BiggerPockets

Michelle-

You've seen this first hand?

That's is the worst way to do business. The buyer pay for the appriasal, home inspection and WF sneaks this in at the last possible second.

I am not sure this can actually be valid since the approval letter dictates the terms and conditions.

This sounds a bit fishy. It almost sounds like WF adopted their REO guidlines or at least confused them.

Did your partner do a simultaneous close?

Hi guys, I think he was going to end up closing it A to C because he was pressed for time and didn't want to risk losing the deal.

Scott I agree with you. It seems like after they issue the approval letter they should not be able to change the terms like that.

I have asked several title companies and mortgage brokers if we close A to C and the end buyer is getting conventional financing would it be possible to put a "termination of option" fee on the buyers side of the HUD but noone has been able to answer me. Do you guys have any idea if this would work?

Thanks,
Michelle

Just a thought. They accepted an offer. They have to honor the terms on the acceptance letter. I wouldnt sign the affidavit, if they refuse to close, I would turn my attornies loose on them. They only do these things because they get away with it. They just have to be stopped.

I have yet to see anything like this. Would someone mind coping the document and placing it on this site.

Thanks!

Can someone explain the difference between a A to B B to C?? closing or A to C closing? I'm very interested in getting involved in with simultaneous closing.

Thanks justin,

I have put the word out. If I have anyone that I know that has one, I will post it.

I too have a WF deal on the table. I'm taking Justin's approach on the HUD-1 approval ASAP. I'll post what I find out, when I find out....

I wonder if this would apply to what BofA is doing too?

Land Trusts:

Everyone talks about land trusts as being very effective. I have used them in short sales in the past and they create as many problems as they solve. Michael hit on one major issue and there are many others.

Lender Restrictions:

Dealing with lender restrictions is really best dealt with an attorney and title company. I like Justin's suggestion in pushing the title company to seek HUD 1 approval ahead of time. That way, you have time for your team members to deal with these illegal restrictions.

Also, it is very clear to me, since Michelle's partner was trying a simultaenous close, that WF, in an attempt to keep this type of transaction from happening, used the restriction at the last minute.

If you are using a simul close, then the HUD 1 will tip off the lender as to what you are doing.

Investors need to realize, if your trying to circumvent the process using simul. closings, land trusts, or other tricks designed to obscure or trick the lenders, ultimately it bites us all in the ass becuase we spend more time and money on attorneys and lost deals then we would have had otherwise saved using the end-buyers funds.

It costs under $5K to pay for transactional funding on most deals. If you cannot negotiate that cost from the lender, then I would recommend droppping the deal (because it is a dog anyway) or hire a negotiator because you suck.

Anyone trying to simul. close should not be surprised about the restrictions. CW got tired of giving up margin to investors double closing and they started the 30 day restriction. Since BOA purchased CW, they are now using this same restriction.

Read the writing on the wall.... This is going to get more and more restrictive until we can no longer profit.

Stop being lazy, inept, or just plain greedy... Instead spend your time being a more effective negotiator and less time and energy trying to get around the restrictions. Chances are, if you negotiate well, you can price in your holding costs and still profit.