small reserve.

Nathan keep in mind not everyone is a landlord most litigation in RE is between partners and investors suing GPs etc etc.  As for liablity for a mom and pop landlord I agree do the best you can and have proper insurance..
Insurance is the FIRST line of defense.  Certainly, LIABILITY insurance and should be regarded as important as fire and casualty.  But, here’s a situation in which having my properties in SEPARATE series of an LLC saved me enormous time, aggravation and money.

in 2012 I purchased 5 individual high rise condos in different buildings in Phoenix, AZ.  I took title to each in a separate series of my LLC, which is the same as per entity protection as having each in a separate LLC but with the organizational and accounting costs of having a single LLC.

In the case of each I carried hazard and liability insurance for the INTERIOR of the condo while the HOA carried insurance for the “common” areas, including structural.

This particular condo was on the second floor, with retail and office space directly below.  Over a weekend during which my tenant was not home, the condo became flooded and water went through the flooring and flooded the office below.  The major damage was to 35 computer stations and various other electronic equipment, as well as buildouts, furnishings, etc. The damage claim was in excess of $800,000. 
My insurance company determined that they were not responsible because the problem originated it form INSIDE the wall which was the responsibility of the condo association.  The condo association insurance determined they weren’t responsible because either (1) my tenant was negligent or (2) the problem originated from a connection just inside my apartment.  The attorney representing the owners of the office downstairs were threatening to sue me.

So, I engaged my attorney to deal with the issue.  While he wasn’t successful getting the insurance companies to accept liability (initially), he pointed out to the plaintiffs attorney that (1) the owner of the condo was an LLC, not me personally, and that’ll business concerning the condo was done in the name of the LLC, and (2) the only asset of the Series of that LLC was the condo itself, so that the legal entity owned only that single asset.  Further, I as a matter of course, place a “friendly” lien on all properties I buy for cash, so there was little equity in the condo.  Now, probably after a long and drawn out court battle, a plaintiff can probably get the lien removed as a “sham”, but a cursory examination by the typical plaintiffs attorney would probably not produce that conclusion.  So as a result of my “asset protection” procedures, the end result was that instead of being sued personally and having to spend the time, money and emotional stress of both defending my self AND suing the insurance companies and condo association, the plaintiffs accepted an ASSIGNMENT of proceeds and signed a form releasing me and my LLC from liability in exchange for the right to go after the insurance companies themselves. 

A rare occurrence? Sure.   But the more property you buy the higher the likelihood of being involved in a situation where asset protection above basic liability insurance can SAVE YOUR A_ _ !

All this asset protection in a Texas Series LLC for a $300 filing fee.  Texas even provides a pdf fill in the blanks form.  
Browsing the forums, I have been a little surprised by the amount of folks who think insurance is there to help you.  This is a great example of how insurance only wants your money and, in fact, are your enemy in many cases. Denying your claim is their goal, they do not want to help you. Having asset protection when coverage is denied is essential. 
Quote from @Steve K.:
Quote from @Stetson Oates:
Quote from @Steve K.:
Quote from @Stetson Oates:
Quote from @Steve K.:
Quote from @Calvin Thomas:
Quote from @John Underwood:

I stumbled across this lawsuit while looking for something else.

As I have mentioned before in this forum an LLC that is not 100% property ran can easily be pierced and the owner sued personally.

Here is an example of where an attorney went after someone that thought their LLC would protect them:

18. Upon information and belief, the member(s) of the Defendant have failed to observe any corporate formalities in that: a. b. c. d. e. f. g.

19. The members did not observe corporate formality; The Defendant did not pay dividends; The Defendant was insolvent at the time of its actions; The Defendant’s members siphoned funds from the Defendant for their own personal use; The Defendant’s members comingled funds; There are no corporate records; The corporation(s) were a facade and alter ego of the member(s) of the Defendant. In addition to the eight (8) factors laid out above, failing to pierce the corporate veil in this matter would create an elementary injustice and fundamental unfairness. The member(s) of the Defendant have used the corporate shell as a way to avoid any liability for the serious injuries that were caused to the Plaintiff and others by the reckless action of the Defendant’s member(s) and agents. With this in mind, Plaintiff should have compensation directly from the member(s) if the same cannot be had from the corporate Defendant. To deny this compensation would create an injustice and fundamental unfairness.

20. For the reasons and for other reasons to be proven, the Plaintiff is entitled to pierce the corporate veil and assert individual liability against the member(s) of the Defendant.


It's always best to have multi-member LLC. You have a stronger ability to not allow a court action to pierce the corporate veil. You can have a parent LLC owned by two trusts, 50/50 and you'd have double the protection. Since it's trust ownership, there are some additional benefits. As always, speak to a lawyer. This shouldn't be taken as legal advice. However, this is how I've done it. The Kushner's do it this way, as well as President Trump. So, some food for thought.

Trusts seem to be the preferred method of liability and asset protection among the wealthy. 
Trusts offer no liability protection. LLCs can protect you from outside attacks that have nothing to do with your real estate operation.  For example, a car wreck. You will be sued personally and everything in your personal name is unprotected. The rental insurance doesn’t protect you in this example, driving a car is the most risky thing we all do.
Asset Protection Trusts, Offshore Asset Protection Trusts (Cook Islands, Belize) and Irrevocable Trusts with a spendthrift clause are examples of how trusts can provide asset protection from lawsuits. Google “OJ Simpson asset protection strategy”.
No trust will provide you asset protection. You can do crazy stuff with trusts but hey are really bad at protecting assets. OJs main asset shield was his primary residence in Florida, which has unlimited homestead protection. Thats why he moved to Florida.  If you want to move assets off shore those assets may or may not be subject to collection depending on the country.

 Asset Protection Trusts don't protect assets?  

My understanding is that O.J. used asset protection trusts established in Nevada with spendthrift clauses to protect his assets from creditors...  


 I'm not an OJ expert.  I invest in real estate.  If I murdered 2 people Id assume any asset I had could be venerable.

Quote from @Steve K.:
Quote from @Stetson Oates:
Quote from @Steve K.:
Quote from @Calvin Thomas:
Quote from @John Underwood:

I stumbled across this lawsuit while looking for something else.

As I have mentioned before in this forum an LLC that is not 100% property ran can easily be pierced and the owner sued personally.

Here is an example of where an attorney went after someone that thought their LLC would protect them:

18. Upon information and belief, the member(s) of the Defendant have failed to observe any corporate formalities in that: a. b. c. d. e. f. g.

19. The members did not observe corporate formality; The Defendant did not pay dividends; The Defendant was insolvent at the time of its actions; The Defendant’s members siphoned funds from the Defendant for their own personal use; The Defendant’s members comingled funds; There are no corporate records; The corporation(s) were a facade and alter ego of the member(s) of the Defendant. In addition to the eight (8) factors laid out above, failing to pierce the corporate veil in this matter would create an elementary injustice and fundamental unfairness. The member(s) of the Defendant have used the corporate shell as a way to avoid any liability for the serious injuries that were caused to the Plaintiff and others by the reckless action of the Defendant’s member(s) and agents. With this in mind, Plaintiff should have compensation directly from the member(s) if the same cannot be had from the corporate Defendant. To deny this compensation would create an injustice and fundamental unfairness.

20. For the reasons and for other reasons to be proven, the Plaintiff is entitled to pierce the corporate veil and assert individual liability against the member(s) of the Defendant.


It's always best to have multi-member LLC. You have a stronger ability to not allow a court action to pierce the corporate veil. You can have a parent LLC owned by two trusts, 50/50 and you'd have double the protection. Since it's trust ownership, there are some additional benefits. As always, speak to a lawyer. This shouldn't be taken as legal advice. However, this is how I've done it. The Kushner's do it this way, as well as President Trump. So, some food for thought.

Trusts seem to be the preferred method of liability and asset protection among the wealthy. 
Trusts offer no liability protection. LLCs can protect you from outside attacks that have nothing to do with your real estate operation.  For example, a car wreck. You will be sued personally and everything in your personal name is unprotected. The rental insurance doesn’t protect you in this example, driving a car is the most risky thing we all do.
Asset Protection Trusts, Offshore Asset Protection Trusts (Cook Islands, Belize) and Irrevocable Trusts with a spendthrift clause are examples of how trusts can provide asset protection from lawsuits. Google “OJ Simpson asset protection strategy”.
No trust will provide you asset protection. You can do crazy stuff with trusts but hey are really bad at protecting assets. OJs main asset shield was his primary residence in Florida, which has unlimited homestead protection. Thats why he moved to Florida.  If you want to move assets off shore those assets may or may not be subject to collection depending on the country.