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: Thor M.

Thor M. has started 4 posts and replied 15 times.

Great list - it definitely makes me lean more toward keeping.

If we keep the property we are considering legalizing the in-law. Given that the building is currently a duplex with no eviction history, does adding a legal in-law decrease the value for future buyers because they wouldn’t be able to fast track condo convert?   Thanks!

Originally posted by @Theresa Harris:

I don't know the tax laws, but you may want to talk to an accountant to ask.  If you can sell it and not have to pay taxes on all the profit because it was your residence; I'd sell it and take that $1 million and invest it elsewhere.

I'm still waiting for hard numbers, but it looks like I could tax defer 1/2 the cash by reinvesting in my new Oakland property through a reverse 1031 and then shelter the remaining amount through the Sec. 121 primary residence exclusion.  

Originally posted by @Amit M.:

 A couple of questions first- what neighborhood is this in? and did you need to do substantial renovations after your purchase? (Am I correctly assuming the units are renovated?)

NOPA/Anza Vista border near Divisadero.  The property was in good shape when I purchased, but I've put in new furnaces, new hot water heaters, new roof, repaired dry rot on exterior side stairs, and some updates in the top unit (new windows, new counters and backsplash, new appliances, new tile in shower and bathroom floor).  Second unit is tenant occupied  at near market rent and had a kitchen and bathroom update about 10 years ago (all in good condition, but dated design).  No eviction history on building.

I need some RE investing advice as my wife and I are having trouble coming to a decision on whether to sell our SF property given that we are moving.

Background: bought San Francisco duplex in 2014 for $1.45 million (two, 2/1 units, 1150 sq ft each; and 1 unpermitted Jr. 1-bed in-law garage/garden unit - so technically three units). I owe $1.05 million on it with a 30 year fixed at 3.5%; PITI is $7,400. One 2-bed unit is rented at $4,000/month, owner-occupy the other 2-bed (rental value $4,500), and we Airbnb the in-law for about $3,000 a month. My broker just did a valuation and put the current value at $2.05-2.25 million.

Current situation: we just bought a triplex in Oakland for $1.7 million that better suits our needs (large unit for family). We can financially afford to keep the SF property, but aren't sure whether to do so. Under SF law, we won't be able to Airbnb the in-law because we aren't living there, so rent for the in-law would be about $2,000-2,500. If we fully lease the building, it would rent for about $10,500-11,000 and cash flow about $3,000/month assuming no major repairs (tenants pay utilities, all major systems and roof already upgraded, vacancy generally not an issue in SF). But something unforeseen could cut into that cash flow real quickly.

Pros of keeping: (1) SF real estate seems to just go up and up and is tough to purchase - the city discourages and blocks almost all development and so there is a super constrained supply, lots of high paying jobs, and lots of housing demand; we wrote 30 offers to get this place in 2014 and won with a $300,000 overbid. But, at some point the market will level off or slow down (probably when interest rates rise; and there must be a price point when demand falls). (2) The $3,000/month income would be nice, but I suspect we could get the same or more with other investments. (3) If I sold, I'm not sure what I'd do with the pot of money and I'm worried about it just sitting there (probably other RE or maybe index funds). Essentially, the upside is a bet on SF real estate continuing to rise - a good bet over the last 30 years.

Cons of keeping: (1) unreasonable, tenant-skewed rent control laws - master tenants can bring in up to 2 subtenants per bedroom without landlord consent; rent increases of only 1-2% per year max; just-cause eviction law - hard to evict except for very bad behavior, so tenants essentially have a life-estate as long as they pay the rent; if you evict with owner move-in, it "taints" the building for 10 years limiting the option to condo convert, etc.; (2) the building is (10%?) more valuable vacant and I could sell now with two vacant units, but that's unlikely later if I fully lease it; (3) $1 million in equity tied up only making $36,000/yr max (plus appreciation); (4) I could do a Reverse 1031 exchange and take my profit tax free to put into the new property; (5) free up a lot of cash to reinvest somewhere, including the new property.

TL;DR: should I continue to bet on SF real estate rising for my $2mm duplex despite the hassles of being an SF landlord; or should I take my profit and move on?

@Chris Mason  Amazing post!  Exactly what I was looking for.  Luckily, we only have one investment property at this point, so this strategy is prospective as we hope to acquire 2-3 properties this year. 

I'm in SF, what sort of lending do you do?

Thanks @Cal C. and @Steve Vaughan 

My wife and I have decent income so qualifying shouldn't be an issue at this point, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing other issues or pitfalls by employing this strategy. 

Anyone have a bad experience splitting up loans like this?

Do any married couples put their investment property loans into only one person's name so that both people can each get 10 residential loans?  

@Kyle J.

Great insights!  I admittedly have no experience in Stockton other than driving through it a couple times.  I was merely commenting on my personal thoughts and observations, which are not well informed.

What areas of Stockton do you like to invest in? SFR, duplexes, multi-units? It seems that the properties that cash-flow on paper are more likely to have 4+ units in (what I think are) class-C neighborhoods. Thoughts?

@Leslie B.

I'm still exploring Stockton as an option so my opinion may change after I gather more information, but:

Pros: (1) possible appreciation because it is close to the Bay Area and may benefit from people looking for cheaper housing options (indeed, the ACE train runs from Stockton to Silicon Valley); (2) a better rent-to-price ratio than many other California cities allowing for more cash flow opportunities; and (3) proximity to San Francisco, which allows me to invest closer to home. 

Cons: (1) Stockton recently filed bankruptcy and could have future problems; (2) some high crime areas; (3) little in the way of strong local industries; (4) more dilapidated properties requiring increased maintenance costs; and (5) weaker tenant base.

These are just a few thoughts, but I'm sure others with more experience could provide a better or more complete view.

@Leslie B.  Your message didn't seem to come through on the thread.  It appears as "<p>@gloria</p>".  Can you resend?  Thanks!