data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/76d6b/76d6b1f1021671770ee7dca28b95485a5c07ae2b" alt=""
24 May 2019 | 12 replies
The interpretation of the law is just as important for this business as the letter of the law.What's going to do you in when you come in front of a judge in Massachusetts is exactly the same thing that will do you in before a Pennsylvania judge and before a Colorado judge.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c43c4/c43c402a70f8afa3ff3742db7d9a826d34d14491" alt=""
17 May 2019 | 7 replies
That type of borrowing has its own inherent risks.In each layer, each lender has their own interpretation of the guidelines and can impose overlays or rules that they feel will make the loans better.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/84e5f/84e5ff9366d75adda9156eec8fbe0b15ae41a6de" alt=""
28 May 2019 | 5 replies
Other than the typical auction stuff (sight unseen bids, existing liens, crazy competition, trying to interpret weird legal descriptions, etc), I've heard title issues are pretty common with these types of sales.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/04486/04486b25464b829f8dae8853f6f6b6d72a58ef08" alt=""
31 May 2019 | 7 replies
For equal units this is easy, however he unit I would occupy would be 40%bigger and have a garden- I feel the value increase would be open to interpretations and depends also on the buyer ( is a developer wouldn’t care but a owner occupier would)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/84054/84054866a5e160118c7dad1dcaff4e6fee361a78" alt=""
2 June 2019 | 27 replies
@Aaron MoayedI think the problem here is that you're using materials from a real estate investment university class and trying to use them to interpret tax law...No wonder you're confused.We don't start with cash flow or NOI in the tax world, although that's fine to do it that way if you have the basic concepts down and prefer to do it that way.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d5d97/d5d9763721b59d7c0d26827748ac07876a3d5786" alt=""
29 July 2019 | 4 replies
It would be worth the $100 or so that a title company will charge to pull the deed and interpret it for you.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/94de9/94de9d5e86ee51233d95bfab266ddbe7ef3fdebe" alt=""
27 July 2019 | 35 replies
Rents are generally within range, but the ranges are pretty wide and leave a lot of room for interpretation.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2daab/2daabfa3470290f57ee7783974de11b1ea3bfa6e" alt=""
17 July 2019 | 2 replies
Although, I also now recollect your possibly saying at the ATLASS meeting that you don't interpret the law to necessarily state they have to pay my legal fees under any circumstances - I may be misremembering that.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eb088/eb0881bad5f23f2c9dd467dd8f913650a8725a0a" alt=""
29 August 2019 | 16 replies
I could be wrong but that’s how I interpreted it.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4d368/4d368eeb8a73bc9d484d87e9cf851ee1d59b4978" alt=""
27 July 2019 | 68 replies
So while it does say this:“(b)Appraisal independence For purposes of subsection (a), acts or practices that violate appraisal independence shall include—(1) any appraisal of a property offered as securityfor repayment of the consumer credit transactionthat is conducted in connection with such transaction in which a person with an interest in the underlying transaction compensates, coerces, extorts, colludes, instructs, induces, bribes, or intimidates a person,appraisal management company, firm, or other entity conducting or involved in an appraisal, or attempts, to compensate, coerce, extort, collude, instruct, induce, bribe, or intimidate such a person, for the purpose of causing the appraised value assigned, under the appraisal, to the property to be based on any factor other than the independent judgment of the appraiser;(2)mischaracterizing, or suborning any mischaracterization of, the appraised value of the property securing the extension of the credit;(3)seeking to influence an appraiser or otherwise to encourage a targeted value in order to facilitate the making or pricing of the transaction; and(4)withholding or threatening to withhold timely payment for an appraisal report or for appraisal services rendered when the appraisal report or services are provided for in accordance with the contract between the parties.”It immediately follows up with this:“(c)ExceptionsThe requirements of subsection (b) shall not be construed as prohibiting a mortgage lender, mortgage broker, mortgage banker, real estate broker, appraisal management company, employee of an appraisal management company, consumer, or any other person with an interest in a real estate transaction from asking an appraiser to undertake 1 or more of the following:(1)Consider additional, appropriate property information, including the consideration of additional comparable properties to make or support an appraisal.(2)Provide further detail, substantiation, or explanation for the appraiser’s value conclusion.(3)Correct errors in the appraisal report.”Based on this discovery, I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of Dodd Frank as it pertains to my previous comment regarding appraisal reconsiderations.