|
Still haven't closed. Been moved in for two weeks though...
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2012 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:19 |
|
|
Thanks for the thoughts. We thought long and hard about removing the contingency, and decided to go ahead with it. We obtained a preapproval to carry both mortgages and can swing both for a limited time. Of course, we're still going to be fairly aggressive about selling our house but carrying both doesn't break us, and we have far more in savings than equity in our current house, so we're not desperately depending on the proceeds to go forward. So we've got an accepted offer, all without using a buyer's agent (yeah I know it's "free," but I have my own feelings about that). Next is finding a good home inspector. I'm told they don't exist. If anyone has recommendations for Middlesex County, MA, I'm all ears.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
Neil Desmond did a reasonably good job for a house in Hamilton.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
uwaeve posted:Next is finding a good home inspector. I'm told they don't exist. If anyone has recommendations for Middlesex County, MA, I'm all ears. Oh hey, I've got someone actually. http://top2bottomhi.com/ Had this guy recommended to me by a co-worker, rated well on Angie's List (as I recall), and ended up using him for two inspections. (the first scared me away from a house I thought needed $50k+ of work, when in reality it needed well over $100k... and was a short sale). Both reports were ~25-30 page documents. I've lived in this house for two years now, done a bunch of projects and haven't come up with anything that wasn't in the report.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2012 01:54
|
|
|
Wow, thanks. Are these guys you came up with on your own or on recommendations? Or were they recommended by your realtors?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2012 10:43
|
|
|
Thought I would save money on a house... already spent $8k furnishing it and we haven't even moved in yet. I should have read this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 01:29
|
|
|
uwaeve posted:Wow, thanks. Are these guys you came up with on your own or on recommendations? Or were they recommended by your realtors? I wouldn't use someone recommended by my realtor. I dunno, they could be honest, but even an honest realtor is going to be biased towards a more lenient home inspector. Friend of mine at work had had that guy recommended to him, was really happy with him, and let me leaf through his report. That was plenty for me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 01:32
|
|
|
uwaeve posted:Wow, thanks. Are these guys you came up with on your own or on recommendations? Or were they recommended by your realtors? Got a recommendation through a high school friend (who is a realtor, but not my realtor).
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 12:31
|
|
|
My anecdotal experience is not to trust your realtor's recommendation. Cost me about $50,000 in repairs that were superficially hidden by the sellers. The inspector put down all the stuff that you couldn't plainly ignore, but made no effort to so much as move the ceiling tiles and check for water damage (which there was, because the roof needed to be completely replaced). He also didn't examine the chimney at all (which needed to be replaced), check the swimming pool (which was unsound and had to be removed completely), or even check the outlets and light switches (half of which didn't work). Makes sense from the realtor's perspective to hire somebody who will do a crappy job of it, because a thorough inspector might find things that scare the buyer off, and then they'd lose the commission.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 14:47
|
|
|
My income has taken a huge jump recently and I'm thinking about buying a house next year. I live in Oklahoma where houses are relatively cheap. I work from home and don't plan on moving anywhere else, so there's really nothing keeping from buying here. I was considering renting for a while but home rentals seem to be rather scarce in my area for some reason. So I was wondering - how much financial sense does it make to wait until I can pay cash for a home? Obviously I'll save by not paying interest, but I'd get the house paid off relatively quickly even if I was paying interest. Are there any real benefits to paying cash other than avoiding interest?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 21:51
|
|
|
SlightlyMadman posted:My anecdotal experience is not to trust your realtor's recommendation. Cost me about $50,000 in repairs that were superficially hidden by the sellers. The inspector put down all the stuff that you couldn't plainly ignore, but made no effort to so much as move the ceiling tiles and check for water damage (which there was, because the roof needed to be completely replaced). He also didn't examine the chimney at all (which needed to be replaced), check the swimming pool (which was unsound and had to be removed completely), or even check the outlets and light switches (half of which didn't work). Makes sense from the realtor's perspective to hire somebody who will do a crappy job of it, because a thorough inspector might find things that scare the buyer off, and then they'd lose the commission. You do realize pool inspection is not in the purview of a general home inspector? Certainly they can make a recommendation to have a specialized inspector look at it but they don't have any requirement to actually inspect a pool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 22:19
|
|
|
Talks To Cats posted:So I was wondering - how much financial sense does it make to wait until I can pay cash for a home? Obviously I'll save by not paying interest, but I'd get the house paid off relatively quickly even if I was paying interest. Are there any real benefits to paying cash other than avoiding interest? Your offer will be a more attractive one to sellers since it doesn't require you to qualify for a mortgage, and you will probably be able to offer a bit lower than normal. With interest rates so low, though, there is no reason to pay off your loan super duper quickly - make sure you are maxing your retirement accounts first with that sweet, sweet smut money. I'm currently refinancing and am looking at a 15 year fixed mortgage at 2.875% interest (paying down $800 to lower the rate from 3%). That is ridiculous low; there's really no reason to wait until you can pay cash if you can get something that low or close to it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 01:23
|
|
|
moana posted:Your offer will be a more attractive one to sellers since it doesn't require you to qualify for a mortgage, and you will probably be able to offer a bit lower than normal. With interest rates so low, though, there is no reason to pay off your loan super duper quickly - make sure you are maxing your retirement accounts first with that sweet, sweet smut money. The only thing stopping me from buying now is my lovely credit score. I hope getting a bunch of old debt paid off will push that up enough. Is there a minimum credit score lenders like to see these days?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 01:54
|
|
|
Talks To Cats posted:Thanks for the response! I did some research and I've been reading about ARM loans and it seems like in my situation there really is no reason to pay cash.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 01:59
|
|
|
Talks To Cats posted:Thanks for the response! I did some research and I've been reading about ARM loans and it seems like in my situation there really is no reason to pay cash. The 700's are generally considered "good" while 750-800 is "best." Also, watch out for ARM loans. While the interest rate may be attractive at first it can have the potential to really gently caress you in the long term. If at all possible lock in a fixed rate loan the historic lows they're at right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
Bucket Joneses posted:You do realize pool inspection is not in the purview of a general home inspector? Certainly they can make a recommendation to have a specialized inspector look at it but they don't have any requirement to actually inspect a pool. Ok granted, but internal water damage, roof needing replacement, crumbling chimney, and severe electrical problems probably should have been caught. I was an idiot to not think something was up, considering the entire inspection took about 15 minutes (less time than I'd spend giving a tour to a friend over for dinner). I'm not saying all home inspectors are crooks or anything, just that you might want to get a trusted recommendation and not just go with whoever your realtor says.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:Getting an ARM when interest rates are at their historical bottom is probably a bad idea. Higgy posted:The 700's are generally considered "good" while 750-800 is "best." Also, watch out for ARM loans. While the interest rate may be attractive at first it can have the potential to really gently caress you in the long term. If at all possible lock in a fixed rate loan the historic lows they're at right now. My credit score was barely in the 700s before I racked up tens of thousands in debt. I hope I can repair it. I guess I might end up paying cash anyway. I never thought I'd be in a position to buy a home so I was okay with all that debt sitting there. Now it's a weight around my neck.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 02:08
|
|
|
SlightlyMadman posted:Ok granted, but internal water damage, roof needing replacement, crumbling chimney, and severe electrical problems probably should have been caught. I was an idiot to not think something was up, considering the entire inspection took about 15 minutes (less time than I'd spend giving a tour to a friend over for dinner). I'm not saying all home inspectors are crooks or anything, just that you might want to get a trusted recommendation and not just go with whoever your realtor says. Yeah I agree completely on "it should take longer than 15 minutes". The guy we used (Ken Harper, Seattle Area) was amazingly thorough and spent 2+ hours looking at everything in the house. His report was equally thorough with photos of everything that needed to be addressed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 03:36
|
|
|
Talks To Cats posted:I see. I was thinking about it in terms of "I'm going to pay this off in 3 years max" but maybe a fixed rate would be safer. Maybe I'm missing something, but if you've got cash to buy a house, don't you have cash to pay down those debts?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 03:48
|
|
|
OneTruePecos posted:Maybe I'm missing something, but if you've got cash to buy a house, don't you have cash to pay down those debts?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 03:52
|
|
|
Bucket Joneses posted:Yeah I agree completely on "it should take longer than 15 minutes". Ok, I guess I'm just mistaken in thinking that a home inspector should check the roof, electrical, and chimney then? I've only had it done once and it didn't seem to go so well. Is that something the buyer generally hires a separate consultant for? I honestly had no idea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 04:12
|
|
|
^^^that's what an inspection is for, and I have no idea why you thought that it was okay for your inspector to not inspect anything. Anyone know of a good contractor in Mass? I've received two quotes for a new kitchen and hardwood floors, and it seems like neither person wants the job. It's about 12K in material costs (excluding the appliances) for everything yet the quotes are 6x of that. I'm about one week away from saying gently caress it and doing the work myself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 04:15
|
|
|
Moved in a townhouse four months ago. Got a call (and note on my door) today around 5:30 pm from the water company - someone noticed water running into the streets. Upon their inspection, it's coming from the pipes between the meter and my house, and that I should get a plumber to fix it. I doubled checked and unfortunately it really is on my side. Calling a plumber tomorrow and not looking forward to how much it's going to cost to fix. Do Never Buy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 04:40
|
|
|
If you are planning on paying the home down in less than 7 years, you are going to be better off in an ARM than a fixed interest rate. It is just simple math. It is not for everyone, but for someone who knows exactly how the payments are going to go, its by far the better option. Pricing on a 2.75 15 year fixed is not as good as a 2.75 7/1 arm. For what it is worth, ever single person in our capital markets department (the people who focus on interest rates and charting bps and junk like that) have an ARM, and would not go otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 05:14
|
|
|
Had the inspection done yesterday. Was pretty pleased with the process, it took 3 1/2 hours for a 3700 SF house built in 1994. General view was that the house was extremely well maintained. Inspector caught the obvious stuff like missing sink stopper, missing outlet cover on outside outlet, spent some time finding the GFI reset location for all the exterior circuits, etc. The biggest issue is that his assessment of the roof using binoculars was that the north side had 1-2 years left before he'd recommend replacement, and the south side 4-5 years. I had read to make sure to use an inspector that went out on the roof, etc, but most of the other pros outweighed this con, and honestly if he's not a roofer all we were looking for was whether this assessment would trigger us to want to have a roofer (or three) come out, and at this point I think it does. Notwithstanding we're in Massachusetts and I would have expected the southern exposure to have worn faster, we're kind of at a loss of what to do here. On one hand, it's unreasonable in our opinion to just say "give us a new roof on a house you won't be living in," not only from the cost burden perspective but because despite thier apparently super anal-retentive maintenance ethic and attention to detail, human nature is going to take over and they will probably do the cheapest job they can. On the other hand, even though I had planned for maintenance, my model kind of assumes at least SOME time to save up for the biggest ticket item. Granted, all the major mechanicals are 18 years old as well, but nothing is as expensive as the roof. At this point for us to replace the roof is drawing down our down payment/furniture/maintenance fund right off the bat. Does anyone have a sense of how to proceed from a contractual standpoint? How should I suggest we proceed? I'm going to wait for the roofers' opinions, becaues honestly, someone could say the inspector was being conservative and with careful monitoring, the north side could go 4 years instead of 1-2, and that would put us more in line with what we were thinking initially as far as being able to save, and getting 20-25 years out of a 15-30 year product on a generally very well-built and maintained home. If the answer comes back "yeah, if this were my house I'd do this within a year or two," I'd want it done before the 31 Oct move-in. My inclination is to propose that we mutually choose roofers to do the evaluation, mention that if recommendations are for immediate (within 2 years maybe) replacement we expect to share the cost of repairs, contingent upon us going through with the purchase. Is there any insurability risk or financing (from the appraisal for the mortgage perspective) risk to this if we just decide to take it as-is? I believe I mentioned before that we aren't using a buyers' agent, or else we'd be asking them these questions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 11:16
|
|
|
gtkor posted:If you are planning on paying the home down in less than 7 years, you are going to be better off in an ARM than a fixed interest rate. The key is planning versus will, and for someone with that much other debt load (and not student debt) I would have concerns about it. There's just less wiggle room in general if something unexpected happens. With rates so low right now, with a fixed mortgage you're taking on a very little extra payment for a lot less risk if your time horizon gets bumped out. If you really do pay it off in 3 years it's not like you paid that much extra interest anyway but you kept yourself hedged against negative events. It's not necessarily just about a straight interest rate comparison, it's also about the variance you're expecting on your outcomes and your overall risk exposure. Which is why you need actuaries and capital markets guys for long-term decision making. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 11:28
|
|
|
If the roof is in bad shape, lower your offer an appropriate amount to replace it, citing that as the reason your offer is lower. Then you replace it/have it replaced yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 13:35
|
|
|
Talks To Cats posted:I don't have cash for a house right now, it's an eventual thing. And the debts will come first. I just worry about my credit score afterwards. But hey, it's all good man. If your credit score is hurting from high debt loads, it will improve as you pay the debts down. There's no memory of high debt utilization built in the scores. The utilization part of your score is based just on a point-in-time figure. If there are also payment history problems, like late payments or write-offs, those will hurt you less the more time passes, but it can take a while. In your situation, I'd be strongly inclined to pay some very large (maybe 50%) portion down, finance the remainder with whatever gets you the best interest rate, and then pay it off within a few years. You'll give yourself a lot of flexibility, you'll quickly own the house outright, and you'll establish a mortgage on your credit history. The last isn't really worth worrying about, but I personally would pay a few bucks in interest to keep that much more cash on hand for the first year or two of ownership.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 14:01
|
|
|
Tim Thomas posted:^^^that's what an inspection is for, and I have no idea why you thought that it was okay for your inspector to not inspect anything. Like I said, I was an idiot; I was 23 and it was the height of the real-estate boom. I was basically operating with the idea that I should be grateful my offer was accepted in a seller's market and not do anything to jeopardize it. I'm glad it's so obvious to everyone now that it's not even worth mentioning, but the question was asked about trusting your agent's inspector so I shared my experience.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 15:24
|
|
|
SlightlyMadman posted:Like I said, I was an idiot; I was 23 and it was the height of the real-estate boom. I was basically operating with the idea that I should be grateful my offer was accepted in a seller's market and not do anything to jeopardize it. I'm glad it's so obvious to everyone now that it's not even worth mentioning, but the question was asked about trusting your agent's inspector so I shared my experience.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 16:28
|
|
|
Molybdenum posted:If the roof is in bad shape, lower your offer an appropriate amount to replace it, citing that as the reason your offer is lower. Then you replace it/have it replaced yourself. The issue is cash flow. If the roof costs $10,000 to replace and I lower the offer by $10,000, I only generate $2,000 to fix the roof (because I have to bring that much less to closing for the down payment). My monthly payments would be lower as well, but that doesn't help me replace the roof until those savings accrue. Alternately, I could just say "fix the roof and I'll buy the house."
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 17:16
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:Uh, I was 23 and stupidly bought at the precise height of the bubble and still got an inspector and all that. Almost everyone was still putting in inspection contingencies anyway, it's not like people in NYC don't put that in, right? Just because it's a seller's market doesn't mean they can completely ream you. (I did pay for closing costs though so it's a double-screw by the time I sold and had to pay closing costs...) Like I said, I was an idiot. I'm not sure how you could disagree with me on that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 17:34
|
|
|
uwaeve posted:The issue is cash flow. If the roof costs $10,000 to replace and I lower the offer by $10,000, I only generate $2,000 to fix the roof (because I have to bring that much less to closing for the down payment). My monthly payments would be lower as well, but that doesn't help me replace the roof until those savings accrue. Alternately, I could just say "fix the roof and I'll buy the house." It's harsh, but: I think most of us would agree that you should have the cash to handle a roof replacement as part of your emergency house reserve, and if you don't, you might not be able to afford to buy until you can save that up. I'm a bit of a hypocrite saying that since the day after we bought I could not have absorbed a new roof in my own budget either. Then again a roof on my house would be closer to $5k than $10k, and I certainly had the ability to (cheaply) borrow for it if I needed to. I think though that you can get a more detailed assessment and then ask the sellers to fix the roof. They may not be able to if they don't have the cash and/or are not making money on the sale, though, and that could be a reason for them to back out of the sale. So it's a risk. I wouldn't worry too much about shoddy work: you can keep your inspection contingency, so its clear that if the new roof is crap you can still back out of the sale (and keep your earnest money). Be honest and up-front that you want a reasonable quality roof at a reasonable price, and they may be willing to work with you on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 18:19
|
|
|
We just went through this on our purchase. After inspection, the home needed about 8k worth of work (new roof and some foundation repairs). We asked the sellers to meet us in the middle and raised our offer by 4k, which they accepted. Have you actually gotten bids for a new roof yet? I thought ours would have cost much more, but all of the bids we received were right around 4-5k (for a 2 story 1800sf home in with an additional 300sf outbuilding that also got a new roof).
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 18:37
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:It's harsh, but: I think most of us would agree that you should have the cash to handle a roof replacement as part of your emergency house reserve, and if you don't, you might not be able to afford to buy until you can save that up. Harsh but fair. Technically we have the money, it's just it's earmarked for other purposes at this point. I understand it then becomes a subjective question of whether we're willing to reallocate funds, and no one can help us with that. What I was looking for was more along the lines of "yeah, this comes up a lot and here's a good way to handle it: " or "looks like it's another round at the negotiating table, steel yourself for it" or "here's how we equitably split the cost of the roof replacement in a similar situation..." Thanks for the help. So far they seem reasonable and nice (which may just be an indication that I'm being bent over a barrel...when it comes to money sometimes I think that unless someone's yelling or screaming at you you're getting ripped off), and I also want to be fair to both parties.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 18:42
|
|
|
fat poo poo cat posted:We just went through this on our purchase. After inspection, the home needed about 8k worth of work (new roof and some foundation repairs). We asked the sellers to meet us in the middle and raised our offer by 4k, which they accepted. Have you actually gotten bids for a new roof yet? I thought ours would have cost much more, but all of the bids we received were right around 4-5k (for a 2 story 1800sf home in with an additional 300sf outbuilding that also got a new roof). Are they removing the existing roof or just adding on a new layer? Also prices depend heavily on the location / availability of work / labor I imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 18:43
|
|
|
fat poo poo cat posted:We just went through this on our purchase. After inspection, the home needed about 8k worth of work (new roof and some foundation repairs). We asked the sellers to meet us in the middle and raised our offer by 4k, which they accepted. Have you actually gotten bids for a new roof yet? I thought ours would have cost much more, but all of the bids we received were right around 4-5k (for a 2 story 1800sf home in with an additional 300sf outbuilding that also got a new roof). Have not gotten bids, I'm working off of colleagues' estimates of prices. Also we have a little sheet that came with our inspection report gave national estimates per square foot. Since I'm buying in a suburb of Boston, I basically multiplied that by 2 (even though my gut told me 3 or more  ). It's not so much an issue of whether it's $8k or $12k, it's more how we should share the cost proportionally if they have basically used up the roof during their stay.Like I said, I feel like the next step is basically saying we'd like to have contractors come out to estimate, and let the sellers be party to that process to be fair. So the sellers don't propose a terrible job for 50% of the real cost, and we don't propose 400% of the real cost to get a slate roof or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 18:46
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Are they removing the existing roof or just adding on a new layer? What? Is that a thing? I've never really heard of that (but then I don't know that much about roofs I guess) but my assumption with "replace the roof" is that they take it down to the studs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 18:46
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:What? Is that a thing? I think, assuming the plywood or whatever the shingles are nailed to is in good shape, it's quite common to throw another layer or two over the top.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:19 |
|
|
Kalli posted:Are they removing the existing roof or just adding on a new layer? Also prices depend heavily on the location / availability of work / labor I imagine. There's nothing set in stone yet, but the recommendations I've gotten all say that it's preferable to do the removal and cleaning. If it becomes that big of a sticking point I suppose we can overlay (the current roof is the original one from 1994), but honestly I'd rather (with help from the seller) pony the money to strip it down to examine the sheathing for maintenance, inspect or update the water & ice shield or whatever (not sure what was standard practice 18 years ago). It is our plan to remain in the house for the long haul, and it seems to me that within reason we should be investing in it accordingly. Which doesn't necessarily mean a $30,000 roof that will last fifty years, but I would like to continue to maintain the home as it has been, which is very very well from our multiple inspections to date. Edit: Leperflesh posted:What? Is that a thing? Well, to be clear we're talking here about the shingles reaching the end of their economic life, not the roof caving in/having structural issues (as far as we know). As I understand it, it is appropriate to have up to two layers of shingles on, meaning that you can get away with reshingling on top of the first layer. As I mentioned, without knowing anything about roofing is that you lose the advantage of being able to inspect the sheathing or any other barriers or whatever. Why do I have the feeling I'm going to learn more about roofing than I ever thought I could in the next like week. Edit2: And yeah, I'm happy to talk about roofs but I was trying to keep it constrained to the real estate/financial side. Though I'm not sure if there is a roof porn thread, so whatever. uwaeve fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Jul 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 18:50
|
|