50% and 2% rule question
I realize these have been beaten to death on this forum so I'm not here to bring this debat back to life but do have a question.
I don't think it's possible to follow the 50% rule if you don't buy a property that isn't completely run down and in need of huge repairs. If this is typically the case then can a lesser amount be applied to this rule if a property is fairly new and not needing substantial repairs (thus the need for less than 50%)?
For example: I had a property valued at $250k but selling for $210k because it was bank owned and they just wanted to unload it. The gross rent is $2200 (duplex so $1100 each side) and the loan (10% down at 7% on a 30 yr fixed) payment would be $1621 PITI. This nets $579 which to me is great but applying the 50% rule means I'd actually be -$521 a month but the property is only 5 years old and has had the same tenants since it was built. Can't a mitigation be done to become okay with buying this property or is the rule pretty hard and fast????