30 year mortgage where I don’t have to stay a year in the house

11 Replies

After using Wells Fargo for my last two properties that I’ve successfully sold for a profit, using conventional loans, it is taken me almost a week to get from the same person I’ve been talking to for the last two houses to tell me that yes, in the security vehicle a.k.a. the mortgage there is indeed one line that says that I intend to occupy the house for one year.

 After using Wells Fargo for my last two properties that I’ve successfully sold for a profit, using conventional loans, it has taken me almost a week , to get from the same person I’ve been talking to for the last two houses,  to tell me that yes, in the security vehicle , a.k.a. the mortgage , there is indeed one line that says “that I intend to occupy the house for one year.”

A whole week!

 He seems to think there’s no creative way for Wells Fargo  to eliminate That particular line perhaps in favor of me giving an extra couple of percentage points when I sell the property for a profit.…… I kind of understand that… So my question for this form is

 That particular line perhaps in favor of me giving an extra couple of percentage points when I sell the property for a profit.…… I kind of understand that… So my question for this form is

Does anybody know a 30 year mortgage out there that is not FHA or anything to do with the government, that allows me to buy live in as my primary residence fix up and leave and sell before one year? Or, does anybody know any bank that would be more flexible than Wells Fargo in terms of giving this kind of loan. As I intend to bring A trusted lender with me for future purchases it would almost be like the bank making a continuous stream of income in away.

 A trusted lender with me for future purchases it would almost be like the bank making a continuous stream of income in away.

Any thoughts ideas advice? The Hardmoney lender route seems a little bit too, I don’t know risky?

The Hardmoney lender route seems a little bit too, I don’t know.... risky?

Thanks for any input you guys have for me.

A regular conventional loan for an investment property doesn't require you to live in the house for a year.

FHA requires that you must owner-occupy the property but not regular conventional investment loans.

They will typically require 20% down though so if you're looking for 3.5% you won't find that if non-owner-occupied.

Sorry for the doubling up with my email, must’ve hit the wrong button somewhere!!

 Sorry for doubling up with my email, must’ve hit the wrong button somewhere!!

So if I understand what you’re saying, there are 30 year conventional type loans that I could get from Wells Fargo, for example, where I could say I am buying an investment property? I believe I’m just butting my head up against a brick wall all the time. 

One – I do not have another home

Two– I want to live in the investment property for less than a year

Three- I would like a 30 year loan to lessen my monthly payments. Do not mind making more payments or points Upon the sale of this next property to help out the bank!!

 Do you think there are any loans out there for me like that? 

Wow this was hard to follow. Buy an investment property with conventional financing and don’t live in it. Tons of banks will do this, maybe just not Wells Fargo

I’ve actually done a loan with Wells that was for an investment property.
20% down, rate was about 1% higher since it was an investment and not a primary residence. Just as easy as any other mortgage.

Talk to someone else. All banks do this, and as long as you don’t have something odd going on with your finances, any bank can die a conventional (Freddie/Fannie) loan for an investment.

Are you doing buy and hold or fix and flip?  Investor loans with 30 year fixed rates and no occupancy requirements are readily available.  But those are intended for properties you want to hold.  It sounds like you're doing fix and flips.  This is not the right sort of loan for a fix and flip.  The people making these loans get paid based on the assumption the loan will be in place for some years.  If you pay off the loan quickly, as in a fix and flip, the loan originator may get penalized for the early pay off.  You may pull this off once or twice with a lender, but you'll burn bridges.  I suspect that may be the cause of the delay in getting back to you.

Further, if you're getting a loan that does have an occupancy requirement (i.e. an owner occupied loan) that you have no intention of occupying you're committing loan fraud.  You may get a better rate, but its not worth the risk, IMHO.

For fix and flips you need to use hard money, a construction loan, or a line of credit of some sort.

thanks all

Sorry about the hard to follow bit.. my frustration is all over my post I guess!!

No, simply hoping that since a regular 30 year loan will allow you to live in a house for a year and then flip it or whatever ( primary home) why not a loan that will allow you to live in for less than a year.. hm loans are only for non occupied.. sigh..... I guess I’ll be looking at another year in my next house then .... no biggee..

Thanks for all your input!!

I would use a mortgage broker instead of a single bank. They will explain your different options considering your exact situation and then tell you the best rates with different banks.

There is not any reason to limit yourself to Wells Fargo and conventional loans do not require you to live there.

lol .... it is even getting painful for ME to read!!!!

 To Amy Beth. My guy at Wells Fargo confirmed to me, after reading one of his contracts, that there is indeed one sentence in there that requires me to live in the property, or otherwise have the property as my primary Residence, for at least one year.……… The whole reason for my quandary and my posting here on bigger pockets.