What A Pro Looks For In A *Residential* SubTo Purchase

Buying & Selling Real Estate
1yFollow

What A Pro Looks For In A *Residential* SubTo Purchase

Ken M.
Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes

This will be boring - I don't do anything "fancy" or "innovative" or "guru like" that is half baked false hoods.

The first thing I look for are people who want/need to sell quickly. They have already called a real estate agent to list on the MLS and when the agent comes over to take the listing, they tell the prospective seller that the dog poop in the living room has got to go.

The rot in the bathroom behind the toilet needs to be fixed. The broken kitchen sink needs to be replaced. The swastikas in the son's bedroom have to be painted over. The septic needs to be covered, the roof needs to be replaced, aluminum wiring needs to be upgraded from 60amps to 200amps with romex according to code. You get where I'm going.

I buy houses realtors won't/can't list. The people still need to sell, but no one in their right mind will buy it. Enter me.

Being terribly deranged in a nice way, and eternally optimistic, I make an offer. It's an offer, people, not a directive! I offer what the property is worth to me, because I am the one making the offer. If they want an MLS offer, they are free to make the repairs and list the property.

So, the SubTo part, I am very, very experienced. I am well capitalized. I do not borrow money for the EMD. I only buy if I can have equity right from the start. I never pay MLS list price. They haven't fixed the house up to MLS list price level, so why would I pay that price?

If they have a loan at a favorable rate, I give them additional money to take over the loan. They benefit based on the interest rate. If I don't have to put down a large payment on a new loan, it's worth giving them more. I also save on origination points, I save on interest rates. I pass on extra money to them. They like that.

My super duper, proprietary "Quick Calc Pro" spreadsheet tells me in minutes what price I can pay for the property, what my cash flow will be, what my entry fee is, how much I can wholesale or fix & flip it for, how much to give the seller, and a ton of other items that only someone deranged and experienced would care to know. And it works, for TX, AZ, CA, GA, FL, TN, OH and so on.

Yes, and it works for buying pre-foreclosures, too..

I always get a title report, I always disclose, I always use escrow, I always record, I never try to hide what I am doing, I don't use Trusts. There are legal reasons for all of these decisions. I use professionals when I need to.

I've had only two Due on Sale called in over 30 years. The first was in 2006. I have been sued, investigated, audited and commended by judges. I've won every time that an issue has arisen. I document, document, document. And I keep my deals clean.

Life is good when you are bullet proof. Just be fair and honest and follow the law. That's all I ask.

2Reply
107 views

Most Popular Reply

Steve Smith
Member since 2020 · 217 posts · 167 votes
1y

Ken,

Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

3Reply
See this reply in the discussion

32 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Kerry BairdPro Member
    Rental Property Investor · Melbourne, FL · Member since 2011 · 3k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    1y

    Yes!  This is a super boring, super amazing solving-people’s-problems path! 

    0Reply
  • Steve Smith
    Member since 2020 · 217 posts · 167 votes
    1y

    Ken,

    Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

    The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

    3Reply
  • Ken M.
    OP
    Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Steve Smith:

    Ken,

    Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

    The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

    .
    just for clarity. I never disclose to the lender. They are not required to be notified. All disclosures are to the seller, escrow, IRS, that kind of thing.

    In one lawsuit, the judge determined that the lender had constructive notice because I had recorded the warranty deed and was making payments from my business checking account. I had done nothing to hide the transfer of title. I won the case based on that.

    How has using a trust benefitted you?

    1Reply
    • Steve Smith
      Member since 2020 · 217 posts · 167 votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:

      Ken,

      Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

      The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

      .
      just for clarity. I never disclose to the lender. They are not required to be notified. All disclosures are to the seller, escrow, IRS, that kind of thing.

      In one lawsuit, the judge determined that the lender had constructive notice because I had recorded the warranty deed and was making payments from my business checking account. I had done nothing to hide the transfer of title. I won the case based on that.

      How has using a trust benefitted you?

      With a trust, no one know who owns the property. Thr trust could be in the name of the seller, and your entitty would be the trustee and beneficiary.
      0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:

      Ken,

      Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

      The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

      .
      just for clarity. I never disclose to the lender. They are not required to be notified. All disclosures are to the seller, escrow, IRS, that kind of thing.

      In one lawsuit, the judge determined that the lender had constructive notice because I had recorded the warranty deed and was making payments from my business checking account. I had done nothing to hide the transfer of title. I won the case based on that.

      How has using a trust benefitted you?

      With a trust, no one know who owns the property. Thr trust could be in the name of the seller, and your entitty would be the trustee and beneficiary.
      .
      I'm not sure I get the idea.

      If a lender sees that the person they have on record, the borrower, is not who is currently
      listed at the county as the owner, they can then look into who owns the property. That is very easy to do in today's world. In fact, a lender could do a mass cross reference of all their loans. They probably will do so in the right circumstances.

      They will send a letter to the borrower. If the borrower says it's their trust, the lender asks for proof. If the borrower legally and properly put it into a trust, it shouldn't be a problem. If the letter doesn't get responded to, they will call the note due and start a foreclosure.

      Lenders aren't stupid and they don't play games with their money. The property secures the loan. It's called "risk management". They do this all day long, have been to court many, many times. You haven't been, hopefully.

      If the borrower says that's not their trust or they sold the property or says they don't know who owns the trust, the lender can call the note due. Or, If it becomes a legal case, under the rules of discovery, the owner of the trust has to be revealed.

      If the buyer is successful in hiding his ownership, he won't get legal notices of lawsuits and bankruptcy and foreclosure and change of servicer. I would think those are pretty important notices to get. It affects ownership.

      Never trust a SubTo seller (subject to an existing mortgage) to "cover" for you in the future. There is no benefit for them to lie for you. They no longer own the property, are jealous of your benefitting from their pain and now have a debt hanging around that prevents them from buying another home.

      And, no, most borrowers won't transfer the deed back to the borrower to protect you. And if they do transfer the deed back, the smart ones know that you now no longer own the property. They now own it again, and you can't make them deed to back to you once the lender isn't looking.

      We're not even dealing with the issues of protected classes, emotional people, pre-foreclosures, elderly and minorities. Anyone that sees you've benefitted from "their property" believes they are owed that benefit. It does not matter that it is an irrational "feeling". Some attorney will take the case. 

      Explain attempting to get the property deeded back to you, after hiding ownership from a lender who has the property as security for a loan, to the judge. That would be a fun one to witness.

      At some point, if you do very many, you will wind in court on one of these. Just build the credibility, in advance, so the judge will side with you. Hiding ownership doesn't build credibility, and frankly, there isn't any plausible reason to hide ownership.
      0Reply
    • Steve Smith
      Member since 2020 · 217 posts · 167 votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:

      Ken,

      Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

      The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

      .
      just for clarity. I never disclose to the lender. They are not required to be notified. All disclosures are to the seller, escrow, IRS, that kind of thing.

      In one lawsuit, the judge determined that the lender had constructive notice because I had recorded the warranty deed and was making payments from my business checking account. I had done nothing to hide the transfer of title. I won the case based on that.

      How has using a trust benefitted you?

      With a trust, no one know who owns the property. Thr trust could be in the name of the seller, and your entitty would be the trustee and beneficiary.
      .
      I'm not sure I get the idea.

      If a lender sees that the person they have on record, the borrower, is not who is currently
      listed at the county as the owner, they can then look into who owns the property. That is very easy to do in today's world. In fact, a lender could do a mass cross reference of all their loans. They probably will do so in the right circumstances.

      They will send a letter to the borrower. If the borrower says it's their trust, the lender asks for proof. If the borrower legally and properly put it into a trust, it shouldn't be a problem. If the letter doesn't get responded to, they will call the note due and start a foreclosure.

      Lenders aren't stupid and they don't play games with their money. The property secures the loan. It's called "risk management". They do this all day long, have been to court many, many times. You haven't been, hopefully.

      If the borrower says that's not their trust or they sold the property or says they don't know who owns the trust, the lender can call the note due. Or, If it becomes a legal case, under the rules of discovery, the owner of the trust has to be revealed.

      If the buyer is successful in hiding his ownership, he won't get legal notices of lawsuits and bankruptcy and foreclosure and change of servicer. I would think those are pretty important notices to get. It affects ownership.

      Never trust a SubTo seller (subject to an existing mortgage) to "cover" for you in the future. There is no benefit for them to lie for you. They no longer own the property, are jealous of your benefitting from their pain and now have a debt hanging around that prevents them from buying another home.

      And, no, most borrowers won't transfer the deed back to the borrower to protect you. And if they do transfer the deed back, the smart ones know that you now no longer own the property. They now own it again, and you can't make them deed to back to you once the lender isn't looking.

      We're not even dealing with the issues of protected classes, emotional people, pre-foreclosures, elderly and minorities. Anyone that sees you've benefitted from "their property" believes they are owed that benefit. It does not matter that it is an irrational "feeling". Some attorney will take the case. 

      Explain attempting to get the property deeded back to you, after hiding ownership from a lender who has the property as security for a loan, to the judge. That would be a fun one to witness.
      .
      At some point, if you do very many, you will wind in court on one of these. Just build the credibility, in advance, so the judge will side with you. Hiding ownership doesn't build credibility, and frankly, there isn't any plausible reason to hide ownership.

      Learn more about "subject tos". Regardless of how you title it, YOU control the property, YOU (entity) also get a power of atty to manage, deal with the note, and do anything you want to with the property. You send notice to the bank of that, and get any notice or info from the bank re the mortgage.
      You also disclose everything to the seller so they know what you're doing and they agree to it. That's been done hundreds of times without ever having the bank call the note.

      Look up "subject to" on this site and I'd be surprised if there wasn't a few folks that teach it. 


      0Reply
    • Steve Smith
      Member since 2020 · 217 posts · 167 votes
      1y
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:

      Ken,

      Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

      The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

      .
      just for clarity. I never disclose to the lender. They are not required to be notified. All disclosures are to the seller, escrow, IRS, that kind of thing.

      In one lawsuit, the judge determined that the lender had constructive notice because I had recorded the warranty deed and was making payments from my business checking account. I had done nothing to hide the transfer of title. I won the case based on that.

      How has using a trust benefitted you?

      With a trust, no one know who owns the property. Thr trust could be in the name of the seller, and your entitty would be the trustee and beneficiary.
      .
      I'm not sure I get the idea.

      If a lender sees that the person they have on record, the borrower, is not who is currently
      listed at the county as the owner, they can then look into who owns the property. That is very easy to do in today's world. In fact, a lender could do a mass cross reference of all their loans. They probably will do so in the right circumstances.

      They will send a letter to the borrower. If the borrower says it's their trust, the lender asks for proof. If the borrower legally and properly put it into a trust, it shouldn't be a problem. If the letter doesn't get responded to, they will call the note due and start a foreclosure.

      Lenders aren't stupid and they don't play games with their money. The property secures the loan. It's called "risk management". They do this all day long, have been to court many, many times. You haven't been, hopefully.

      If the borrower says that's not their trust or they sold the property or says they don't know who owns the trust, the lender can call the note due. Or, If it becomes a legal case, under the rules of discovery, the owner of the trust has to be revealed.

      If the buyer is successful in hiding his ownership, he won't get legal notices of lawsuits and bankruptcy and foreclosure and change of servicer. I would think those are pretty important notices to get. It affects ownership.

      Never trust a SubTo seller (subject to an existing mortgage) to "cover" for you in the future. There is no benefit for them to lie for you. They no longer own the property, are jealous of your benefitting from their pain and now have a debt hanging around that prevents them from buying another home.

      And, no, most borrowers won't transfer the deed back to the borrower to protect you. And if they do transfer the deed back, the smart ones know that you now no longer own the property. They now own it again, and you can't make them deed to back to you once the lender isn't looking.

      We're not even dealing with the issues of protected classes, emotional people, pre-foreclosures, elderly and minorities. Anyone that sees you've benefitted from "their property" believes they are owed that benefit. It does not matter that it is an irrational "feeling". Some attorney will take the case. 

      Explain attempting to get the property deeded back to you, after hiding ownership from a lender who has the property as security for a loan, to the judge. That would be a fun one to witness.
      .
      At some point, if you do very many, you will wind in court on one of these. Just build the credibility, in advance, so the judge will side with you. Hiding ownership doesn't build credibility, and frankly, there isn't any plausible reason to hide ownership.

      Learn more about "subject tos". Regardless of how you title it, YOU control the property, YOU (entity) also get a power of atty to manage, deal with the note, and do anything you want to with the property. You send notice to the bank of that, and get any notice or info from the bank re the mortgage.
      You also disclose everything to the seller so they know what you're doing and they agree to it. That's been done hundreds of times without ever having the bank call the note.

      Look up "subject to" on this site and I'd be surprised if there wasn't a few folks that teach it. 



       And YES, lenders are stupid. They don't think, 'they do what their told to do. I've never had a note called, and never been to court with a sub to. And did plenty of them.

      0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:

      Ken,

      Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

      The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

      .
      just for clarity. I never disclose to the lender. They are not required to be notified. All disclosures are to the seller, escrow, IRS, that kind of thing.

      In one lawsuit, the judge determined that the lender had constructive notice because I had recorded the warranty deed and was making payments from my business checking account. I had done nothing to hide the transfer of title. I won the case based on that.

      How has using a trust benefitted you?

      With a trust, no one know who owns the property. Thr trust could be in the name of the seller, and your entitty would be the trustee and beneficiary.
      .
      I'm not sure I get the idea.

      If a lender sees that the person they have on record, the borrower, is not who is currently
      listed at the county as the owner, they can then look into who owns the property. That is very easy to do in today's world. In fact, a lender could do a mass cross reference of all their loans. They probably will do so in the right circumstances.

      They will send a letter to the borrower. If the borrower says it's their trust, the lender asks for proof. If the borrower legally and properly put it into a trust, it shouldn't be a problem. If the letter doesn't get responded to, they will call the note due and start a foreclosure.

      Lenders aren't stupid and they don't play games with their money. The property secures the loan. It's called "risk management". They do this all day long, have been to court many, many times. You haven't been, hopefully.

      If the borrower says that's not their trust or they sold the property or says they don't know who owns the trust, the lender can call the note due. Or, If it becomes a legal case, under the rules of discovery, the owner of the trust has to be revealed.

      If the buyer is successful in hiding his ownership, he won't get legal notices of lawsuits and bankruptcy and foreclosure and change of servicer. I would think those are pretty important notices to get. It affects ownership.

      Never trust a SubTo seller (subject to an existing mortgage) to "cover" for you in the future. There is no benefit for them to lie for you. They no longer own the property, are jealous of your benefitting from their pain and now have a debt hanging around that prevents them from buying another home.

      And, no, most borrowers won't transfer the deed back to the borrower to protect you. And if they do transfer the deed back, the smart ones know that you now no longer own the property. They now own it again, and you can't make them deed to back to you once the lender isn't looking.

      We're not even dealing with the issues of protected classes, emotional people, pre-foreclosures, elderly and minorities. Anyone that sees you've benefitted from "their property" believes they are owed that benefit. It does not matter that it is an irrational "feeling". Some attorney will take the case. 

      Explain attempting to get the property deeded back to you, after hiding ownership from a lender who has the property as security for a loan, to the judge. That would be a fun one to witness.
      .
      At some point, if you do very many, you will wind in court on one of these. Just build the credibility, in advance, so the judge will side with you. Hiding ownership doesn't build credibility, and frankly, there isn't any plausible reason to hide ownership.

      Learn more about "subject tos". Regardless of how you title it, YOU control the property, YOU (entity) also get a power of atty to manage, deal with the note, and do anything you want to with the property. You send notice to the bank of that, and get any notice or info from the bank re the mortgage.
      You also disclose everything to the seller so they know what you're doing and they agree to it. That's been done hundreds of times without ever having the bank call the note.

      Look up "subject to" on this site and I'd be surprised if there wasn't a few folks that teach it. 



       And YES, lenders are stupid. They don't think, 'they do what their told to do. I've never had a note called, and never been to court with a sub to. And did plenty of them.

      Oh, you say "And YES, lenders are stupid."
      please take a look at https://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/311/topics/1235215-pre-...
      0Reply
    • Steve Smith
      Member since 2020 · 217 posts · 167 votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve Smith:

      Ken,

      Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

      The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

      .
      just for clarity. I never disclose to the lender. They are not required to be notified. All disclosures are to the seller, escrow, IRS, that kind of thing.

      In one lawsuit, the judge determined that the lender had constructive notice because I had recorded the warranty deed and was making payments from my business checking account. I had done nothing to hide the transfer of title. I won the case based on that.

      How has using a trust benefitted you?

      With a trust, no one know who owns the property. Thr trust could be in the name of the seller, and your entitty would be the trustee and beneficiary.
      .
      I'm not sure I get the idea.

      If a lender sees that the person they have on record, the borrower, is not who is currently
      listed at the county as the owner, they can then look into who owns the property. That is very easy to do in today's world. In fact, a lender could do a mass cross reference of all their loans. They probably will do so in the right circumstances.

      They will send a letter to the borrower. If the borrower says it's their trust, the lender asks for proof. If the borrower legally and properly put it into a trust, it shouldn't be a problem. If the letter doesn't get responded to, they will call the note due and start a foreclosure.

      Lenders aren't stupid and they don't play games with their money. The property secures the loan. It's called "risk management". They do this all day long, have been to court many, many times. You haven't been, hopefully.

      If the borrower says that's not their trust or they sold the property or says they don't know who owns the trust, the lender can call the note due. Or, If it becomes a legal case, under the rules of discovery, the owner of the trust has to be revealed.

      If the buyer is successful in hiding his ownership, he won't get legal notices of lawsuits and bankruptcy and foreclosure and change of servicer. I would think those are pretty important notices to get. It affects ownership.

      Never trust a SubTo seller (subject to an existing mortgage) to "cover" for you in the future. There is no benefit for them to lie for you. They no longer own the property, are jealous of your benefitting from their pain and now have a debt hanging around that prevents them from buying another home.

      And, no, most borrowers won't transfer the deed back to the borrower to protect you. And if they do transfer the deed back, the smart ones know that you now no longer own the property. They now own it again, and you can't make them deed to back to you once the lender isn't looking.

      We're not even dealing with the issues of protected classes, emotional people, pre-foreclosures, elderly and minorities. Anyone that sees you've benefitted from "their property" believes they are owed that benefit. It does not matter that it is an irrational "feeling". Some attorney will take the case. 

      Explain attempting to get the property deeded back to you, after hiding ownership from a lender who has the property as security for a loan, to the judge. That would be a fun one to witness.
      .
      At some point, if you do very many, you will wind in court on one of these. Just build the credibility, in advance, so the judge will side with you. Hiding ownership doesn't build credibility, and frankly, there isn't any plausible reason to hide ownership.

      Learn more about "subject tos". Regardless of how you title it, YOU control the property, YOU (entity) also get a power of atty to manage, deal with the note, and do anything you want to with the property. You send notice to the bank of that, and get any notice or info from the bank re the mortgage.
      You also disclose everything to the seller so they know what you're doing and they agree to it. That's been done hundreds of times without ever having the bank call the note.

      Look up "subject to" on this site and I'd be surprised if there wasn't a few folks that teach it. 



       And YES, lenders are stupid. They don't think, 'they do what their told to do. I've never had a note called, and never been to court with a sub to. And did plenty of them.

      Oh, you say "And YES, lenders are stupid."
      please take a look at https://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/311/topics/1235215-pre-...

       Good point, but that lawsuit was brought by the Attorney General, not the lender, and it wasn't to call the note, it was for fraud. And with forecosures, that's not the way to do it. Keep it legal and low profile, it works. As for lenders, I stand my case.

      1Reply
  • Joe S.Pro Member
    Investor · San Antonio · Member since 2020 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    1y
    Quote from @Steve Smith:

    Ken,

    Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

    The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

    When you said all those loans have paid off, are you utilizing other methods than Sub2 at this time? It sounds like you’ve been investing for a while.
    0Reply
  • Steve Smith
    Member since 2020 · 217 posts · 167 votes
    1y
    Quote from @Joe S.:
    Quote from @Steve Smith:

    Ken,

    Very good posts and I could certainly argue your points. Document, document, disclose, etc, but only to the right people, not necessarily the lender. I don't wave a red flag in front of the lender daring them to call the note. But absolutely be very clear with the seller as to what you're doing. However, I've NEVER had a note called on any properties and the vast majority were "subject too" and/or owner financing. However, don't have any of those loans anymore (most paid off).

    The only thing I do that you don't, is use trusts, and love them and they have saved my bacon a number of times.

    When you said all those loans have paid off, are you utilizing other methods than Sub2 at this time? It sounds like you’ve been investing for a while.
    Yes, I've been in this for a bit. I'm not doing any Sub2 deals not, but would if I find something. Prefer seller financing which works a LOT better. I do need some debt. It's just fun going thru the negotiations. I've got stories that would be hard to believe on some of my seller financing deals, contract on a napkin, personal check for a notarized deed, hand shake deals, etc., etc. and a LOT of fun. Harder to do those deals in todays climate.
    2Reply
  • Jacob Thorpe
    Lender · Lake Geneva WI, USA · Member since 2023 · 141 posts · 72 votes
    1y
    Quote from @Ken M.:

    This will be boring - I don't do anything "fancy" or "innovative" or "guru like" that is half baked false hoods.

    The first thing I look for are people who want/need to sell quickly. They have already called a real estate agent to list on the MLS and when the agent comes over to take the listing, they tell the prospective seller that the dog poop in the living room has got to go.

    The rot in the bathroom behind the toilet needs to be fixed. The broken kitchen sink needs to be replaced. The swastikas in the son's bedroom have to be painted over. The septic needs to be covered, the roof needs to be replaced, aluminum wiring needs to be upgraded from 60amps to 200amps with romex according to code. You get where I'm going.

    I buy houses realtors won't/can't list. The people still need to sell, but no one in their right mind will buy it. Enter me.

    Being terribly deranged in a nice way, and eternally optimistic, I make an offer. It's an offer, people, not a directive! I offer what the property is worth to me, because I am the one making the offer. If they want an MLS offer, they are free to make the repairs and list the property.

    So, the SubTo part, I am very, very experienced. I am well capitalized. I do not borrow money for the EMD. I only buy if I can have equity right from the start. I never pay MLS list price. They haven't fixed the house up to MLS list price level, so why would I pay that price?

    If they have a loan at a favorable rate, I give them additional money to take over the loan. They benefit based on the interest rate. If I don't have to put down a large payment on a new loan, it's worth giving them more. I also save on origination points, I save on interest rates. I pass on extra money to them. They like that.

    My super duper, proprietary "Quick Calc Pro" spreadsheet tells me in minutes what price I can pay for the property, what my cash flow will be, what my entry fee is, how much I can wholesale or fix & flip it for, how much to give the seller, and a ton of other items that only someone deranged and experienced would care to know. And it works, for TX, AZ, CA, GA, FL, TN, OH and so on.

    Yes, and it works for buying pre-foreclosures, too..

    I always get a title report, I always disclose, I always use escrow, I always record, I never try to hide what I am doing, I don't use Trusts. There are legal reasons for all of these decisions. I use professionals when I need to.

    I've had only two Due on Sale called in over 30 years. The first was in 2006. I have been sued, investigated, audited and commended by judges. I've won every time that an issue has arisen. I document, document, document. And I keep my deals clean.

    Life is good when you are bullet proof. Just be fair and honest and follow the law. That's all I ask.


     It pays to be detail orientated, great approach

    0Reply
  • Paul Graves
    Real Estate Consultant · Columbus, OH · Member since 2020 · 9 posts · 10 votes
    1y

    How does one learn these things? Without paying 10,000 for a guru or something…. Great post thanks

    0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Paul Graves:

      How does one learn these things? Without paying 10,000 for a guru or something…. Great post thanks

      1) Time
      2) Practical Experience (Getting Up and Riding Again after dumping the bike at a corner)
      3) Mistakes
      4) More Time
      5) or pay someone "one on one" to avoid the mistakes and cut the time considerably

      There are books, youtube and Real Estate meet ups, where you will get most of the stuff you need. 

      0Reply
  • Matthew Adams
    Member since 2021 · 22 posts · 4 votes
    1y

    What do you mean by "disclose"?  I'm taking it to mean that you inform the lender that you're going to be making the payments and that the deed is being transferred to you.  Correct?

    1Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Matthew Adams:

      What do you mean by "disclose"?  I'm taking it to mean that you inform the lender that you're going to be making the payments and that the deed is being transferred to you.  Correct?

      .

      No, NOT the lender. They will simply call the loan due and/or foreclose.

      Disclose to the SELLER everything that affects them.
      Most sellers don't realize that the loan stays in their name, affects their credit and they can't do a thing about it if you miss payments, because they no longer own the property.

      Yes, they could make the payments, but why should they? They no longer own or benefit from the property. You've taken over he responsibility to make those payments. The punishment to you by the lender and by the prosecutor, can be pretty severe depending on the circumstances, if you stop making payments.

      There are various other disclosures you will need if you wind up in court. Our investors are given a two page disclosure document for the seller to sign.

      There are some things you can NOT include in a disclosure, because they no effect in law and only point out to the judge you have no clue of what you are doing. Those false and useless documents are abundant in "SubTo communities". When the doodoo hits the fan in the next 6 months to a year, this becomes very important.

      0Reply
  • Zach Howard
    Hong Kong · Member since 2024 · 161 posts · 57 votes
    1y

    @Ken M.

    Are you teaching subject 2? If yes, please tell me more about your program. I've learned a bit now, but I want to learn much more.

    0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Zach Howard:

      @Ken M.

      Are you teaching subject 2? If yes, please tell me more about your program. I've learned a bit now, but I want to learn much more.

      I do teach Subject To and WRAPS, but the investors have to be well funded (accredited investor), have a source of income, follow the rules, have reserves. Has to have good credit and be able to pay off the loan entirely in 30 days if the lender calls the note due. Must have a good book keeper, pay the mortgage on time, no criminal record. Must be able to talk to sellers.  There is a lot of focus on sales and identifying cash flowing properties. Understand that this is a problem solving technique not a primary tool. They learn all about deeds, purchase & sale agreements (contracts), notice of default, notice of trustee sales, lending, title & escrow, finding and paying off liens and priorities in recordings. How to avoid breaking the law And so on.

      You know, the typical stuff.
      0Reply
    • Zach Howard
      Hong Kong · Member since 2024 · 161 posts · 57 votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Zach Howard:

      @Ken M.

      Are you teaching subject 2? If yes, please tell me more about your program. I've learned a bit now, but I want to learn much more.

      I do teach Subject To and WRAPS, but the investors have to be well funded (accredited investor), have a source of income, follow the rules, have reserves. Has to have good credit and be able to pay off the loan entirely in 30 days if the lender calls the note due. Must have a good book keeper, pay the mortgage on time, no criminal record. Must be able to talk to sellers.  There is a lot of focus on sales and identifying cash flowing properties. Understand that this is a problem solving technique not a primary tool. They learn all about deeds, purchase & sale agreements (contracts), notice of default, notice of trustee sales, lending, title & escrow, finding and paying off liens and priorities in recordings. How to avoid breaking the law And so on.

      You know, the typical stuff.

       I am not an accredited investor yet, everything else is fine. I just want to learn everything that I can so that I have the right tools and options when the time comes. 

      0Reply
  • Cherie Tormey
    Investor · Denver, CO · Member since 2018 · 52 posts · 16 votes
    1y

    Love your success!  HATS off to you!  I would love to learn more.  

    How many hours on average does it take for you to find the deal plus your cost finding it if any?

    Thank you!

    0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Cherie Tormey:

      Love your success!  HATS off to you!  I would love to learn more.  

      How many hours on average does it take for you to find the deal plus your cost finding it if any?

      Thank you!

      I do things differently than you might imagine, so unless you do things the way I do them in the markets I buy, your results may be different.

      First I am looking for properties in metro areas, nothing rural. 3 bed 2 bath, 1,000 sqft to 2,800 sqft. It can be a fixer or ready to rent. Can't be near a high tension wire or a garbage dump or a main highway and so on. Must be in a neighborhood you or I can comfortably walk down the street in the evening and not be harassed. 

      I buy at 85% of ARV or less or I walk. Prices are going to be coming down and in some markets already have. I want to account for that. If the interest rate is 5% or higher, I walk. On a Subject To or a Wrap, it has to cash flow for me. I don't mind making repairs.

      The deal has to be fair to both the seller and me. I walk if they have too much equity. Because
      a) They deserve that equity and if I can't cash them out I can't afford it
      b) taking that equity is called "equity stripping" and it's illegal.
      c) Since I am getting a discount on price and a rockin' interest rate, I don't need excessive equity. Taking excessive equity is greedy and gets you sued or prosecuted.
      I stay away from foreclosures since they are the "third rail" to attorneys general.

      That's kind of my outline, is it hard and fast, yeah pretty hard and fast. I've had 6 deals I've walked away from in the last two months because the numbers just didn't work.

      The three properties I made offers on in the last month took about 3 months to generate and "mature" to offer stage, at least one, probably two will close and I've spent about $5,000 on marketing. I am always adding new prospective properties into my "pipeline". I work with half a dozen sellers at a time and most fizzle along the way, numbers don't work or seller changes their mind. Sometimes there are title issues.

      I show the seller the Redfin, Zillow and Realtor estimates and I give them a detail of what they would spend and get using the MLS. I am not an agent and I tell them so. But, it's a reasonable, experienced estimate based on comps.

      Of the three, the one will be $60,000 below market cost, the next probable one will only be $40,000 below and the third is about $76,000 below market. 

      These are actually being assigned to a couple of investors of mine who don't have the time nor the inclination to find their own properties. I get 1/3 of their savings. They are well funded and buy throughout the year.

      I keep excellent documentation and communication.

       This has been pretty consistent over the years. It was very slow during covid though. I work this full time. I don't have a "team" other than attorney, title co, escrow co, handyman, that kind of help. I do not have a real estate agent since they typically can't comprehend what I do ;-) I negotiate my own contracts. You will notice that I am very specific about the process, that is for a) it's a business and b) you have to have documentation of everything in the event you get audited (I have been or sued, I have been and won). Keep it clean and win.

      0Reply
  • Steve K.
    Realtor · Boulder, CO · Member since 2016 · 3k+ posts · 5k+ votes
    1y

    The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

    0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?
      0Reply
    • Steve K.
      Realtor · Boulder, CO · Member since 2016 · 3k+ posts · 5k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?

       Well yeah, if the house gets sold and they make more money with much less risk than they would by selling subto and giving up that equity and wrecking their debt to income ratio and potentially their credit or having the loan called due, then obviously that's a better deal for the seller even if they have to pay an agent. Commissions are also negotiable, it doesn't always have to be $24k for a $400k sale. A lot of times I'm able to connect a buyer and seller in a situation like this and save them on the commission. Just because somebody talked to one agent who couldn't help them doesn't mean they are stuck needing to sell subto. They should talk to more agents and find the right one. Many agents will already know a cash buyer and can put the deal together for a discount because they won't have any listing expenses, they just make a few phone calls.  

      0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?

       Well yeah, if the house gets sold and they make more money with much less risk than they would by selling subto and giving up that equity and wrecking their debt to income ratio and potentially their credit or having the loan called due, then obviously that's a better deal for the seller even if they have to pay an agent. Commissions are also negotiable, it doesn't always have to be $24k for a $400k sale. A lot of times I'm able to connect a buyer and seller in a situation like this and save them on the commission. Just because somebody talked to one agent who couldn't help them doesn't mean they are stuck needing to sell subto. They should talk to more agents and find the right one. Many agents will already know a cash buyer and can put the deal together for a discount because they won't have any listing expenses, they just make a few phone calls.  

       Your word "IF" is a very big word feller. "If the house gets sold". (by the agent)

      I'm not sure what the current expireds list is, but it's a long list and for a reason. Since sellers aren't robots, they get a choice in this matter. What a seller "should do" isn't ours to decide.

      It can be useful for a seller to use an investor to buy the property when:

      1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold" 

      2. Agent over promises on price 

      2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have.

      3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen) 

      4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing.

      5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low 

      6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature

      7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery 

      8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition,  No one will buy the property 

      9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there

      10. It's near a cemetery and no one will buy it except the residents in the cemetery 

      11. There is a dispute on a lot line 

      12. There is a lien to deal with 

      13. The seller is in bankruptcy 

      14. It's a painful probate with 5 disagreeable heirs.

      15. The seller is only days away from a foreclosure auction. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.

      17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium.

      There are lots of reasons using an agent won't work. Using Subject To is not always the answer, it's one of a swiss knife of choices an experienced investor brings to the party.

      0Reply
    • Steve K.
      Realtor · Boulder, CO · Member since 2016 · 3k+ posts · 5k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?

       Well yeah, if the house gets sold and they make more money with much less risk than they would by selling subto and giving up that equity and wrecking their debt to income ratio and potentially their credit or having the loan called due, then obviously that's a better deal for the seller even if they have to pay an agent. Commissions are also negotiable, it doesn't always have to be $24k for a $400k sale. A lot of times I'm able to connect a buyer and seller in a situation like this and save them on the commission. Just because somebody talked to one agent who couldn't help them doesn't mean they are stuck needing to sell subto. They should talk to more agents and find the right one. Many agents will already know a cash buyer and can put the deal together for a discount because they won't have any listing expenses, they just make a few phone calls.  

       Your word "IF" is a very big word feller. "If the house gets sold". (by the agent)

      I'm not sure what the current expireds list is, but it's a long list and for a reason. Since sellers aren't robots, they get a choice in this matter. What a seller "should do" isn't ours to decide.

      It can be useful for a seller to use an investor to buy the property when:

      1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold" 

      2. Agent over promises on price 

      2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have.

      3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen) 

      4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing.

      5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low 

      6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature

      7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery 

      8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition,  No one will buy the property 

      9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there

      10. It's near a cemetery and no one will buy it except the residents in the cemetery 

      11. There is a dispute on a lot line 

      12. There is a lien to deal with 

      13. The seller is in bankruptcy 

      14. It's a painful probate with 5 disagreeable heirs.

      15. The seller is only days away from a foreclosure auction. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.

      17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium.

      There are lots of reasons using an agent won't work. Using Subject To is not always the answer, it's one of a swiss knife of choices an experienced investor brings to the party.

      The reason there is a long expired listing list is almost entirely because those seller's picked an unreasonable price and refused to do price drops until it sold.

      "1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold"
      1. Seller should try a different agent or adjust the list price

      "2. Agent over promises on price "
      2. No agent wants to price a home too high and not sell it and get paid nothing. Why on earth would they do that? Makes no sense. It's always the seller insisting on an unreasonable list price in my experience, never the agent. Agent's typically like to list properties a little low so they get buyers attention and sell fast.  

      "2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have."
      2 #2 (your list has two #2's, so mine does too). This contradicts your statement that you always get just enough equity to make it worthwhile, but not too much. If that's the case that there is just the right amount of equity, then it can be sold on the open market.

      "3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen)" 
      3. I have never had an agent not call me back about a listing. Maybe it's you? If you mention sub to in the message, then it's definitely you. 

      "4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing."
      4. FHA and VA are so rare these days. I haven't seen one in several years and Trump is probably getting rid of the FHA and the VA soon anyway. This is a non-issue for 99.999% of listings. Most fixer-upper sales are going to be sold to cash buyers anyway and everybody knows that. 

      "5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low" 
      5. If the property doesn't appraise then there isn't equity at that sale price anyway so what would be the point of doing a sub to at that price? Doesn't make sense and contradicts your own statements. The buyer can come up with the appraisal gap, or negotiate the price.

      "6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature"
      6. If a seller prefers dealing with an "investor" making a sub to offer on their property over listing their property with an agent, then they both deserve each other ;). Nothing personal of course. 

      "7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery"
      7. There are almost always better options like a reverse mortgage (remember you said there is equity). 

      "8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition, No one will buy the property" 
      8. What actually happens in this scenario is that the lender does what's called force-place insurance. You can't have a mortgage without insurance. My insurance broker has also never failed in finding insurance coverage. If you have a seller with this problem, send them my way I will help them. 

      "9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there"
      9. Sounds like a deal my investor clients would love to pay cash for and close quickly! Also sounds like they should make an insurance claim or ask their lender for mortgage forebearance. Selling to someone via subto would probably just make their situation much worse. 

      10-15. I would never recommend anyone to buy a place subject to an existing mortgage in any of these situations. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.
      16. Cool have fun with that!  


      "17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium."

      17. You did not think this one through. Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium, not Biden. It was nationwide not just the sates that you called out. Does that mean Trump is a "stupid communist" in your opinion? 

      You wrote a lot but missed my main question: Why would anyone want to specialize in subject to and actually seek out these kinds of deals? Or even crazier, why would anyone pay somebody for training in this tiny, kinda shady market segment, when there are so many other better ways to make money in this business? You could just get licensed for a fraction of the cost of any of these sub to trainings and help 9.9 out of 10 people instead of .01 out of 10. I can see how sub to makes sense in very rare circumstances especially short-term and combined with another strategy like flipping, but I don't understand why anyone would specialize in this or take the time to become an expert and operate exclusively in this space, or want to hold a property purchased using subto longterm. I guess if you have a criminal record and can't get a real estate license then this is an option, along with wholesaling. But I don't see why it would be anyone's first choice as a way to make money in real estate.  

      0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?

       Well yeah, if the house gets sold and they make more money with much less risk than they would by selling subto and giving up that equity and wrecking their debt to income ratio and potentially their credit or having the loan called due, then obviously that's a better deal for the seller even if they have to pay an agent. Commissions are also negotiable, it doesn't always have to be $24k for a $400k sale. A lot of times I'm able to connect a buyer and seller in a situation like this and save them on the commission. Just because somebody talked to one agent who couldn't help them doesn't mean they are stuck needing to sell subto. They should talk to more agents and find the right one. Many agents will already know a cash buyer and can put the deal together for a discount because they won't have any listing expenses, they just make a few phone calls.  

       Your word "IF" is a very big word feller. "If the house gets sold". (by the agent)

      I'm not sure what the current expireds list is, but it's a long list and for a reason. Since sellers aren't robots, they get a choice in this matter. What a seller "should do" isn't ours to decide.

      It can be useful for a seller to use an investor to buy the property when:

      1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold" 

      2. Agent over promises on price 

      2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have.

      3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen) 

      4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing.

      5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low 

      6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature

      7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery 

      8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition,  No one will buy the property 

      9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there

      10. It's near a cemetery and no one will buy it except the residents in the cemetery 

      11. There is a dispute on a lot line 

      12. There is a lien to deal with 

      13. The seller is in bankruptcy 

      14. It's a painful probate with 5 disagreeable heirs.

      15. The seller is only days away from a foreclosure auction. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.

      17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium.

      There are lots of reasons using an agent won't work. Using Subject To is not always the answer, it's one of a swiss knife of choices an experienced investor brings to the party.

      The reason there is a long expired listing list is almost entirely because those seller's picked an unreasonable price and refused to do price drops until it sold.

      "1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold"
      1. Seller should try a different agent or adjust the list price

      "2. Agent over promises on price "
      2. No agent wants to price a home too high and not sell it and get paid nothing. Why on earth would they do that? Makes no sense. It's always the seller insisting on an unreasonable list price in my experience, never the agent. Agent's typically like to list properties a little low so they get buyers attention and sell fast.  

      "2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have."
      2 #2 (your list has two #2's, so mine does too). This contradicts your statement that you always get just enough equity to make it worthwhile, but not too much. If that's the case that there is just the right amount of equity, then it can be sold on the open market.

      "3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen)" 
      3. I have never had an agent not call me back about a listing. Maybe it's you? If you mention sub to in the message, then it's definitely you. 

      "4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing."
      4. FHA and VA are so rare these days. I haven't seen one in several years and Trump is probably getting rid of the FHA and the VA soon anyway. This is a non-issue for 99.999% of listings. Most fixer-upper sales are going to be sold to cash buyers anyway and everybody knows that. 

      "5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low" 
      5. If the property doesn't appraise then there isn't equity at that sale price anyway so what would be the point of doing a sub to at that price? Doesn't make sense and contradicts your own statements. The buyer can come up with the appraisal gap, or negotiate the price.

      "6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature"
      6. If a seller prefers dealing with an "investor" making a sub to offer on their property over listing their property with an agent, then they both deserve each other ;). Nothing personal of course. 

      "7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery"
      7. There are almost always better options like a reverse mortgage (remember you said there is equity). 

      "8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition, No one will buy the property" 
      8. What actually happens in this scenario is that the lender does what's called force-place insurance. You can't have a mortgage without insurance. My insurance broker has also never failed in finding insurance coverage. If you have a seller with this problem, send them my way I will help them. 

      "9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there"
      9. Sounds like a deal my investor clients would love to pay cash for and close quickly! Also sounds like they should make an insurance claim or ask their lender for mortgage forebearance. Selling to someone via subto would probably just make their situation much worse. 

      10-15. I would never recommend anyone to buy a place subject to an existing mortgage in any of these situations. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.
      16. Cool have fun with that!  


      "17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium."

      17. You did not think this one through. Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium, not Biden. It was nationwide not just the sates that you called out. Does that mean Trump is a "stupid communist" in your opinion? 

      You wrote a lot but missed my main question: Why would anyone want to specialize in subject to and actually seek out these kinds of deals? Or even crazier, why would anyone pay somebody for training in this tiny, kinda shady market segment, when there are so many other better ways to make money in this business? You could just get licensed for a fraction of the cost of any of these sub to trainings and help 9.9 out of 10 people instead of .01 out of 10. I can see how sub to makes sense in very rare circumstances especially short-term and combined with another strategy like flipping, but I don't understand why anyone would specialize in this or take the time to become an expert and operate exclusively in this space, or want to hold a property purchased using subto longterm. I guess if you have a criminal record and can't get a real estate license then this is an option, along with wholesaling. But I don't see why it would be anyone's first choice as a way to make money in real estate.  

      Your simply not understanding does make the reason invalid.

      Your solution for everything is to reduce the price,
      I was trained professionally and taught to add value instead.

      Your comment "Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium"

      I'd like to believe you, you seem like such a nice guy but I can't find anything like that. 

      There is a ton on evictions, none name Trump 

      All I can find is stuff like this



      Biden calls on Congress to extend eviction moratorium
      L.A. County adopts eviction moratorium
      Tsunami of evictions could be coming to Yolo Count
      COVID-19 eviction moratoriums in the United States - WikipediaAugust 7, 2024 - I
      LA city council voting on eviction moratorium


      Illinois extends eviction moratorium


      0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?

       Well yeah, if the house gets sold and they make more money with much less risk than they would by selling subto and giving up that equity and wrecking their debt to income ratio and potentially their credit or having the loan called due, then obviously that's a better deal for the seller even if they have to pay an agent. Commissions are also negotiable, it doesn't always have to be $24k for a $400k sale. A lot of times I'm able to connect a buyer and seller in a situation like this and save them on the commission. Just because somebody talked to one agent who couldn't help them doesn't mean they are stuck needing to sell subto. They should talk to more agents and find the right one. Many agents will already know a cash buyer and can put the deal together for a discount because they won't have any listing expenses, they just make a few phone calls.  

       Your word "IF" is a very big word feller. "If the house gets sold". (by the agent)

      I'm not sure what the current expireds list is, but it's a long list and for a reason. Since sellers aren't robots, they get a choice in this matter. What a seller "should do" isn't ours to decide.

      It can be useful for a seller to use an investor to buy the property when:

      1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold" 

      2. Agent over promises on price 

      2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have.

      3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen) 

      4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing.

      5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low 

      6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature

      7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery 

      8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition,  No one will buy the property 

      9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there

      10. It's near a cemetery and no one will buy it except the residents in the cemetery 

      11. There is a dispute on a lot line 

      12. There is a lien to deal with 

      13. The seller is in bankruptcy 

      14. It's a painful probate with 5 disagreeable heirs.

      15. The seller is only days away from a foreclosure auction. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.

      17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium.

      There are lots of reasons using an agent won't work. Using Subject To is not always the answer, it's one of a swiss knife of choices an experienced investor brings to the party.

      The reason there is a long expired listing list is almost entirely because those seller's picked an unreasonable price and refused to do price drops until it sold.

      "1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold"
      1. Seller should try a different agent or adjust the list price

      "2. Agent over promises on price "
      2. No agent wants to price a home too high and not sell it and get paid nothing. Why on earth would they do that? Makes no sense. It's always the seller insisting on an unreasonable list price in my experience, never the agent. Agent's typically like to list properties a little low so they get buyers attention and sell fast.  

      "2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have."
      2 #2 (your list has two #2's, so mine does too). This contradicts your statement that you always get just enough equity to make it worthwhile, but not too much. If that's the case that there is just the right amount of equity, then it can be sold on the open market.

      "3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen)" 
      3. I have never had an agent not call me back about a listing. Maybe it's you? If you mention sub to in the message, then it's definitely you. 

      "4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing."
      4. FHA and VA are so rare these days. I haven't seen one in several years and Trump is probably getting rid of the FHA and the VA soon anyway. This is a non-issue for 99.999% of listings. Most fixer-upper sales are going to be sold to cash buyers anyway and everybody knows that. 

      "5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low" 
      5. If the property doesn't appraise then there isn't equity at that sale price anyway so what would be the point of doing a sub to at that price? Doesn't make sense and contradicts your own statements. The buyer can come up with the appraisal gap, or negotiate the price.

      "6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature"
      6. If a seller prefers dealing with an "investor" making a sub to offer on their property over listing their property with an agent, then they both deserve each other ;). Nothing personal of course. 

      "7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery"
      7. There are almost always better options like a reverse mortgage (remember you said there is equity). 

      "8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition, No one will buy the property" 
      8. What actually happens in this scenario is that the lender does what's called force-place insurance. You can't have a mortgage without insurance. My insurance broker has also never failed in finding insurance coverage. If you have a seller with this problem, send them my way I will help them. 

      "9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there"
      9. Sounds like a deal my investor clients would love to pay cash for and close quickly! Also sounds like they should make an insurance claim or ask their lender for mortgage forebearance. Selling to someone via subto would probably just make their situation much worse. 

      10-15. I would never recommend anyone to buy a place subject to an existing mortgage in any of these situations. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.
      16. Cool have fun with that!  


      "17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium."

      17. You did not think this one through. Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium, not Biden. It was nationwide not just the sates that you called out. Does that mean Trump is a "stupid communist" in your opinion? 

      You wrote a lot but missed my main question: Why would anyone want to specialize in subject to and actually seek out these kinds of deals? Or even crazier, why would anyone pay somebody for training in this tiny, kinda shady market segment, when there are so many other better ways to make money in this business? You could just get licensed for a fraction of the cost of any of these sub to trainings and help 9.9 out of 10 people instead of .01 out of 10. I can see how sub to makes sense in very rare circumstances especially short-term and combined with another strategy like flipping, but I don't understand why anyone would specialize in this or take the time to become an expert and operate exclusively in this space, or want to hold a property purchased using subto longterm. I guess if you have a criminal record and can't get a real estate license then this is an option, along with wholesaling. But I don't see why it would be anyone's first choice as a way to make money in real estate.  

      Your simply not understanding does make the reason invalid.

      Your solution for everything is to reduce the price,
      I was trained professionally and taught to add value instead.

      Your comment "Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium"

      I'd like to believe you, you seem like such a nice guy but I can't find anything like that. 

      There is a ton on evictions, none name Trump 

      All I can find is stuff like this



      Biden calls on Congress to extend eviction moratorium
      L.A. County adopts eviction moratorium
      Tsunami of evictions could be coming to Yolo Count
      COVID-19 eviction moratoriums in the United States - WikipediaAugust 7, 2024 - I
      LA city council voting on eviction moratorium


      Illinois extends eviction moratorium



       I did find something insidious that Trump did:

      Banning ‘forced’ use of paper straws

      The order: Trump signed an executive order ending the “procurement and forced use of paper straws”

      Nasty! Now, is that worthy of the most powerful man in the world's time? I think not. He should be busy cleaning out the swamp, but not by using straws. Plastic straws work just fine, by the way.

      0Reply
    • Steve K.
      Realtor · Boulder, CO · Member since 2016 · 3k+ posts · 5k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?

       Well yeah, if the house gets sold and they make more money with much less risk than they would by selling subto and giving up that equity and wrecking their debt to income ratio and potentially their credit or having the loan called due, then obviously that's a better deal for the seller even if they have to pay an agent. Commissions are also negotiable, it doesn't always have to be $24k for a $400k sale. A lot of times I'm able to connect a buyer and seller in a situation like this and save them on the commission. Just because somebody talked to one agent who couldn't help them doesn't mean they are stuck needing to sell subto. They should talk to more agents and find the right one. Many agents will already know a cash buyer and can put the deal together for a discount because they won't have any listing expenses, they just make a few phone calls.  

       Your word "IF" is a very big word feller. "If the house gets sold". (by the agent)

      I'm not sure what the current expireds list is, but it's a long list and for a reason. Since sellers aren't robots, they get a choice in this matter. What a seller "should do" isn't ours to decide.

      It can be useful for a seller to use an investor to buy the property when:

      1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold" 

      2. Agent over promises on price 

      2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have.

      3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen) 

      4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing.

      5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low 

      6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature

      7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery 

      8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition,  No one will buy the property 

      9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there

      10. It's near a cemetery and no one will buy it except the residents in the cemetery 

      11. There is a dispute on a lot line 

      12. There is a lien to deal with 

      13. The seller is in bankruptcy 

      14. It's a painful probate with 5 disagreeable heirs.

      15. The seller is only days away from a foreclosure auction. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.

      17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium.

      There are lots of reasons using an agent won't work. Using Subject To is not always the answer, it's one of a swiss knife of choices an experienced investor brings to the party.

      The reason there is a long expired listing list is almost entirely because those seller's picked an unreasonable price and refused to do price drops until it sold.

      "1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold"
      1. Seller should try a different agent or adjust the list price

      "2. Agent over promises on price "
      2. No agent wants to price a home too high and not sell it and get paid nothing. Why on earth would they do that? Makes no sense. It's always the seller insisting on an unreasonable list price in my experience, never the agent. Agent's typically like to list properties a little low so they get buyers attention and sell fast.  

      "2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have."
      2 #2 (your list has two #2's, so mine does too). This contradicts your statement that you always get just enough equity to make it worthwhile, but not too much. If that's the case that there is just the right amount of equity, then it can be sold on the open market.

      "3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen)" 
      3. I have never had an agent not call me back about a listing. Maybe it's you? If you mention sub to in the message, then it's definitely you. 

      "4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing."
      4. FHA and VA are so rare these days. I haven't seen one in several years and Trump is probably getting rid of the FHA and the VA soon anyway. This is a non-issue for 99.999% of listings. Most fixer-upper sales are going to be sold to cash buyers anyway and everybody knows that. 

      "5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low" 
      5. If the property doesn't appraise then there isn't equity at that sale price anyway so what would be the point of doing a sub to at that price? Doesn't make sense and contradicts your own statements. The buyer can come up with the appraisal gap, or negotiate the price.

      "6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature"
      6. If a seller prefers dealing with an "investor" making a sub to offer on their property over listing their property with an agent, then they both deserve each other ;). Nothing personal of course. 

      "7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery"
      7. There are almost always better options like a reverse mortgage (remember you said there is equity). 

      "8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition, No one will buy the property" 
      8. What actually happens in this scenario is that the lender does what's called force-place insurance. You can't have a mortgage without insurance. My insurance broker has also never failed in finding insurance coverage. If you have a seller with this problem, send them my way I will help them. 

      "9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there"
      9. Sounds like a deal my investor clients would love to pay cash for and close quickly! Also sounds like they should make an insurance claim or ask their lender for mortgage forebearance. Selling to someone via subto would probably just make their situation much worse. 

      10-15. I would never recommend anyone to buy a place subject to an existing mortgage in any of these situations. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.
      16. Cool have fun with that!  


      "17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium."

      17. You did not think this one through. Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium, not Biden. It was nationwide not just the sates that you called out. Does that mean Trump is a "stupid communist" in your opinion? 

      You wrote a lot but missed my main question: Why would anyone want to specialize in subject to and actually seek out these kinds of deals? Or even crazier, why would anyone pay somebody for training in this tiny, kinda shady market segment, when there are so many other better ways to make money in this business? You could just get licensed for a fraction of the cost of any of these sub to trainings and help 9.9 out of 10 people instead of .01 out of 10. I can see how sub to makes sense in very rare circumstances especially short-term and combined with another strategy like flipping, but I don't understand why anyone would specialize in this or take the time to become an expert and operate exclusively in this space, or want to hold a property purchased using subto longterm. I guess if you have a criminal record and can't get a real estate license then this is an option, along with wholesaling. But I don't see why it would be anyone's first choice as a way to make money in real estate.  

      Your simply not understanding does make the reason invalid.

      Your solution for everything is to reduce the price,
      I was trained professionally and taught to add value instead.

      Your comment "Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium"

      I'd like to believe you, you seem like such a nice guy but I can't find anything like that. 

      There is a ton on evictions, none name Trump 

      All I can find is stuff like this



      Biden calls on Congress to extend eviction moratorium
      L.A. County adopts eviction moratorium
      Tsunami of evictions could be coming to Yolo Count
      COVID-19 eviction moratoriums in the United States - WikipediaAugust 7, 2024 - I
      LA city council voting on eviction moratorium


      Illinois extends eviction moratorium



      Seriously, you couldn't find anything on the Trump eviction moratorium? It took me less than 3 seconds to find, I literally just googled "Trump eviction moratorium" and dozens of articles popped up like this:

      "Trumps new eviction moratorium everything renters need to know" Fox Business

      https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/trumps-new-eviction-morato...

      and this:

      https://www.foxnews.com/video/6186812153001

      and this:

      https://www.caapts.org/news/trump-moratorium

      and this:

      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-order-prompts-cdc-to-...

      The eviction moratorium was started by an executive order by the president in September 2020, giving the CDC the go-ahead to ban evictions nationwide. You can ask google who was president in September 2020. Hint: it was not Biden. 

      "Adding value" and "professionally trained" aren't terms people typically associate with subto transactions, but I will take your word for it that you are that much better than 99.9% of subto people who are mostly bottom--feeders looking to take advantage of un-savvy sellers and rob them of their equity. I still wonder why anyone would choose that specific area of real estate to specialize in.

      0Reply
    • Ken M.
      OP
      Investor · Get yourself trained before doing something inadvisable. · Member since 2024 · 3k+ posts · 1k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?

       Well yeah, if the house gets sold and they make more money with much less risk than they would by selling subto and giving up that equity and wrecking their debt to income ratio and potentially their credit or having the loan called due, then obviously that's a better deal for the seller even if they have to pay an agent. Commissions are also negotiable, it doesn't always have to be $24k for a $400k sale. A lot of times I'm able to connect a buyer and seller in a situation like this and save them on the commission. Just because somebody talked to one agent who couldn't help them doesn't mean they are stuck needing to sell subto. They should talk to more agents and find the right one. Many agents will already know a cash buyer and can put the deal together for a discount because they won't have any listing expenses, they just make a few phone calls.  

       Your word "IF" is a very big word feller. "If the house gets sold". (by the agent)

      I'm not sure what the current expireds list is, but it's a long list and for a reason. Since sellers aren't robots, they get a choice in this matter. What a seller "should do" isn't ours to decide.

      It can be useful for a seller to use an investor to buy the property when:

      1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold" 

      2. Agent over promises on price 

      2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have.

      3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen) 

      4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing.

      5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low 

      6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature

      7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery 

      8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition,  No one will buy the property 

      9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there

      10. It's near a cemetery and no one will buy it except the residents in the cemetery 

      11. There is a dispute on a lot line 

      12. There is a lien to deal with 

      13. The seller is in bankruptcy 

      14. It's a painful probate with 5 disagreeable heirs.

      15. The seller is only days away from a foreclosure auction. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.

      17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium.

      There are lots of reasons using an agent won't work. Using Subject To is not always the answer, it's one of a swiss knife of choices an experienced investor brings to the party.

      The reason there is a long expired listing list is almost entirely because those seller's picked an unreasonable price and refused to do price drops until it sold.

      "1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold"
      1. Seller should try a different agent or adjust the list price

      "2. Agent over promises on price "
      2. No agent wants to price a home too high and not sell it and get paid nothing. Why on earth would they do that? Makes no sense. It's always the seller insisting on an unreasonable list price in my experience, never the agent. Agent's typically like to list properties a little low so they get buyers attention and sell fast.  

      "2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have."
      2 #2 (your list has two #2's, so mine does too). This contradicts your statement that you always get just enough equity to make it worthwhile, but not too much. If that's the case that there is just the right amount of equity, then it can be sold on the open market.

      "3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen)" 
      3. I have never had an agent not call me back about a listing. Maybe it's you? If you mention sub to in the message, then it's definitely you. 

      "4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing."
      4. FHA and VA are so rare these days. I haven't seen one in several years and Trump is probably getting rid of the FHA and the VA soon anyway. This is a non-issue for 99.999% of listings. Most fixer-upper sales are going to be sold to cash buyers anyway and everybody knows that. 

      "5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low" 
      5. If the property doesn't appraise then there isn't equity at that sale price anyway so what would be the point of doing a sub to at that price? Doesn't make sense and contradicts your own statements. The buyer can come up with the appraisal gap, or negotiate the price.

      "6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature"
      6. If a seller prefers dealing with an "investor" making a sub to offer on their property over listing their property with an agent, then they both deserve each other ;). Nothing personal of course. 

      "7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery"
      7. There are almost always better options like a reverse mortgage (remember you said there is equity). 

      "8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition, No one will buy the property" 
      8. What actually happens in this scenario is that the lender does what's called force-place insurance. You can't have a mortgage without insurance. My insurance broker has also never failed in finding insurance coverage. If you have a seller with this problem, send them my way I will help them. 

      "9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there"
      9. Sounds like a deal my investor clients would love to pay cash for and close quickly! Also sounds like they should make an insurance claim or ask their lender for mortgage forebearance. Selling to someone via subto would probably just make their situation much worse. 

      10-15. I would never recommend anyone to buy a place subject to an existing mortgage in any of these situations. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.
      16. Cool have fun with that!  


      "17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium."

      17. You did not think this one through. Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium, not Biden. It was nationwide not just the sates that you called out. Does that mean Trump is a "stupid communist" in your opinion? 

      You wrote a lot but missed my main question: Why would anyone want to specialize in subject to and actually seek out these kinds of deals? Or even crazier, why would anyone pay somebody for training in this tiny, kinda shady market segment, when there are so many other better ways to make money in this business? You could just get licensed for a fraction of the cost of any of these sub to trainings and help 9.9 out of 10 people instead of .01 out of 10. I can see how sub to makes sense in very rare circumstances especially short-term and combined with another strategy like flipping, but I don't understand why anyone would specialize in this or take the time to become an expert and operate exclusively in this space, or want to hold a property purchased using subto longterm. I guess if you have a criminal record and can't get a real estate license then this is an option, along with wholesaling. But I don't see why it would be anyone's first choice as a way to make money in real estate.  

      Your simply not understanding does make the reason invalid.

      Your solution for everything is to reduce the price,
      I was trained professionally and taught to add value instead.

      Your comment "Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium"

      I'd like to believe you, you seem like such a nice guy but I can't find anything like that. 

      There is a ton on evictions, none name Trump 

      All I can find is stuff like this



      Biden calls on Congress to extend eviction moratorium
      L.A. County adopts eviction moratorium
      Tsunami of evictions could be coming to Yolo Count
      COVID-19 eviction moratoriums in the United States - WikipediaAugust 7, 2024 - I
      LA city council voting on eviction moratorium


      Illinois extends eviction moratorium



      Seriously, you couldn't find anything on the Trump eviction moratorium? It took me less than 3 seconds to find, I literally just googled "Trump eviction moratorium" and dozens of articles popped up like this:

      "Trumps new eviction moratorium everything renters need to know" Fox Business

      https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/trumps-new-eviction-morato...

      and this:

      https://www.foxnews.com/video/6186812153001

      and this:

      https://www.caapts.org/news/trump-moratorium

      and this:

      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-order-prompts-cdc-to-...

      The eviction moratorium was started by an executive order by the president in September 2020, giving the CDC the go-ahead to ban evictions nationwide. You can ask google who was president in September 2020. Hint: it was not Biden. 

      "Adding value" and "professionally trained" aren't terms people typically associate with subto transactions, but I will take your word for it that you are that much better than 99.9% of subto people who are mostly bottom--feeders looking to take advantage of un-savvy sellers and rob them of their equity. I still wonder why anyone would choose that specific area of real estate to specialize in.

      Thanks 5 years ago, eh
      Personal Finance Published September 3, 2020 2:58pm EDT

      When we didn't know that Covid 19 was was a fake pandemic. (More people died from the Covid shot than from the Covid 19)  check out below to see what damage the Covid 19 shot has done and is still ongoing.


      VAERS Logo

      https://vaers.hhs.gov/

      Yeah, that was a big mistake on Trump's part.

      It is the kind of mistake people make when "experts" who knew fully well that 1.) They were manipulating the Data 2.) That the number of Covid 19 cases skyrocketed while flu dropped to zero (they have the same symptoms and diagnosis - so flu cases were reported as Covid because the Covid diagnosis paid more from insurance claims 3.) Ivermectin and Fenbendazole treat Covid better than the other treatments but cost only $20 so, a fraction of the pharmaceutical costs. Hospitals went with the others drugs because they got much higher reimbursements from the government. 

      Anyway. Trump made the big mistake of trusting the "experts", who rely on the pharmaceutical industry. 


      The eviction moratorium should have ended after 6 months and here we, are 5 years of Biden later dealing with both an evcition moratorium and a foreclosure moratorium. When it crashes, it will crash hard.

      How does that make any sense at all?

      0Reply
    • Steve K.
      Realtor · Boulder, CO · Member since 2016 · 3k+ posts · 5k+ votes
      1y
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:
      Quote from @Ken M.:
      Quote from @Steve K.:

      The only issue I see is that there is no such thing as a house that won't sell on the MLS. Properties that need a lot of work sell on the MLS all the time, even tear downs. The highest price is always going to come from exposing the property to the maximum number of potential buyers. The way to do that is on the MLS. You admit this by saying that you always capture equity, but not too much equity. If you're capturing equity, that means the seller could make more by selling to someone else (on the MLS/ with an agent on the open market). You're walking a very fine line between doing good business and equity-skimming IMO because it's subjective. One persons correct amount of equity could be seen as equity skimming by someone else, like a seller or their heirs or a judge or a jury. There are so many other ways to make better money in this industry, with less risk and less ick. Sorry but it just seems like bottom feeding to me. Why not just get licensed and do business on the up and up?

      That is very lazy thinking. A real estate agent makes $24,000 for listing a $400,000 house. And sits. Do you think that is value?

       Well yeah, if the house gets sold and they make more money with much less risk than they would by selling subto and giving up that equity and wrecking their debt to income ratio and potentially their credit or having the loan called due, then obviously that's a better deal for the seller even if they have to pay an agent. Commissions are also negotiable, it doesn't always have to be $24k for a $400k sale. A lot of times I'm able to connect a buyer and seller in a situation like this and save them on the commission. Just because somebody talked to one agent who couldn't help them doesn't mean they are stuck needing to sell subto. They should talk to more agents and find the right one. Many agents will already know a cash buyer and can put the deal together for a discount because they won't have any listing expenses, they just make a few phone calls.  

       Your word "IF" is a very big word feller. "If the house gets sold". (by the agent)

      I'm not sure what the current expireds list is, but it's a long list and for a reason. Since sellers aren't robots, they get a choice in this matter. What a seller "should do" isn't ours to decide.

      It can be useful for a seller to use an investor to buy the property when:

      1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold" 

      2. Agent over promises on price 

      2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have.

      3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen) 

      4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing.

      5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low 

      6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature

      7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery 

      8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition,  No one will buy the property 

      9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there

      10. It's near a cemetery and no one will buy it except the residents in the cemetery 

      11. There is a dispute on a lot line 

      12. There is a lien to deal with 

      13. The seller is in bankruptcy 

      14. It's a painful probate with 5 disagreeable heirs.

      15. The seller is only days away from a foreclosure auction. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.

      17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium.

      There are lots of reasons using an agent won't work. Using Subject To is not always the answer, it's one of a swiss knife of choices an experienced investor brings to the party.

      The reason there is a long expired listing list is almost entirely because those seller's picked an unreasonable price and refused to do price drops until it sold.

      "1. The agent tries but can't "get it sold"
      1. Seller should try a different agent or adjust the list price

      "2. Agent over promises on price "
      2. No agent wants to price a home too high and not sell it and get paid nothing. Why on earth would they do that? Makes no sense. It's always the seller insisting on an unreasonable list price in my experience, never the agent. Agent's typically like to list properties a little low so they get buyers attention and sell fast.  

      "2. There isn't enough equity for a seller to sell without bringing money to escrow, that they don't have."
      2 #2 (your list has two #2's, so mine does too). This contradicts your statement that you always get just enough equity to make it worthwhile, but not too much. If that's the case that there is just the right amount of equity, then it can be sold on the open market.

      "3. Agent Doesn't return prospective buyers phone calls (oh, yeah, that does happen)" 
      3. I have never had an agent not call me back about a listing. Maybe it's you? If you mention sub to in the message, then it's definitely you. 

      "4.The beat up house that you list on the MLS doesn't qualify for lending from (FHA, VA etc reject it) New buyers can't get financing."
      4. FHA and VA are so rare these days. I haven't seen one in several years and Trump is probably getting rid of the FHA and the VA soon anyway. This is a non-issue for 99.999% of listings. Most fixer-upper sales are going to be sold to cash buyers anyway and everybody knows that. 

      "5. There is an offer but the appraisal comes in way low" 
      5. If the property doesn't appraise then there isn't equity at that sale price anyway so what would be the point of doing a sub to at that price? Doesn't make sense and contradicts your own statements. The buyer can come up with the appraisal gap, or negotiate the price.

      "6. The Seller can't stand real estate agents (there are reasons this is actually true) Nothing personal here Steve, it's just a fact of human nature"
      6. If a seller prefers dealing with an "investor" making a sub to offer on their property over listing their property with an agent, then they both deserve each other ;). Nothing personal of course. 

      "7. The seller needs money today for grandma's gout surgery"
      7. There are almost always better options like a reverse mortgage (remember you said there is equity). 

      "8. They lost insurance because of a bad roof and a buyer can't get insurance in it's present condition, No one will buy the property" 
      8. What actually happens in this scenario is that the lender does what's called force-place insurance. You can't have a mortgage without insurance. My insurance broker has also never failed in finding insurance coverage. If you have a seller with this problem, send them my way I will help them. 

      "9. It's a crack house . . . that had a fire . . . that the copper wires were stripped . . . and now squatters live there"
      9. Sounds like a deal my investor clients would love to pay cash for and close quickly! Also sounds like they should make an insurance claim or ask their lender for mortgage forebearance. Selling to someone via subto would probably just make their situation much worse. 

      10-15. I would never recommend anyone to buy a place subject to an existing mortgage in any of these situations. 

      16. The seller or the seller's neighbor, take your pick, is an irritable butthead with a gun, that sane agents can't/won't deal with.
      16. Cool have fun with that!  


      "17. The property is in CA or CO or WA or NY or some other stupid communist Biden supporter place that has an eviction moratorium. But the investor is a masochist for pain so he will buy it anyway. Normal people don't buy non-paying properties with an eviction moratorium."

      17. You did not think this one through. Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium, not Biden. It was nationwide not just the sates that you called out. Does that mean Trump is a "stupid communist" in your opinion? 

      You wrote a lot but missed my main question: Why would anyone want to specialize in subject to and actually seek out these kinds of deals? Or even crazier, why would anyone pay somebody for training in this tiny, kinda shady market segment, when there are so many other better ways to make money in this business? You could just get licensed for a fraction of the cost of any of these sub to trainings and help 9.9 out of 10 people instead of .01 out of 10. I can see how sub to makes sense in very rare circumstances especially short-term and combined with another strategy like flipping, but I don't understand why anyone would specialize in this or take the time to become an expert and operate exclusively in this space, or want to hold a property purchased using subto longterm. I guess if you have a criminal record and can't get a real estate license then this is an option, along with wholesaling. But I don't see why it would be anyone's first choice as a way to make money in real estate.  

      Your simply not understanding does make the reason invalid.

      Your solution for everything is to reduce the price,
      I was trained professionally and taught to add value instead.

      Your comment "Trump actually signed the executive order that created the eviction moratorium"

      I'd like to believe you, you seem like such a nice guy but I can't find anything like that. 

      There is a ton on evictions, none name Trump 

      All I can find is stuff like this



      Biden calls on Congress to extend eviction moratorium
      L.A. County adopts eviction moratorium
      Tsunami of evictions could be coming to Yolo Count
      COVID-19 eviction moratoriums in the United States - WikipediaAugust 7, 2024 - I
      LA city council voting on eviction moratorium


      Illinois extends eviction moratorium



      Seriously, you couldn't find anything on the Trump eviction moratorium? It took me less than 3 seconds to find, I literally just googled "Trump eviction moratorium" and dozens of articles popped up like this:

      "Trumps new eviction moratorium everything renters need to know" Fox Business

      https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/trumps-new-eviction-morato...

      and this:

      https://www.foxnews.com/video/6186812153001

      and this:

      https://www.caapts.org/news/trump-moratorium

      and this:

      https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-order-prompts-cdc-to-...

      The eviction moratorium was started by an executive order by the president in September 2020, giving the CDC the go-ahead to ban evictions nationwide. You can ask google who was president in September 2020. Hint: it was not Biden. 

      "Adding value" and "professionally trained" aren't terms people typically associate with subto transactions, but I will take your word for it that you are that much better than 99.9% of subto people who are mostly bottom--feeders looking to take advantage of un-savvy sellers and rob them of their equity. I still wonder why anyone would choose that specific area of real estate to specialize in.

      Thanks 5 years ago, eh
      Personal Finance Published September 3, 2020 2:58pm EDT

      When we didn't know that Covid 19 was was a fake pandemic. (More people died from the Covid shot than from the Covid 19)  check out below to see what damage the Covid 19 shot has done and is still ongoing.


      VAERS Logo

      https://vaers.hhs.gov/

      Yeah, that was a big mistake on Trump's part.

      It is the kind of mistake people make when "experts" who knew fully well that 1.) They were manipulating the Data 2.) That the number of Covid 19 cases skyrocketed while flu dropped to zero (they have the same symptoms and diagnosis - so flu cases were reported as Covid because the Covid diagnosis paid more from insurance claims 3.) Ivermectin and Fenbendazole treat Covid better than the other treatments but cost only $20 so, a fraction of the pharmaceutical costs. Hospitals went with the others drugs because they got much higher reimbursements from the government. 

      Anyway. Trump made the big mistake of trusting the "experts", who rely on the pharmaceutical industry. 


      The eviction moratorium should have ended after 6 months and here we, are 5 years of Biden later dealing with both an evcition moratorium and a foreclosure moratorium. When it crashes, it will crash hard.

      How does that make any sense at all?

      This is what I get when I click on your link:

      "This website is being modified to comply with President Trump's Executive Orders"

      I couldn't find any supporting evidence of people dying from covid vaccines there, and all of the links to videos on the site have been removed:

      The fake news about vaccines causing excess deaths has been widely debunked:

      https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/study-does-not-say-covid-...

      "VERDICT

      False. The study offers no evidence of an ongoing rise in excess deaths following the COVID-19 pandemic or of a causal link between COVID vaccines and excess deaths.This article was produced by the Fact Check team."

      This is so off the rails that I can't believe I'm even having to address this statement, but if more people had died from the covid vaccine than from covid itself, wouldn't we all know a few people who died from the vaccine? I know quite a few people who died from covid and not a single person who died from the vaccine. I think the numbers are more like a very, very small number of people died from the vaccine and millions died from covid. 

      You didn't answer my question as to why anyone would spend time or money becoming an expert in Subject To when the market demand for it is so minuscule, but your reply did help me answer that question for myself, so thank you.

      I'm going back to not paying any attention to subto now. If I ever come across the extremely rare scenario where buying or selling via subto is the best solution, I'll hit you up for advice as you are clearly the expert (I mean that sincerely btw, not being snarky, I do appreciate you fact-checking the other subto people on here and you seem to know subto better than anyone). Good luck with your endeavors!  

      0Reply
  • Matthew Adams
    Member since 2021 · 22 posts · 4 votes
    7mo

    Can you share a link to the spreadsheet you created if it's a Google or Office sheet?

    0Reply
Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.
Log InJoin for Free