All Forum Posts by: Tom Gimer

@LeeAnn Owens Many wholesalers post their deals on this website:

https://investorlift.com/

Good luck.

The lender will only provide information about the loan to a successor in interest. In this case the SII would the the executor or personal representative (depending on the jurisdiction) of the decedent’s estate. 

If the decedent died intestate (without a will) the family can still open an estate. They should do so in the county where the decedent resided at the time of his death. The court will appoint the executor/pr and issue letters of administration or whatever the evidence of the appointment is referred to locally. That evidence along with the death certificate should be sufficient for the lender to update the account with SII information and discuss the loan. 

If the payoff exceeds the value of the property, I believe federal law allows the family to purchase the property for 95% of its appraised value. Good luck. 

@Carlos Ptriawan I do not have a book reference. The subject is way too broad… 50 states’ different laws are implicated. 

That said, I do recommend you download the latest ALTA Owners Policy and ALTA Lenders Policy forms. They are quite similar but do have some obvious differences.

Most title insurance companies have resources online but currently I think Stewart Title has the best publicly-facing database of information about how these policy forms (and requirements, exceptions, endorsements, etc.) and local laws all interact at Virtualunderwriter.com. 

@Nana Sefa Those are not theoretical... they are actual examples of things I've seen in the past 20+ years doing my job. The latest one -- buyer declined coverage and the prior title company missed a $20k state tax lien. Oops.

You didn't read Peter's comment or Alecia's fact pattern. Peter suspects (and I would tend to agree) that the title insurer involved in "resolving" the title issue was likely being asked to insure the next transfer... so the work was not done as part of a claims handling process but rather underwriting the next deal. Further, there was no title defect... coverage was not even implicated.

IMO, you're just not going to find anybody wise who agrees with your strategy. 

Relying upon the existence of a lender's policy to protect you as owner when the simultaneous issue rate for the owners policy is typically pennies on the dollar? That's not particularly smart, IMO.

Especially when, as @Peter Walther mentioned above, the lender is not likely to do anything on a performing loan and further the title defect may not affect lien priority. On the last comment let's say the title company missed an easement which effectively prevents the intended use of the land. You're SOL; the lender is secured. Or perhaps title missed a $5k water lien. Nobody is going to foreclose a water lien so guess who has to pay it? I could come up with many, many examples such as these where without owners coverage you're screwed.

@Scott Trench @Aaron Breckenridge Have a look at this thread from today and tell me if you see anything odd:

https://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/432/topics/1162021-owne...

I think somebody (or perhaps an entire company) has figured out a way to game the vote system. That's not a good thing.

A better question may be is the program worth 10,000 pesos.

When the DOS is called you can't reconvey to the seller and restructure the deal as a lease option... at that point the goose is already cooked.

Yup -- I actually send Dave Foster business whenever I have the ability to sway a client's choice of QI. 

That's a great point, @Mike Dymski -- and fyi I did not join BP to try to market on, I was invited to this site by @Steve Babiak who found me answering questions on Quora. I haven't seen Steve around BP in some time... wonder what he's up to.