data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4c67b/4c67b3f4dd57ca721efcd17fc4e64a966f0ccd1c" alt=""
24 June 2008 | 21 replies
[[[[........There is potential there it is reasoned because of a new large airport that is being built and some other happenings....]]]]]I don't know anything about those towns, but a new large airport is not good for property values.No one wants to live anywhere near all that noise, so prices near the new airport and under the flight path will take a steep nose dive.Have you, by the way, even verified independently that there is a new airport going in?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/76f07/76f07642c8602b27a3faf0272f4b401605623810" alt=""
21 July 2008 | 23 replies
I think aweber is superior, however it requires double opt in, meaning that all subscribers must verify their request to opt in.This results in a very high quality lead, however, it makes it slower to build your list...but that's the price you pay for quality.Good luck!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b5158/b51583db849cf0446d6817e5bbabb60a77483af0" alt=""
9 July 2008 | 163 replies
So of course by percentages, his figures must be in the 50% or even higher range.Quite the contrary, I have completely normal expenses, which by the way are identical to yours (as I proved above).Keep in mind that Mike operates a self-employed business.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fac28/fac285d5cde6f143ce725f0cbee42ca91a2abd42" alt=""
4 July 2008 | 15 replies
.- The insurance estimate seems low to me...have you verified this yourself, or are you trusting the current owner's pro-forma?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eb498/eb49820910412a9073c4aec776ed9f7238848177" alt=""
9 July 2008 | 9 replies
You have no identifying information anywhere on the site, so for all we know, you could be someone trying to steal someone's identity.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7eaa4/7eaa468b1d357ed7f639c28cac0116d3f6faa445" alt=""
24 July 2008 | 11 replies
The automated systems are starting to allow these now IF and only if you look pretty strong other- wise......4) The Otherwise: 700+ FICO, strong verified assets: both liquid and ideally monthly cash flow.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3f0cd/3f0cda59eb96f091404fb273edcc540375b3f98c" alt=""
11 July 2010 | 20 replies
HSA's do require a high deductible insurance plan, as to paying for a second in addition to the one provided by your employer or switching is something you should verify with your financial advisor or by looking up the HSA guidelines on qualified insurance plans.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/75454/75454e2ba1149c4f9cf6787014845a2c1220f072" alt=""
22 July 2008 | 3 replies
I just heard that IndyMac borrowed 1/10th of the money in FDIC, and they aren't even one of the 90 that the FDIC is really worried about (still trying to verify all this).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/76abb/76abb283bbedf3428b32077421f790ed3b52bb68" alt=""
5 August 2008 | 48 replies
.`(9) DOCUMENTATION AND VERIFICATION OF INCOME- In complying with the FHA underwriting requirements under the HOPE for Homeowners Program under this section, the mortgagee under the mortgage shall document and verify the income of the mortgagor by procuring an Internal Revenue Service transcript of the income tax returns of the mortgagor for the 2 most recent years for which the filing deadline for such years has passed and by any other method, in accordance with procedures and standards that the Board or the Secretary shall establish.`(10) MORTGAGE FRAUD- The mortgagor shall not have been convicted under any provision of Federal or State law for fraud, including mortgage fraud.`(11) PRIMARY RESIDENCE- The mortgagor shall provide documentation satisfactory in the determination of the Secretary to prove that the residence covered by the mortgage to be insured under this section is occupied by the mortgagor as the primary residence of the mortgagor, and that such residence is the only residence in which the mortgagor has any present ownership interest.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/76f07/76f07642c8602b27a3faf0272f4b401605623810" alt=""
5 August 2008 | 20 replies
While it's good for them if they need to back out of the deal after the contingencies are gone, I'm pretty sure if they and I made an otherwise identical offer to a seller, I'd get the contract with my EM over them.