The Best Way To Get Started as a Real Estate Investor

The Best Way To Get Started as a Real Estate Investor

Member since 2008 · 21 posts · 3 votes

Here are a couple of ideas that should help you get started in the right direction and answer how you can do a no money down deal with no cash, no credit, no income, no nothing, except having some general knowledge backed with a desire to succeed by going out there and taking ACTION!!!

The way most people make money in this game is by using creative techniques to solve one person's problem while being able to structure the deal to where it makes you a profit.

The key to finding a lot of deals in this game is to look for the MOTIVATED SELLERS.... forget about looking for houses, that's a waste of time and requires way too much work!!! Narrow it down to dealing with "MOTIVATED SELLERS" and make fewer offers that result in getting more offers accepted!

Let me give you an example on buying a house for full market value, with no money out of your pocket, picking up a quick $5k up front, some positive cash flow every month, and a nice payday on the back end.... plus where talking about dealing in NICE homes....NO junk properties!

Mr. Seller has a newer home he purchased about 2 years ago. When he purchased the home he put about 5% down and was able to qualify for 95% financing. After closing cost he had hardly any equity left.

Mr. Seller ended up buying a new home a couple years later. He's been trying to sell this home before he has to close on his new home. He can't even afford to list the home with a realtor because he doesn't have enough equity in the property to even cover the 6% - 7% commission he would have to pay a real estate agent.

Now the Seller's new home is finished, ready to be moved into and he needs to close on it. He closes and figures he'll sell the old home soon, but soon enough doesn't seem to be coming. Now the Seller is starting to have some financial problems because he has to start paying two mortgage payments until someone buys the old home. The Seller has a problem now because he can't afford to make two mortgage payments. If something doesn't give pretty quick, he's going to fall behind on the payments on the old home. He's going to pay the new homes mortgage first. But he doesn't want to be late or get behind on the payments of the old home either. The Seller is worried about damaging his credit if he misses any payments.

This is where I would come along and be in a position to SOLVE HIS PROBLEM! I can put a stop to the Seller's worry and stop the bleeding TODAY! All the Seller needs to do is agree to my TERMS and I'll even pay him what he owes on the property, which is pretty close to full market value. The Seller knows he wasn't going to get any money out of it after paying off his mortgage and closing costs, so all the Seller wants and all he NEEDS, is to get out from under his mortgage payment!

I agree to take over the Seller's mortgage. I take it over "subject to", which means I assume the Seller's loan without even qualifying through the lender that holds the Seller's mortgage. The Seller will deed the property over to me. I now OWN the home. The Seller is still on the loan that has the lien against the property. The Seller remains responsible to the lender for that loan until I pay it off! Usually within a few years when my tenant ends up exercising their option that I will give to them under a lease option agreement. I won't be liable for the loan on the property to the lender. The Seller's bank can't come after me if something where to go wrong. The loan is in the Seller's name, not mine! However, I will be liable to the Seller to perform on our contract agreement to make his payments and pay off that loan eventually, but my liability is to Seller, not his bank.

The Seller deeds the property over to me. The house is worth $150k. The Seller's loan balance is about $145k. I agree to start making the payments in 30 - 60 days from today! Now I have 30 - 60 days to market the property before my payments start. The payments are $1400 PITI

What is the FASTEST way to sell a property? Sell on TERMS!

So I run an ad in the paper.

NO BANK QUALIFYING!!!
RENT TO OWN
NICE! 4bd/2ba House
Call xxx-xxxx

The phone starts ringing off the hook!

I find a potential Buyer that has $5k to put down and says they can afford to pay $1700 per month. ($150k homes in the area would rent for $1200 - $1400 per month, so getting $1700 a month on a $1400 rental when offering an OPTION TO BUY, will bring a premium rent and people will gladly pay it, because no one else will even finance them because of one reason or another) I agree to give them an option to buy the home for $165k in one or two years. YOU get a premium on the sale price because you're offering TERMS!

I collect the $5k up front as "Non-Refundable Option Consideration" and "IF" they exercise the OPTION, the $5k will be deducted from the purchase price of $165k, leaving my Tenant/Buyer with a balance owed of $160k. If they don't exercise the option the option money paid is non-refundable and is lost by the Tenant/Buyer!

I get the $5k up front, plus first month's rent of $1700. Since I was lucky and found this Tenant/Buyer in the first week, I get to keep 100% of the first two months rent since my payments won't start for 60 days! So I collect $5k + $1700 first month rent up front, for a total of $6700. The following month I collect the full $1700 for rent and the 10 months after that I collect $300 per month positive cash flow. At the end of the year, IF the Tenant/Buyer exercises their option, they will pay $160k. After paying off the underlying mortgage of $145k remaining on the Seller's mortgage, I'll collect another $15k at closing.

So lets see, that's....

$5k option money up front
$1700 first months rent
$1700 second months rent
$300 x 10 months rent = $3k
$15k at closing ($160k - $145k = $15k)

That's $26,400.00 over 12 months total PROFIT!

Now what happens if my Tenant/Buyer doesn't exercise the option in a year???

WONDERFUL!!!!!!!

Now I get to start all over again! I get to collect another option fee, raise the rent after a year for inflation and get a higher selling price for the option the next time around!

I just keep repeating the process over and over again until someone eventually exercises their option!

Assuming every tenant was to exercise their option in the first year.... how many deals like this would you have to do each year to make $100k???

Just FOUR deals like this one and you're making $105,600 per year!

How many hours would that work out to be to find and structure a deal like this and get a Tenant/Buyer in the property? Not very many!

How many hours per week would you have to put into working at your job to make $105,600.00 per year???

One thing to remember is that the typical homebuyer or seller does not understand any type of creative real estate buying or selling. They typically use a realtor to buy or sell. When that realtor doesn't sell that home or when that buyer can't get that loan.... that's where motivation starts to set in. The Seller starts getting motivated to sell and the Buyer starts getting motivated to buy. In either case they both either, just want to get out of the property or buy to get in. The Seller will just let the property go to get their problem solved and the Buyer will gladly pay any price to just get in if you can solve their problem.

Motivated Sellers are those that have been trying to sell but haven't been able to for one reason or another. Or they may be facing foreclosure. Or they may be in a divorce situation. Or they may have been transferred with their job and need to move on, but they don't want to leave the house empty or deal with renting it out to renters being so far away. Or they may have lost their job and can no longer afford the home and need to find something less expensive. Or they may have purchased another home and are now stuck with two mortgage payments. Or for whatever other reasons, they just need to get out from under their mortgage payments.

The Buyers just need someone that will sell to them. They can't get a bank loan or some just "think" they can't get a bank loan and they only care about two things! How much down and how much per month? If they can afford the payments and have enough to put down in order to allow them an opportunity of owning a home, price doesn't matter to them as much. They just WANT to be able to buy a home!

Your job is to become the "PROBLEM SOLVER!" Instead of thinking in terms of, I'm looking to buy properties, or I want to be an investor, or how do I buy properties with no money, or how do I get financing, etc...

Start thinking in terms of being a "problem solver". Your job is to find SOLUTIONS to fix someone else's problems! Your job is to sit down with these people and find out what their problem is. Once you figure out what their real problem is, you now know what they NEED! They all WANT an all cash sale. They WANT full price and WANT someone to just waltz in and buy their home the traditional way. But your job is to find out what they really NEED! Once you find out what their PROBLEM is, then you can determine what their NEED is. Once you know what they really NEED, then your job to get the deal closed is to just come up with the SOLUTION that will get them what they NEED that will SOLVE their PROBLEM!

You are not a real estate investor, you’re a PROBLEM SOLVER! You find SOLUTIONS to solve anyone's PROBLEM! That's how you make the deals come together!

Take Very Good Care,

HuntMan1

0Reply
40 views

22 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Member since 2008 · 9 posts · 0 votes
    19y

    In this scenario, wouldn't the mortgage have to be assumable? Where would you find someone to write a contract like that? Please put this into "Big Bird" terms for me as I'm a noob, and in the process of reading a few RE books.

  • Member since 2008 · 4 posts · 0 votes
    19y

    In my state, TN, you do not have to give rent credit to the tenant.
    Here you have 3 documents: 1 is a lease agreement 2 is the sales contract and 3 is the option contract. So, three separate transactions.
    The lease is straight rent and the tenant does not get credit for any monies.
    They do get to deduct the option price from the sales price if the elect to excercise the option. If they don't excercise and the option expires, you keep the rent, the option money and the house...and like the original poster said, you do it all over again.
    ET

  • Real Estate Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2008 · 74 posts · 14 votes
    19y

    Good stuff. But you didn't say how you find that motivated seller to get everyting rolling. I assume you use one of those "we buy houses" signs/ads and wait for people to call you?

  • Member since 2008 · 9 posts · 0 votes
    19y
    Originally posted by "HuntMan1":

    I agree to take over the Seller's mortgage. I take it over "subject to", which means I assume the Seller's loan without even qualifying through the lender that holds the Seller's mortgage. The Seller will deed the property over to me. I now OWN the home. The Seller is still on the loan that has the lien against the property. The Seller remains responsible to the lender for that loan until I pay it off!
    HuntMan1

    Again, is this a case where the mortgage is assumable? Does anybody know a rough percentage of mortgages that are assumable? Also, since I know so little about financing (Carlton Sheets speaks greek when he talks about his creative financing methods) are there any good books that I can pick up to try to clarify some of this? Real Estate finance for dummies?

  • Member since 2008 · 21 posts · 3 votes
    19y

    It doesn't matter if the mortgage is assumable or not (Most likely it won't be!)
    The loan has nothing to do with you. You are taking the the property "Subject To" the existing financing. All I am doing is making the payments where the owner wasn't. The only time the bank will even know that a property has changed hands is when new insurance is drawn on the property. The principles on the insurance will change.

    Well, not only are we not assuming responsability for the note, we are also not getting new insurance. Everything will remain the same except I have brought the loan current and am now making the payments for the owner.
    The bank just wants their money.

    Does that make sense? Maybe I'll do a break down of subject to purchases in another post.

    Take Very Good Care

    HuntMan1

  • Member since 2008 · 9 posts · 0 votes
    19y

    That does make sense. Unfortunately for me I'm murky on the details. For instance, I'm sure there is still some sort of contract between you and the "seller" in order to protect them. If this is the case, who writes such a contract? (I'd love to see a rough example).

    This is a great post, and I really appreciate you taking the time to dumb this down for me. I'm sorry if this has been covered somewhere else. I've been doing my best to get to every post on the site before asking too many questions, but this really caught my eye and I didn't want it to get lost in the shuffle.

    Thanks,

    James

  • Member since 2008 · 21 posts · 3 votes
    19y

    Yes,

    There is a contract b/t you and the home owner. The protection that the owner has lies within that contract. You are contractually obligated to the home owner to pay the mortgage on their behalf.

    If you breech, they can sue you in court.

    Do a search for subject to purchases. This will further clarify that process.

    E-mail me and I can show you the contract that I use.

    Take Very Good Care,

    HuntMan1

  • Member since 2008 · 6 posts · 0 votes
    19y

    I'm sorry, I know I'm a novice in real estate investing. I'll just be closing on my first rental property in about a month, but the scenario laid out by HuntMan1, just doesn't make much sense to me. I mean, this technique must work for some people and I've heard a lot of gurus promote it, but I just still don't "get it".

    Here's what I mean: So, you go out and find some poor guy who's in big trouble with his mortgage on a house in good rental condition with no equity. You find this guy and promise to solve all his problems, you draw up the contract, and take over the mortgage "Subject to".

    Now, who is going to want to lease this property? First off, it's got to be a person who can afford a huge rent (because obviously they are going to be renting at an amount that covers 95% of the motage +) but for some reason doesn't have good credit or can't afford a huge down payment at the moment. Then, they are going to agree on an option price that's above market *and* doesn't mind putting down a 5K non-refundable deposit to take the gamble that he's going to be able to fix any problems that wouldn't allow him to buy that house outright in the first place. I mean, does that sound like a good deal to anyone? Would anyone here take that deal??? I certainly wouldn't.

    Again, why wouldn't the potential buyer rent somewhere *cheaply* (or at least cheap-er than an entire single family house) for a year or two until they fix their credit problems or save up the down payment. Then they could buy the same house at market value and if real estate prices are going down, so much the better. They actually pay less than they might have. And if prices go up, so what? They would end up paying about what you're giving them in the lease, since it was above market at the time to begin with.

    I mean, am I missing something? Oh right, the buyer's motivated too. Actually it sounds more like they're just not too bright with their money.

    This whole thing seems more like just pure "salesmanship". Convincing someone to take a bad deal by making it sound great. What am I missing?

    MyPetSlug

  • Member since 2008 · 6 posts · 0 votes
    19y

    Hi Charles,
    No I don't have a pet slug, but you have to admit, they would make great pets. They make no noise, take up little space, eat next to nothing, and it's not like they can run away.

    You said: "I have heard of many people going this route in purchasing a home. The perks of the deal are that the end buyer usually does not have good enough credit to actually purchase a house so instead a lease option is better suited for their current financial abilities. I don't understand how they afford the non-refundable option monies but that's besides the point."

    MyPetSlug: So, for a person with bad credit, how is the lease option better suited for them? They essentially take the lease option with the deposit on faith that they'll be able to fix whatever credit problems they have in the future enough to buy the house at a price above where the market is now. At the same time, they are essentially renting at an above market rent because they're paying a premium for the option to buy. Doesn't trying to fix one's credit at the same time you're paying a large rent seem counter productive to you? Even if not, if the market goes down, the option price suddenly doesn't look so hot and they're out 5K.

    Add to that the fact that it make infinitely more sense for a person with credit problems to rent cheaply somewhere for a while, while they fix their credit problems with no risk of losing 5K and no risk of the market going down.

    You said: "on another note; all the people that I know that do these type of deals do purchase the home below fair market value and therefore start out with equity. part of this equity is then transferred to the end buyer which will setup a lease option. What do you mean "they are going to be renting at an amount that covers 95% of the mortgage". I usually see deals like this:

    purchase price=85K (assumed the current mortage)
    ARV=100K
    sell price=95K "

    MyPetSlug: How do these people you know purchase the home below market? In every lease option I've heard explained, including HuntMan1, the option price is always above market because the seller had no equity to play with and you want to make money when the leaser exercises their option.

    What I mean by "they are going to be renting at an amount that covers 95% of the mortgage" is that because you're assuming the mortgage "Subject to" and the seller has no, or very little, equity (the example HuntMan1 gave was 5%), you have to set the rent as at least the mortgage payment that you're now making, which is 95% LTV on the house. In my area, and I would guess most, renting a single family house for essentially the same price it would cost to get a 95% mortgage on it would be a very high rent.

    So, my point was that because of that you're looking for a very specific person, someone who can afford to borrow 100% of the purchase price of the house, but for some reason has bad credit and, as I was arguing in my other paragraph, is also bad at math.

    Also, in the example you gave, the person has 15% equity, so they could afford to hire a real estate agent.

    As for you cash-flow example, I mean, I understand that part. I know how it's good for the investor. It's great for him. I'm just arguing that is seems terrible for the buyer.

    MyPetSlug

  • Real Estate Investor · OH · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    19y

    MyPetSlug,

    To answer your question, there are VERY FEW people who will sell you their house subject to the existing financing. The only people that will do that are DESPERATE sellers who have no other choice. In a subject to deal, they are giving you the deed to their house and you are promising to pay. If you don't pay, there is nothing they can do about it (except sue you) and THEIR credit is ruined if the bank forecloses because their name is still on the mortgage.

    On the other side of this deal, you have a lease option "buyer" who is paying more than market rent; paying a higher than market price for the house; and in reality will never buy the house because they will never fix their credit. What also frequently happens is that this lease option buyer doesn't do the maintenance that they are supposed to do and in a year or two, you'll get the property back in bad condition. The vast majority of lease option (and land contract) buyers never buy the property because they're really nothing more than renters to start with.

    While you're waiting for the lease option "buyer" (someone with bad credit but a big pile of cash) to show up and "buy your house", you could have simply been renting the house to a tenant. While you're waiting, your expenses and mortgage payment continue. Often, you will lose more in lost rent than you make by getting the option premium.

    That's the other side (real world) of lease options and subject to. It sounds better at a seminar than it is in reallity.

    Mike

  • Member since 2008 · 21 posts · 3 votes
    19y

    Just a bit of clarification.

    As the investor, I am going to purchase the property below market. I would lease option it to a buyer at market or above depending on the length of the option period.
    I think there was some confusion on this.
    This is not an everyday type of deal. I have done deals like this but it takes paying attention to pick up on the clues that point to this technique. It works like a charm on mobile homes and I can use loose variations of this technique as the situation will permit.

    This is not a rip off. No one is getting ripped off. Everyone I have dealt with in this way has thanked me for putting deals like this together. Every One!
    There are people who have money but have no documentation of income that will satisfy a bank (Those who make cash tips for example) who are excited as all get out
    to be able to "rent to own". They are excited to not have to put down a 20% down payment. They are beside themselves to be in a position that they never thought they could be in. A Homeowner! Is this less than the most ideal way to enter into home ownership? Yes! Get your credit score to about 740 or better, have no debt, have a good paying job for at least 10 years in one industry, and have a fairly large sum of money in the bank and you can walk into almost any home in your budget with the best loan rate and tax bene's and live large! That's pretty ideal.

    There are lesser variations of this ideal all the way down to a family who can satisfy none of these "Ideals" but wants a home. These buyers, in my experience, have NEVER felt ripped off by me telling them that they can give me $5K-10K down and start making payments and in the agreed upon amount of time, you will own this home!
    I think that's a pretty good deal for some. Not everyone, but some. Heck, people rent TV’s for their apartments! Now THAT'S A RIP OFF!

    As for those who are willing to sign their property over to me? These are people who have reached the end of options. They can't sell or refi. They are going to loose the home and get NOTHING when the gavel falls. Or they can sign the property over to me. I will give them some money for their equity. Not much, but more than they will get at the end of the auction. I explain this to them explicitly! I hide nothing. They either are on board or not. It does not matter to me one way or another. It's not my house. It's not my problem. Most people will tell me to go kick rocks after they hear my offer. So I go and kick rocks! BUT...every now and again I will get that phone call that interrupts my rock kicking! And EVERY person that I have dealt with thanks me after the transaction is done! EVERY SINGLE ONE!

    I once moved an old lady out of a house that was too big and too expensive and into a nice condo in a nice retirement community. I fixed the home up, staged it well and sold it for a $93K profit! To this day, I still give and get xmas cards and she and my mom have become friends.

    When talking about this business in this type of forum, it sounds harsh and cold. But believe me, those that are successful in this type of business are those who are honest, transparent, soft spoken, great listeners and one who cares more about the players than the game.

  • Real Estate Investor · OH · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    19y

    Charles and MyPetSlug,

    Huntman is correct -- these techniques are not a rip off, illegal (in most places), or immoral. They can be effective techniques and can make money for the investor. I was only pointing out that the reality of these techniques is quite different than they appear in seminars and bootcamps.

    Let's be clear about this "WIN-WIN" concept that is perpetuated by some of the gurus. IT IS NONSENSE! When you're buying someone's house for pennies on the dollar - THEY LOSE AND YOU WIN! The gurus spew that crap to make newbies feel better about buying their expensive courses that embrace these techniques.

    Life is not win-win. People screw up with regularity. When a homeowner (or investor) makes bad decisions and doesn't pay their bills, they will pay the price for their decisions. That may mean losing the equity that was in their house. When an investor decides to buy their house for pennies on the dollar, their decision results in making money (a good decision). Let's not confuse the truth with the guru babble.

    Mike

  • Real Estate Investor · OH · Member since 2008 · 4k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    19y

    Charles,

    There is nothing to be sorry for. It IS a crappy deal for the desperate seller and you may not want to do these preforeclosure deals for that reason. Preforeclosure deals also have a much better chance of turning into a lawsuit, when the previous owner decides that the buyer took advantage of them.

    Also, don't get too caught up in trying to "help" someone. The purpose of running a business is to make money, not be a social agency.

    Mike

  • Member since 2008 · 141 posts · 1 vote
    19y

    I always wonder why people get bent out of shape about "taking advantage" of other people. If I offer something, and you buy it, that's business. If the terms are not favorable, but you take them, that's your problem. If the house has been termite eaten, and I fix the visible damage to dupe you, then I'm an immoral bastard. I get a little bothered when I hear everybody talk about how businesses (and businessmen) "rob" people. Get over it. There are two things that have no place in business: dishonesty, and Socialism. (I made that up. Write it down, and send me a quarter.)

    Huntman, thanks for the great post. I'll try and use your advice to make some money, and then I'll put some change in the collection plate to make it easier to sleep at night! :shock:

  • Real Estate Consultant · CA · Member since 2008 · 46 posts · 1 vote
    19y

    Huntman...love your posts...keep them coming. It's great to see how an experienced investor can balance the goal of making money with integrity and honesty.

    I see so many investors who try to lie and cheat their way through a transaction, often times spinning it one way at the beginning of the deal and then changing the game towards the end when the homeowner in distress has no options left.

    I applaude your upfront approach!

  • Residential Real Estate Agent · Dayton, OH · Member since 2008 · 70 posts · 1 vote
    19y

    I assume in this scenario, you, the investor, do not get to deduct the interest for taxes, nor do you get to take depreciation, since you got the title subject-to. Is this correct? I assume the original owner still gets to deduct the interest.

    Kevin

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.