|
Antifreeze Head posted:As for that guy, that cash is his. That guy is an idiot for posting about it online before hiring a lawyer, and a double-idiot for not hiring a lawyer immediately. That said, I'm not convinced the cash is his. Are you a lawyer and/or are you familiar with any case law on this sort of thing? And even leaving that aside: I think that, ethically, he should give the cash to the family. It's part of their inheritance. Maybe (after very thoroughly clearing it with his lawyer) he could offer to split it with them?
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:30 |
|
|
He should have just never mentioned it to anyone and paid cash for groceries and household items for the rest of his life.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 04:11
|
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:He should have just never mentioned it to anyone and paid cash for groceries and household items for the rest of his life. I agree. The other family members didn't believe the story enough to go looking for the money themselves, and they sold the house as-is. I'd personally view anything left behind, including money hidden in the walls, as having transferred ownership. Legally I think you'd have a good case for keeping the money anyway; if a former owner showed up later and demanded that you hand over the ceiling fans and sink fixtures, would you feel obligated to do so? But there's absolutely no reason to tell anyone about it; buy a nice safe to keep it in and pay for small stuff with cash from now on. QuarkJets fucked around with this message at 04:48 on Jul 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Kakairo posted:Thanks for this. I'm a first time homebuyer, so it sounds like I may want to go for a more traditional agent. Maybe. Since Redfin agents have salaries, they have little incentive to gently caress you, while a traditional agent working solely on commission can give into the inherent conflict of interest and give you bad advice to close the deal. How do you plan to determine who is a top quality, ethical buyers agent? Put in the time to educate yourself either way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
I dunno if this should go in this thread but I have a Dodd-Frank question if there are any bank people here or people who know a lot about loans: I am a professional poker player and as such banks will basically not let me count much at all of my income as income because they think it's a lot more variable than it really is I think. As such, the only income I can count for loans is income from stock dividends and that sort of thing. I have one rental property and when I was getting a loan for my current house the loan officer told me that even though my property is bringing in $1400 a month and the PITI on it is $700, they won't let me count the income because the people might move out BUT they are going to count the debt against me. I want to keep building a portfolio of rental houses because I'm pretty well loaded up on stocks, but as far as I can tell they are simply gonna stop loaning me money after one or two more because they are gonna count my payments against me but not count my income as a plus. I was wondering if there's any solution to this, and what companies like REITs do to get around this. My first thought was maybe to make some sort of corporation where I am the president and I pay myself a salary which is like $6000 a year or something, or whatever I think my net from the rental will usually be? Would I be able to just count that as income in that case? One of the big things that makes rental properties a good investment is the leverage you're able to use in a relatively low-risk proposition, if I had to buy these places for cash the return would be pretty small so I'd really like to be able to keep accumulating them with loans but I'm not sure how to go about doing it without eventually just running into an artificial limit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
Not sure how you understood what the bank guy was saying, but generally if you can document signed leases and rental income on tax returns dating back one or two years, you can get some amount of credit for that income to discount the hit of the mortgage payment against your DTI. No clue how that jives with the situation where you don't have an actual salaried job but to me it's weird they wouldn't allow you to show tax returns for the past X years as proof of income just like small business owners or any kind of 1099 earner might do, unless they just have a no gambling/gaming income policy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:That guy is an idiot for posting about it online before hiring a lawyer, and a double-idiot for not hiring a lawyer immediately. That said, I'm not convinced the cash is his. Are you a lawyer and/or are you familiar with any case law on this sort of thing? Not sure how it will eventually pan out, but I thought the flip side of the argument was pretty strong - say the buyer uncovered some expensive, disastrous repair instead of a bunch of cash on a property sold "as is". Would the sellers come rushing to the rescue?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:Not sure how you understood what the bank guy was saying, but generally if you can document signed leases and rental income on tax returns dating back one or two years, you can get some amount of credit for that income to discount the hit of the mortgage payment against your DTI. No clue how that jives with the situation where you don't have an actual salaried job but to me it's weird they wouldn't allow you to show tax returns for the past X years as proof of income just like small business owners or any kind of 1099 earner might do, unless they just have a no gambling/gaming income policy. I got the impression from her that even if I have steady rental income for 3 years they will only ever count the monthly payment against me and never count the income for me from the rentals, post-Dodd Frank. She may have just not known what she was talking about though!
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
Kakairo posted:Thanks for this. I'm a first time homebuyer, so it sounds like I may want to go for a more traditional agent. Redfin has home-buying classes. Free dinner (and beer?), ask questions, no obligations. Try one, then decide if a normal agent is right for you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:Not sure how it will eventually pan out, but I thought the flip side of the argument was pretty strong - say the buyer uncovered some expensive, disastrous repair instead of a bunch of cash on a property sold "as is". Would the sellers come rushing to the rescue? If the owner could prove that the previous owner knew about a disastrous problem and deliberately tried to hide it, or were legally obliged to disclose it but failed to do so, then yes absolutely. Even an "as-is" condition to the sale doesn't cover a seller from deliberate fraud. Similarly, the previous owner couldn't possibly have intended to include $300k in cash in the sale. I'm not a lawyer but my understanding of contract law is that irrespective of what's actually written in a contract, the law recognizes that all parties are only entering into an agreement that covers what both parties can reasonably believe the contract covers. (Which is, incidentally, why most EULAs are at least partially unenforceable.) I can't sell you something that I don't even know I have. Of course, the reality is that all sorts of poo poo happens all the time in contravention of people's rights and the law. People make mistakes, and people can also be malicious or stupid. I have to wonder: if the guy who was overseas on deployment knew or suspected there was money in the Or could it be the entire story is absolute, utter bullshit? That's definitely the way I'm leaning, because who, after finding three hundred thousand dollars in the walls of his house, rushes off to Reddit to figure out what to do? Vs., who might enjoy making up stories about secret hidden money caches for the entertainment and amusement of Reddit people?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 06:22
|
|
|
Stefan Prodan posted:I dunno if this should go in this thread but I have a Dodd-Frank question if there are any bank people here or people who know a lot about loans: This is not true unless you're just evading taxes by not reporting cash income. You'll generally want to declare yourself as self employed, assuming you're declaring and paying taxes as self employment income you'll be fine, banks will just want several years of tax returns to ensure when you say you make $100K a year from poker you actually demonstrate that consistent income. A bit more history required than a W2 but it should be fine if you have that consistent income history. All the pro poker players I know just have a corporation they deposit their winnings into and then pay themselves however much from that so it's easy to keep track of how much declared income they have and have a separate account for expenses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
I mean this has never been true as far as like them considering as good as normal "steady" and I've always reported my whole income, I dunno. One of the people that was doing one of my loans actually suggested that I go back and amend a previous year's return and say that I made more money than I really did (and pay the extra taxes). I was like, wouldn't that just be fraud? And his reply was "Well everyone does it". I did not do it obviously, but yeah, it could just be that I got lovely loan people. Last time I tried to do a loan I had 5 years of poker income and they didn't seem thrilled about it, maybe because I'm on like 7 years of being a pro now that'll be better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 08:48
|
|
|
Stefan Prodan posted:I want to keep building a portfolio of rental houses because I'm pretty well loaded up on stocks, but as far as I can tell they are simply gonna stop loaning me money after one or two more because they are gonna count my payments against me but not count my income as a plus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Maybe. Since Redfin agents have salaries, they have little incentive to gently caress you, while a traditional agent working solely on commission can give into the inherent conflict of interest and give you bad advice to close the deal. How do you plan to determine who is a top quality, ethical buyers agent? Oh, I'm months away from actually buying, I plan on researching as much as possible about the process. bartkusa posted:Redfin has home-buying classes. Free dinner (and beer?), ask questions, no obligations. I just saw that last night, definitely going to check it out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
Stefan Prodan posted:I am a professional poker player and as such banks will basically not let me count much at all of my income as income because they think it's a lot more variable than it really is I think. As such, the only income I can count for loans is income from stock dividends and that sort of thing. I have one rental property and when I was getting a loan for my current house the loan officer told me that even though my property is bringing in $1400 a month and the PITI on it is $700, they won't let me count the income because the people might move out BUT they are going to count the debt against me. Stefan Prodan posted:I did not do it obviously, but yeah, it could just be that I got lovely loan people. Get a new banker. There are methods of calculating rental income, but it is common to count 3/4 of your gross rent toward your income and the full costs on your debt, or to use a Fannie Mae calculator that does almost the same thing, makes a few adjustments such as adding back in depreciation. This particular rental property won't add a lot to your income but it shouldn't be a negative. Also, anyone who actively advocates fraud you want to stay away from. He is going to be more likely to hide fees from you, lie to vendors too, and just be lovely overall. Your income is probably more likely than most to fluctuate so you should be putting more down and buying more conservative, and on your rentals not be highly leveraged, but
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
You can absolutely use rental income on a loan application. You need to have a lease agreement and a full year reported on the taxes (this is two years for 'agency' or government loans), and typically we take the lesser of the amount of the lease or total rents recieved from the taxes less expenses. Then we add back in depreciation, taxes, insurance, and mortgage interest and divide the total by 12. Finally we take this monthly gross and subtract out the pitia payment on the rental . Pitia is principal, interest, taxes, insurance and association dues. Whatever is left is the total calculated income (or liability) from the property. Most banks won't give you credit for gambling income due to both stability and money luandering concerns. You could try setting up a business entity to funnel the profits through but good luck finding a bank to take the deposits. Actually, your best bet might be smaller banks and credit unions in Nevada where they may be a lot more comfortable with gambling as a source of income. Expect higher rates because it would probably have to be a portfolio loan.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 07:32
|
|
|
therobit posted:Finally we take this monthly gross and subtract out the pitia payment on the rental . Pitia is principal, interest, taxes, insurance and association dues. If you do this, then you don't otherwise count that mortgage as debt for DTI calcs, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
Self employment income is always a pain to document. I don't know why underwriters think being an employee is somehow better. You can get fired in one day. That is why the loan is secured by an asset that can only increase in value, haha.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
The Tampa area got a shitload of rain this past weekend and as a result the house that my brother and his wife just closed on last week flooded a little bit and damaged his hardwood floors. He's not in a FEMA flood zone so he wasn't required to have flood insurance so all of his repairs will be out of pocket. Apparently they spent almost all of their savings on the down payment for the house so I'm not sure how they are going to afford the repairs (yes he should have had an emergency fund for something like this, no he is not very good with money). My brother is a mental wreck right now and is questioning his whole decision to buy a house because of this, and also it's supposed to rain some more today so now he is scared it is going to happen again. I don't think I ever want to buy a house...
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
Well, he could always pull up the hardwood himself and try his hand at replacing it with cheap tile. Should hold him over until he can save up for someone else to come in and fix it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Mind_Taker posted:I don't think I ever want to buy a house... You now have your head in the right place! If you think buying and maintaining is unfun, imagine trying to sell after something like that. Closing costs are a lot bigger on the sale side too (title insurance and agent fees for both sides...)
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
No Butt Stuff posted:Well, he could always pull up the hardwood himself and try his hand at replacing it with cheap tile. Should hold him over until he can save up for someone else to come in and fix it. I'm sure they'll get it fixed somehow, but he's just second guessing his decision now that he's on the hook for flood repairs literally one week after buying a house. We used to live together in a rented townhouse that had a lovely roof and leaked all the time when it rained and we didn't really give a poo poo because it wasn't our job to repair it and worst case we just move out if it becomes really bad and the owner doesn't get it repaired (he did eventually). I just moved into a rental home with my wife and not a week after we moved in did our air conditioner die in the middle of a Florida summer. It sucked for a few days but god drat I would have hated to have to pay for a new AC system out of pocket. I'm sure I would like to buy a house eventually, but seeing my brother go through this ordeal makes me happy I am renting for now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
baquerd posted:If you do this, then you don't otherwise count that mortgage as debt for DTI calcs, right? Yes, only the final net income/loss figure is used to calculate your DTI ratio.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
Stefan Prodan posted:I dunno if this should go in this thread but I have a Dodd-Frank question if there are any bank people here or people who know a lot about loans: Talk to a different bank. One of the loan officers/underwriters wanted to include payments in my wife's student loans and a full credit check . There is at least a year before she will have to make payments and she is not a us citizen. No ssn or residency. Two other banks had no problem just using my credit. For self employed income not every bank has the same requirements.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
Got the inspection done for the house under contract, and thankfully nothing terrible. Some stairs on a deck and a half-set of stairs to the basement (raised ranch) need handrails, and a whole lot of outlets need to be swapped for GFCIs are the only things that might not let it "pass" an insurance appraisal. Some smaller things too, like a couple windows with rotting trim, pieces of loose siding, and the fence is leaning a bit. But the roof, foundation, furnace and water heater, and structure of the house all look good. So where should I go from here? Just reach out to a couple contractors and electricians and ask them for an estimate, then tell the seller to fix it or give us money/pay that amount in closing costs so we can fix it? And if we fix it, will the insurance people/the bank let us buy it and move in before this stuff is fixed? Or do we have to close, then pay to get it fixed, and wait another day or three before we can get it properly insured and move in?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
DrBouvenstein posted:Got the inspection done for the house under contract, and thankfully nothing terrible. If it's FHA, you may have to have the work done before the loan can be issued. Conventional should be fine with work done post closing. I'm not an expert here, never done it myself, but that's my understanding. My folks last house sold with a single windowsill having dryrot and the bank didn't care - my folks gave a small credit for that. I know from inspecting when the new owners were gone that it hasn't been fixed 2yrs later. Insurance wise, they'll give you 30days to fix it usually. Or more, or they won't even care. It all depends. But they definitely give a grace period for work that must be done like knob and tube or roof replacement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Mind_Taker posted:The Tampa area got a shitload of rain this past weekend and as a result the house that my brother and his wife just closed on last week flooded a little bit and damaged his hardwood floors. He's not in a FEMA flood zone so he wasn't required to have flood insurance so all of his repairs will be out of pocket. Apparently they spent almost all of their savings on the down payment for the house so I'm not sure how they are going to afford the repairs (yes he should have had an emergency fund for something like this, no he is not very good with money). I'd be worried as hell about sinkholes in Florida. Gimme west coast earthquakes and cascadia subduction tsunamis and volcanoes anyday. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/sinkholes.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Great, thanks. And it's conventional, not FHA, so that's a plus. Yeah, we definitely prefer getting a credit since, as you said, they could hire the cheapest/worst contractor (or, based on some other minor things we saw, do it themselves rather poorly.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
We're trying to extend A/I. Or we've been trying since two Fridays ago. Our attorney a letter back then that said "We'd like to extend A/I, if you don't agree, send back the earnest check." Selling agent just whines at us in broken English with no actual conviction or idea of what's happening. Our attorney has been trying, in vain, to get in touch with the seller's attorney, for the past two weeks. I'm starting to think that he doesn't exist. I think this might be a harbinger of a really difficult transaction, regardless of if things move forward or fall through.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
How do you set up times to view a bunch of houses without a buyer's agent? I'm thinking I'm just going to go find one because I don't really know how to coordinate all of this and it'll probably be worth whatever I gotta pay. I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:How do you set up times to view a bunch of houses without a buyer's agent? I'm thinking I'm just going to go find one because I don't really know how to coordinate all of this and it'll probably be worth whatever I gotta pay. I guess. Buyer's agent is free for the buyer, because the seller pays both agents. I mean, in theory without a buyer's agent you could negotiate a discount because the seller doesn't have to pay your agent. In practice, the seller's agent just takes the full 6%, or - just as often - steers their client away from you because a lot of buyers going without agents are a load of extra work because they don't know the details of the process and have to be handheld the whole way. Whatever you do, do not let the seller's agent represent you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
Wasn't there recently some mention in this thread about a website where you can go to shop/negotiate for lower local agent rates? I know 6% is standard but I seem to recall quickly checking out a site where rates as low as 3.5-4% were being shopped. I googled but couldn't find anything - does anyone remember what I'm talking about or did I dream about it? Edit: Maybe this was it?: http://www.hungryagents.com/
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Buyer's agent is free for the buyer, because the seller pays both agents.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:someone else pays =/= free. Sure, but there are some agents that will try to charge you directly on top of the normal compensation that they get from the seller, so it's good to point out that a buyer's agent shouldn't require the buyer to pay anything
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
Yeah, we've had this discussion. In theory, the cost of the buyer's agent is incorporated into the sale price of all housing, and therefore all houses cost 3% more to cover for it, and therefore it's not free to you, the buyer*. But in practice, it's very difficult to negotiate back that 3%, especially when you're already annoying the sellers' agent by being unrepresented. If it turns out you're extremely well-informed and don't ask them any questions that a buyers' agent wouldn't ask, and know what all the forms are and are etc. etc. then maybe they'd relent and suggest to their client that you're a perfectly good buyer despite not having an agent. But more likely, especially if there are multiple bids, you'll simply be dismissed at worst, or the seller's agent will just take the whole 6% at best. *Actually this isn't how it works, because this assumes that the price of a house is entirely based on a sum of costs plus some perfectly-deterministic market price that is independent of those costs. In reality, all manner of factors such as the amount the seller owes, the comps, appraisals, and inelastic components of supply and demand affect pricing so much that if you eliminated that 3%, it's not at all guaranteed that overall prices would drop by exactly 3%. Leperflesh fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
baquerd posted:If you do this, then you don't otherwise count that mortgage as debt for DTI calcs, right? Captain Windex already answered this but yes. Somone else asked why undewriters hate self employment... The reason why banks scrutinize self employment more is that wage income tends to remain stable or increase year on year in most cases, but self employment frequently has a lot of ups and downs. There are also a lot more expeses than a wage earner has. And if I look at a set of W2s I can see what they made and the year to date gross on a paystub ca be used to figure out if that is ongoing, but with a business owner I have to trust them about anything since the tax returns, which are hopefully not fraudulent. The y could very easily file a false return and amend it later. Self employed people sometimes have a tendency to tell you thier gross revenue when you ask what they make. I don't know if these people are just math challenged or just think it will make them sound important, but it really sucks when it says 200k on the application and they are taking home 30. (This is really common with truck drivers. Fuel costs are a bitch.) therobit fucked around with this message at 03:11 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Yeah, we've had this discussion. In theory, the cost of the buyer's agent is incorporated into the sale price of all housing, and therefore all houses cost 3% more to cover for it, and therefore it's not free to you, the buyer*. But in practice, an informed buyer willing to do their own work would at worst break even with having a buyer's agent, and at best has a potential of negotiating 3% off the sale price, ignoring the fact that real estate agents in a given market might be a corrupt cartel. But, we can all agree at least that real estate agents charging 6% between the two agents independent of work done or sale price is a tremendous drag on the transactional cost of buying or selling real estate. And that they have a perverse incentive against the be interests of both the buy and the seller. Right? Dik Hz fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Jul 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Yeah, we've had this discussion. In theory, the cost of the buyer's agent is incorporated into the sale price of all housing, and therefore all houses cost 3% more to cover for it, and therefore it's not free to you, the buyer*. There is a sort of back handed way to get the 3% back but its potentially time consuming and dangerous unless you really know the market. That would be to get your real estate license, the requirements vary by state, but usually involves some classroom training at an accredited school and passing a test. It would set you back about $500 or so, but you would essentially be representing yourself and when the deal goes through the other side would pay you your 3% commission for bringing the buyer (you). But you could really gently caress it up big time if due to your ignorance you missed deadlines, etc
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
The way to save money would be to find a licensed real estate agent that would rebate you a portion of the commission. You would have to do all the work by yourself and would have to find a real estate agent willing to give up most of their commission. This isn't practical in many states. I would talk with someone who has sold a house to see what their experiences with agent less buyers are first before making any offers. There is a lot that goes into getting an offer accepted besides 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:30 |
|
|
We have realtors who are family friends and generally awesome people who took care of us really well last time we bought (skype tours of new properties the day they were listed or earlier), who since we've moved to the area have become friends, so we're pretty much stuck with not shopping around there. I'll mention it to him if/when I want to sell, but if HungryAgents is offering me 5% and he's telling me 5.5%, then he's getting the listing. Something to remember is that sometimes it's worth paying a little extra for a realtor, depending on what the market is doing anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2015 13:37
|
|