
4 October 2012 | 1 reply
This is what I know so far about the property:•The land has been in the family for over 50 years•The land is under a trust and the person in-charge is in California and there are rumors that the person charge with the trust is possibly dead.

25 September 2012 | 9 replies
Yes it can go unsaid that one can always consult with a lawyer, but they charge A LOT, and for simple questions it usually is not worth it since forums like this exist.

23 September 2012 | 21 replies
When they rent out for others they charge a portion of the first mo rent upfront so there is the fee.

23 September 2012 | 13 replies
Are you charging a commission?

25 September 2012 | 15 replies
.- Has 11 collections: $943 Medical (2011), $284 Medical (2009), $722 Citibank (2009), $1,086 Sprint (2009), $491 Victoria Secret (2010) shows as paid, and another 6 other collections for medical that amounts for $900 (2010)- In the trade section it also shows few other items that were "placed for collections": $45 Sprint (2011), $1,706 shows as closed by creditor grantor (2009), $4,775 Student Loan shows as unpaid balance charge off (2004), $22.1K Student Loan shows as unpaid balance charge off (2009), $1,189 Placed for collection (2010), $1,812 placed for collections (2010).Now, I do not know if this is typical considering the state of the market and economy as I entered the business only a year back, but based on myself and people I know, this seems to be awful!.

23 September 2012 | 3 replies
You can charge slightly above market rental rates, up the selling price by ~10% for your risk, and get a ~5% option fee upfront.

25 September 2012 | 6 replies
WE CHARGE 5 POINTS, AND INTEREST APR IS 12% FIRST 3 MONTHS, AND 14% NEXT THREE MONTHS.

25 September 2012 | 28 replies
So essentially, in my county at least, Section 8 is dictating what rent you can charge.

3 November 2012 | 8 replies
Tim, Karen and Joel both have good points but because of your inexperience, I think trying to charge a retainer will come off looking more like greed.

2 October 2012 | 38 replies
I'd probably interpret that to mean that a broker CANNOT legally create a full purchase-and-sale agreement without violating that ruling (just my interpretation).BUT, the court also went on to say the following:"A real estate broker may readily protect himself from a charge of unlawful practice of law by inserting in the document that it is subject to the approval of the respective attorneys for the parties."