All Forum Posts by: Tyco Bronye

Hi all, thanks in advance to all who reply. I'm in a Minneapolis suburb. I bought a house 5 years ago. When I moved in there were already fences going from the front yard all the way through the backyard.  My neighbor bought his house 7 years ago and fences were also already in place in his yard.  We share one side.  I've only talked to him a handful of times over the years, he seems cool and nice he would usually compliment me on the yard projects I was doing. 

A year ago I was out working on my yard and he stopped by to chat briefly and during this chat he mentioned that his wife was looking into the official property lines and he said, the fence that divides our property in the front yard is actually 2.5 feet on his land at least in this 15 foot long section.  He then said, he doesn't care about what is official and that we should continue to assume the fence is the border.  I didn't think anything of this exchange.  This is a standard 6 foot tall dog eared privacy fence

This 2.5 feet of width had 2 overgrowth trees (my side of the fence) I cut them down because I thought they looked really bad and they were growing into my walkway, They were about 10 feet tall.  My neighbor was really mad and was yelling at me for cutting these down.  He said he lost privacy.  He was kind of hysterical and was mentioning getting a survey and he said that I should pay for half of the survey.  500 total so he said I should pay 250.  He was yelling that the fence is not the official property line.  So the problem is he thinks he owns that 2 feet by 15 foot strip of land that I need to ask him for permission to cut down overgrowth I guess? If that were the case I would much rather he extend the fence into my property versus telling me what I can and can't do on my side of the fence.

I then spent the rest of the day looking into this matter, and found out that it is not a black and white issue of where the original survey said the property lines are (houses built in 1957) there is "adverse possession"

I guess I'm curious in general of people's opinions, and general advice for me.  I have not talked to him but I plan on it soon to tell him my perspective

My opinions right now is, I have no idea if what he is saying is even true.  Why the need for a survey if your confident you know the boundaries?

Of course I'm not going to pay 250 for a survey so he can take my land.  That's like buying a gun for a guy who says he is planning on shooting you.  Since he has the agenda, I'm making no claim on his land I'm fine with things the way they are using the fence as the border, that all money should be spent by him to pursue this if he wants to

 Since we both bought our houses long after those fences were already there I feel I have a reasonable expectation when I buy a house with fences there it's reasonable to assume that's the property I'll be able to use.  Same thing when he bought his house. I feel it's aggressive and over the line on his part to make claims like this, given the fact that we both moved into the our houses as they are.  It would be different of course if I installed the fence without asking him about property lines but that's not the case.  

This seems to be a very common issue when I googled this but they don't say how to remedy the situation.  Is this a small claims court thing? Is it relevant that the fences where already there when he moved in,  aside from the possible claim of adverse possession?  If he just moves the fence what is my recourse? Thanks

My basic question is, is zoning based on total people living in a house? or since I basically made it into a duplex will it not pass a certificate of occupancy if it's in a single family zone?

  I recently asked bp about a bunch of non pitted work I had did myself to my house.  I bought it with my brother 5 years ago and the first thing I did was make the walk out basement a separate living area(no permits).  We each lived in separate parts of the house for years.  I turned an unfinished area into a kitchen and bathroom.  The issue of zoning was brought to my attention by some bp users, that's something I never considered.  I am the only person who lives here now and I live in the basement unit that I made.  My plan was to only have one or at the most 2 renters occupy the upper floors.  That would only be 3 people living in this house, but I'm concerned I'll run into problems having the two kitchens, that somehow that will effect the zoning rules?  I'm trying to find out my best option at this point wither to get a certificate of occupancy or not.     What would you do in my situation? Thanks

I bought a house that was not in the best shape about 4.5 years ago.  It is three floors total with a walk out basement. The first project I did, I pulled a permit for which was to completely replace the electric main panel and replace the large main wires that go out to the roof.  The reason I pulled a permit was because I did it myself, and this was the first time really working with electricity, so I was concerned over the safety.  I wanted to make sure it was correct so I did not die.  This was great because I basically had this professional (inspector) keep coming back at no additional charge until I had it completely up to code.  After that I have been consistently improving my house over the past 4 years, and never even thought of pulling a permit of any of things I did.  One of the first things I did was make the basement into a space where I could live, and then my plan was to rent out the upper floors as a separate unit.  The basement consisted of a large  room about 340 square feet that was finished when I bought it in that it had drywall on the ceiling and walls, and had an unfinished area that consisted of the electric panel, water heater, furnace and washer/dryer.  I made a kitchen, (gas stove, sink) added electrical outlets and ceiling lights and  I finished off the walls and ceiling with drywall, and also added a full bathroom,(tub, sink, toilet).    My house is in middle of a hill, so the backyard was unusable being just a hill that's maybe around 30 degree angle so I put a short retaining wall about 2 .5 feet tall so I could flatten out the area close to my house, I added dirt, cat 5 gravel. and did a bunch of pavers, I also added concrete stairs, going down the hill that sit directly on the hill. I flatted out the area at the bottom of the hill with a concrete paver patio that is about 300 square feet.  Finally, I added indoor living area to the walkout basement.  When I first bought the place the walk out basement entrance was under a 13 ft by 13 ft three season porch, that sat on pillers that was added before many years before I bought this place so I decided to box the area underneath it and make it an additional room for the basement, I figured I may as well since I already have a roof for the add on, that being the floor of the three season porch right above it.  Everything should be to code on the add on, I dug and poured a 4 foot deep foundation since I live in cold climate. I put in windows and electrical outlets and ceiling lights and it has been my finished bedroom for awhile now.   

Now I'm finally getting close to done with this big project that I've been steadily working away at while living here with my spare free time over the last 4.5 years, and I'm interested in getting a renter for the upper 2 floors.  Now I'm worried about getting a certificate of occupancy from the city to legally have renters.  Now it's basically a duplex since I have two living areas with their own bathroom, kitchen and washer/dryer.  I only really became familiar with permits after listening to the bigger pockets podcast, and now I'm scared after I googled it and read about possible severe consequences.  It's weird because it always seemed like one of those issues that if you do it, it's just a headache and if you don't it's not big deal, I was a service plumber for a few years and I have never known anyone to pull a permit on waterheater replacement even though technically it's required and I've never known of any plumber getting a permit for anything other than brand new construction homes. Even in the realm of plumbing, you are technically "supposed" to have a license and 5 years experience in order to go work on peoples homes by yourself but the reality is new plumbers are sent out to people homes with a month or 2 of experience. It's also weird that in all the hundreds of times I have been to home improvement stores getting advice from workers on how to do projects, never once has anyone pointed out the need for permits.  How would a common homeowner know that he has to get a permit in the first place?

I'm wondering what I should do at this point.  I asked a friend who has a rental and also turned an attic into an additional room and never got a permit for it and he said I should not worry about it because the certificate of occupency person just looks for working windows with screens and working smoke detectors etc.  The other thing I'm worried about is home owners insurance if there was a fire would I be covered since work I've done ( adding outlets) was done without a permit

I would like to own this house and have no plans to sell it ever and always keep it as a rental

Any advice?  Thanks

I'm wondering why an employer would hire a union employee if he doesn't have to?

I work at a hotel and I learn about what people make in various departments

Housekeepers get around 11 bucks an hour to start and max out at 14 an hour

Front desk people are in this same range around 12 dollars an hour

The maintenance department surprisingly only gets 14 dollars an hour, these are people that need a lot of skills and knowledge in all the trades.

Dishwashers 11 an hour

I personally work as a banquet set up person.  Almost no skill is required just setting up chairs and tables and we get a wage plus gratuity so I end up making 27 dollars an hour, which I truly can't understand why I get this much for a no skill job which anybody could learn and master in under a week.

Most surprising is the banquet waitresses get 40 dollars an hour.  I can not understand why the owner of the hotel or the general manager would pay me 27 an hour and the waitresses 40 an hour when we could easily be replaced with people making 15 an hour.

The maintenance department is constantly short staffed because of high turnover and then they have a lot of trouble filling the position because of how much knowledge is needed.  To me it's clear as day that the market is speaking and 14 is not enough, if they paid these people 4 bucks more an hour, there would probably be no turnover.

I'll ask the waitresses and my co workers "don't you guys find it odd that we are paid so much compared to the other employees?  Why wouldn't the owner of the hotel just cut our pay in half?"  

Of course our department has no problem with turnover, we have many people who have worked there for 20 to 30 years, because of high pay. 

Why wouldn't the owner give us less, especially the waitresses who get 40 an hour and give maintenance  or other departments with high turnover more money? 

To which I'll get a reply like..... "The union wouldn't allow that."

Which to me is basically a non answer because  it's not like business owners are required by law to hire union employees.

To be clear since I am a worker and not a business owner so I'm pro union, because it means I get more money.  The part I don't understand is it seems like 90 percent of the work force would need to be a union member in order for the union to work, since it's not required by law it seems an owner is much better off just hiring non -union workers.

I took out a HELOC for my house a few years ago and never used it. Today I called the bank up to verify how the interest works because I wanted to use 3,000 dollars. I assumed my 5 percent rate of interest was by the year but when I called they told me it was by the month. 5 percent of 3,ooo is $150.00 You keep paying interest until the principal of 3k is paid off. That means if I paid this all off in one year (12 months) I would end up paying 150 x 12 = 1800 dollars would be 60 percent "annual percentage rate"

Plus I have my home at risk because it's collateral. 

I'm never been a person who uses credit cards when I heard those 25 percent interest rates I assumed that meant per year. 

Is this how HELOC's work?

A few months ago I was talking to a friend who is not super sophisticated when it comes to real estate.  He wanted to buy a house that was around 120k on the market (that's what the same house was on sale for across the street).  The property was going to go to auction because the person who "owns" the owed a lot in back property taxes.   He brought up the concept that the owner only owns the deed but that he had paid 8k for the house just three years earlier

A few weeks later I asked him what's the latest with the house and he said that the supposed owner of the house only owned the deed but not the house itself, and therefore had no rights to the house?

This does not make sense to me.  Is this possible?

When I think of a deed I think of the legal owner of the house.  So for instance the bank owns the deed to my house since I have a mortgage with them and then in 30 years when my loan is completely paid off I will then own the deed.

I am familiar with estimating the ARV of a house...... half mile away, equal square footage, sold in the last three months, equal number of bathrooms etc. I went on Trulia and looked at their sold houses trying to figure ARV, but I want to make sure others would come to the same ARV as myself because the houses I've been looking at doesn't seem straightforward in their pricing.

My question is are there others in the Twin Cites of Minnesota who could either give me a few examples of how they got their ARV for certain houses or test me and give my a house for sale and ask me what I would estimate ARV as? Thanks

Listening to podcasts, you tube videos, and reading books and message boards I often hear it discussed, don't try to learn everything before jumping in on the first deal, yet it's also pointed out that it's foolish to start investing without some education. Of all the times I've heard this I've noticed it's never really talked about in terms of specifics.

On one end of the spectrum Josh Dorkin made this site because he was supposedly burned on some of his first real estate deals because of lack of knowledge, on the other end of the spectrum I hear the term "analysis paralysis" a lot.

We all grew up taking tests in school to determine what we "really" know about a subject. When pursuing a career from plumber, cosmetologist, to doctor and lawyer, there are always tests involved.

What should be on a real estate final exam?

If you don't want to bother making a list of test questions I would be curious to know maybe how many books one should read? How many hours should one spend listening to podcasts? How many hours should one read Bigger Pockets forums? before setting out on that first deal.

This could also blend in with what mistakes did you make early on because of lack of knowledge?

I don't know why I can't find this answer. I would like to rehab houses. I live in Minnesota and I would like to get a license to have MLS access and for selling my own properties that I rehabbed.

I am wondering what the yearly costs of this would be?

I thought I read on J scotts blog that his wife paid 300 per month which seems like a lot. I don't know if that was including broker commissions on the sale of a house.

I have heard a few times that it's better to pay contractors by the project and not by the hour because it takes away incentive. That being said, based on this pay per project system. I'm wondering how much a contractor is making on average per hour? and how does it vary with each trade?

Plumber?

Electrician?

Window guy?

Dry Waller?

Hardwood floor installer?