
4 December 2015 | 21 replies
PRE-APPROVAL from an HML for a financed offer is perfectly valid (in most situations).That's how I interpreted what was being said above...

4 October 2013 | 11 replies
Do not ever use the term simultaneous closing, as most interpret that as using the end-buyers funds.

30 September 2013 | 29 replies
It's possible that it was a mistake; it's also possible that the summary is misleading and you're interpreting it incorrectly (I misread HUD-1 statements all the time!)...

6 October 2013 | 28 replies
If not, I presume it's not legally binding (I'm not an attorney, but that would be the common sense interpretation)...

1 October 2013 | 9 replies
A judge can interpret the law and what's on paper versus who do they believe with nothing in writing.Family or no family it's business and every transaction should be handled professionally.

1 October 2013 | 4 replies
The board is correct in not taking action and their interpretation that a vote is required.

2 October 2013 | 12 replies
The 2% rule says that a place pulling in $2k a month in rents should only sell for $100k, if I've interpreted it correctly.

6 October 2013 | 9 replies
I had interpreted it as your assignment fee being 60k.

20 October 2013 | 17 replies
Jay Dackman which an attorney friend called the "most tortured interpretation of the law I have ever seen"

12 October 2013 | 10 replies
Under state law, at 20% equity, you would have to foreclose on the borrower and would not be able to use land contract forfeiture provisions (more like an eviction).Oceans of ink have been spilled here talking about the SAFE Act and Dodd Frank regulation that seller-financers have to abide by now, and the implementation varies by state, and there is still lots of ambiguity in how it will be interpreted and enforced.