Wholesaling - Is It About to Change?

Wholesaling - Is It About to Change?

Real Estate Agent · Geneva, IL · Member since 2015 · 403 posts · 172 votes

The Real Estate License Act (RELA) of 2000 is about to sunset. Check out the changes they are making to the RELA regarding wholesaling. How do you think this will affect things? 

Excerpt is taken from the article posted by Illinois Realtors

Title: SB 1872 or Real Estate License Act of 2000 - Explained (full link at bottom of post)

As you may already be aware, the Illinois Real Estate License Act of 2000 (RELA or the Act) was due to “sunset” at the end of 2019.

This is a regular “thing” for licensing laws, and knowing this was on the horizon Illinois REALTORS®set to work organizing a task force to study, consider and recommend changes for a rewrite of RELA.

Accordingly, the Illinois REALTORS® task forces were focused on consumer protection from the start. In addition, IDFPR has a mission of consumer protection together with establishing the standards for professional real estate licensees in Illinois.

  • With regard to business practices, in Section 1-10, the definition of “broker” has been amended to include the practice of “wholesaling” if done as a business model. Generally, “wholesaling” involves the practice of entering contracts to purchase property, then quickly assigning that contract to another buyer for a profit. When done as a business practice, “wholesaling” will now come under RELA’s enforcement provisions and the wholesaler will need a real estate broker’s license, as well as be subject to consumer protection provisions such as disclosure of self-interest and prohibition against dual agency.

Full Link: https://www.illinoisrealtors.org/blog/sb-1872-or-real-estate-license-act-of-2000-explained/?fbclid=IwAR34h8ys5z-ea3ks6ufLTwSPNNos-XAR1unslWPbcLlGQQ7tSnpCmxSw24M#consumer



6Reply
589 views

Most Popular Reply

Contractor · Jacksonville, FL · Member since 2017 · 1k+ posts · 2k+ votes
7y

@Patrice Boenzi

Because wholesalers are hustlers by nature. And by virtue of this they always find a way to make it happen. Maybe they come up with another name for what they are doing or find a different angle but I'm sure it will continue. Wholesaling is a billion dollar industry across America. The economy needs it, whether or not anybody likes it is a different story.

** Please note I am not a wholesaler but I am a realist and this is how society works.

See this reply in the discussion

197 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2019 · 33 posts · 15 votes
    7y

    @Nicky Reader couldn't of said that better. The good ones will find a way to be legitimate and keep business and the rest of the wholesaler hacks will off. It's what our industry needs and hopefully yes, NAR cracks down on this part of the industry as a whole and it plays in all states here soon.

  • Wholesaler/Investor · Dallas, TX · Member since 2018 · 260 posts · 222 votes
    7y

    I am not going to comment on the bill or what the state of Illinois thinks it's going to stop, by writing this into law. Instead I will point out some actual facts that should have been considered, prior to wasting taxpayer resources. 

    I won't pretend to know the motivation behind the state's desire to draft this bill, because I was never invited to the discussion. I will simply go on a limb and say that one of those factors, was probably this gross misconception that we steal equity, and I would guess that it's this 50% number that has the "ouch" factor. 

    It would be my guess that the wholesaling industry makes up less than half of 1% of the overall market, or worse. That alone should have been enough to make anyone realize that this law is going to have zero effect, overall. However, it's easy to say that the investor industry out numbers wholesalers, by a bunch. Would 100x, 1000x or more, be reasonable? 

    Now I would suspect that those agents/brokers and investors themselves, that are quick to put a wholesaler on blast for their thievery, utilize the very popular 70% rule when it comes to evaluating a property. This of course means that according to that rule, you should never offer more than 70% of its value. Now I have no idea who came up with this rule, but I feel comfortable in saying that it was NOT a wholesaler. So let's see what that looks like, in real numbers. 

    Little bit of a test here.

    Subject Property
    3/2 1800 sq ft. ARV 200K
    Needs the following:  HVAC system replaced and updating of kitchen/baths, paint and floors. No other mechanicals are needed. 

    Let's start:
    200K ARV * .70 = 140K purchase price. Right out the door 30% equity, GONE!
    For those that have actually renovated/updated a home of this size, what are the odds you get this done for 40K? Because if the 50% equity creates the problem, you only have 40k to spend to renovate and state within that 50% equity grab. Of course, this math only works if you do NOT use HML or private money, only if you use cash.

    Let's be real. Doing a professional renovation on a 200K home that needs updating and an HVAC system, for 40K, is going to be very very difficult. With over 100 renovations to my credit, I can tell you the only way this stands a chance, is you have a rock start crew that turns this within 3 weeks, or you are stealing the material. 

    To summarize my point in paragraph 3. If theft of equity was a strong motivator and investors grossly out number wholesalers, then by the popularity of the 70% rule, it would actually be the investors causing more of this problem, than us wholesalers. The irony that there are many agent/brokers that are investors themselves, and live by this rule, yet preach fiduciary responsibility, is not lost. 

    However, I am not going to be the one that criticizes and then not offer an alternative view, in fact, a solution that apparently would satisfy all. 

    If there is so much concern over the theft of equity, the solution is real easy. 

    To the fine folks of BP that provide this great community for all of us to speak freely and offer advice. 

    Would you please dropkick the 70% rule calculator out of the window, because it is causing a lot of stress for those brokers/agents and investors that have an issue with wholesalers bringing 50% deals, but they can only buy at 50%, themselves. 

    Are all of you that are actual investors that fix/flip and buy/hold, willing to backup what you are arguing, by promising to only buy at 80% or higher, before repairs?

    In the spirit of showing my flexibility, how about 70% or higher, before repairs?  I would be fine with either personally, as a wholesaler or investor. 

    If so, please join me in my effort of asking BP to remove this calculator, or at least modifying it to say, 125%? I am open for negotiations, so whatever the majority thinks is fair, I am good with it.

    I mean, it's in the best interest of the seller, right? 

  • Jay HinrichsBusiness Member
    Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @John K.:

    I am not going to comment on the bill or what the state of Illinois thinks it's going to stop, by writing this into law. Instead I will point out some actual facts that should have been considered, prior to wasting taxpayer resources. 

    I won't pretend to know the motivation behind the state's desire to draft this bill, because I was never invited to the discussion. I will simply go on a limb and say that one of those factors, was probably this gross misconception that we steal equity, and I would guess that it's this 50% number that has the "ouch" factor. 

    It would be my guess that the wholesaling industry makes up less than half of 1% of the overall market, or worse. That alone should have been enough to make anyone realize that this law is going to have zero effect, overall. However, it's easy to say that the investor industry out numbers wholesalers, by a bunch. Would 100x, 1000x or more, be reasonable? 

    Now I would suspect that those agents/brokers and investors themselves, that are quick to put a wholesaler on blast for their thievery, utilize the very popular 70% rule when it comes to evaluating a property. This of course means that according to that rule, you should never offer more than 70% of its value. Now I have no idea who came up with this rule, but I feel comfortable in saying that it was NOT a wholesaler. So let's see what that looks like, in real numbers. 

    Little bit of a test here.

    Subject Property
    3/2 1800 sq ft. ARV 200K
    Needs the following:  HVAC system replaced and updating of kitchen/baths, paint and floors. No other mechanicals are needed. 

    Let's start:
    200K ARV * .70 = 140K purchase price. Right out the door 30% equity, GONE!
    For those that have actually renovated/updated a home of this size, what are the odds you get this done for 40K? Because if the 50% equity creates the problem, you only have 40k to spend to renovate and state within that 50% equity grab. Of course, this math only works if you do NOT use HML or private money, only if you use cash.

    Let's be real. Doing a professional renovation on a 200K home that needs updating and an HVAC system, for 40K, is going to be very very difficult. With over 100 renovations to my credit, I can tell you the only way this stands a chance, is you have a rock start crew that turns this within 3 weeks, or you are stealing the material. 

    To summarize my point in paragraph 3. If theft of equity was a strong motivator and investors grossly out number wholesalers, then by the popularity of the 70% rule, it would actually be the investors causing more of this problem, than us wholesalers. The irony that there are many agent/brokers that are investors themselves, and live by this rule, yet preach fiduciary responsibility, is not lost. 

    However, I am not going to be the one that criticizes and then not offer an alternative view, in fact, a solution that apparently would satisfy all. 

    If there is so much concern over the theft of equity, the solution is real easy. 

    To the fine folks of BP that provide this great community for all of us to speak freely and offer advice. 

    Would you please dropkick the 70% rule calculator out of the window, because it is causing a lot of stress for those brokers/agents and investors that have an issue with wholesalers bringing 50% deals, but they can only buy at 50%, themselves. 

    Are all of you that are actual investors that fix/flip and buy/hold, willing to backup what you are arguing, by promising to only buy at 80% or higher, before repairs?

    In the spirit of showing my flexibility, how about 70% or higher, before repairs?  I would be fine with either personally, as a wholesaler or investor. 

    If so, please join me in my effort of asking BP to remove this calculator, or at least modifying it to say, 125%? I am open for negotiations, so whatever the majority thinks is fair, I am good with it.

    I mean, it's in the best interest of the seller, right? 

    for these very reasons wholesaler who have no clue which is unfortunately many.. they tie up property and never close.  thereby hurting sellers who thought they had a deal. and made other financial arranges because this nice wholesaler told them he would close with cash on a day of their choosing.. ever heard that one before LOL 

    I agree with U on fix and flip..  buy and hold is different though in a hot market someone may take a 10% discount off of retail and be happy as heck.. 

  • Real Estate Broker · Chicago, IL · Member since 2015 · 147 posts · 73 votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Jimmy O'Connor:
    Originally posted by @Zoran Stanoev:

    I think it will certainly change things. I don't see how it can't. and I don't think doing a double close would avoid running afoul of the law. Wholetailing would, but not a double close. While I don't doubt the hustle of some wholesalers, I also don't doubt the broker's lobby and that some brokers may push for this to be enforced.  I'm not sure how title companies will feel about this, but I think Illinois being very pro-tenant is going to also be very pro-consumer (or anti-wholesaler). 

    I also think it'll affect some of the educational courses out there, which usually lead with wholesaling to entice people because it requires "no money" to start (although I think it actually may require the most). Illinois will have to be carved out as an exception. 

    @Zoran Stanoev- Why is pro-consumer and pro-wholesaler mutually exclusive? The entire demand for wholesalers stems from investors needing prices that are actually profitable- often times too difficult to find on the MLS (not an absolute rule, I have bought and sold home runs through conventional means.) Can you elaborate further?

    I analogize it to Chicago being very pro-tenant.  The city protects the little guy, not the corporation.  In this instance, the homeowner is the little guy and the wholesaler is the equivalent to the landlord. Wholesalers don't have a great reputation and in general, if someone were to give a brief overview of wholesaling to someone unfamiliar with real estate investing, I don't think that person is going to like wholesalers very much. Also, whether it's the "guru's" fault or just the nature of the business, wholesaling has been ruined by a few bad actors. And in my opinion, I don't think wholesaling sprung up because of the demand you explained. 

  • Rental Property Investor · Sacramento, CA · Member since 2015 · 1k+ posts · 893 votes
    7y

    @Patrice Boenzi double closing is a far superior approach anyways. 

    Nobody can stop the buy-low-sell-high. It's one of the oldest business models out there. I don't think anyone can take away your right to purchase something, then resell it. 

  • Real Estate Entrepreneur / Investor · Chicago, IL · Member since 2016 · 688 posts · 367 votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
    Originally posted by @John K.:

    I am not going to comment on the bill or what the state of Illinois thinks it's going to stop, by writing this into law. Instead I will point out some actual facts that should have been considered, prior to wasting taxpayer resources. 

    I won't pretend to know the motivation behind the state's desire to draft this bill, because I was never invited to the discussion. I will simply go on a limb and say that one of those factors, was probably this gross misconception that we steal equity, and I would guess that it's this 50% number that has the "ouch" factor. 

    It would be my guess that the wholesaling industry makes up less than half of 1% of the overall market, or worse. That alone should have been enough to make anyone realize that this law is going to have zero effect, overall. However, it's easy to say that the investor industry out numbers wholesalers, by a bunch. Would 100x, 1000x or more, be reasonable? 

    Now I would suspect that those agents/brokers and investors themselves, that are quick to put a wholesaler on blast for their thievery, utilize the very popular 70% rule when it comes to evaluating a property. This of course means that according to that rule, you should never offer more than 70% of its value. Now I have no idea who came up with this rule, but I feel comfortable in saying that it was NOT a wholesaler. So let's see what that looks like, in real numbers. 

    Little bit of a test here.

    Subject Property
    3/2 1800 sq ft. ARV 200K
    Needs the following:  HVAC system replaced and updating of kitchen/baths, paint and floors. No other mechanicals are needed. 

    Let's start:
    200K ARV * .70 = 140K purchase price. Right out the door 30% equity, GONE!
    For those that have actually renovated/updated a home of this size, what are the odds you get this done for 40K? Because if the 50% equity creates the problem, you only have 40k to spend to renovate and state within that 50% equity grab. Of course, this math only works if you do NOT use HML or private money, only if you use cash.

    Let's be real. Doing a professional renovation on a 200K home that needs updating and an HVAC system, for 40K, is going to be very very difficult. With over 100 renovations to my credit, I can tell you the only way this stands a chance, is you have a rock start crew that turns this within 3 weeks, or you are stealing the material. 

    To summarize my point in paragraph 3. If theft of equity was a strong motivator and investors grossly out number wholesalers, then by the popularity of the 70% rule, it would actually be the investors causing more of this problem, than us wholesalers. The irony that there are many agent/brokers that are investors themselves, and live by this rule, yet preach fiduciary responsibility, is not lost. 

    However, I am not going to be the one that criticizes and then not offer an alternative view, in fact, a solution that apparently would satisfy all. 

    If there is so much concern over the theft of equity, the solution is real easy. 

    To the fine folks of BP that provide this great community for all of us to speak freely and offer advice. 

    Would you please dropkick the 70% rule calculator out of the window, because it is causing a lot of stress for those brokers/agents and investors that have an issue with wholesalers bringing 50% deals, but they can only buy at 50%, themselves. 

    Are all of you that are actual investors that fix/flip and buy/hold, willing to backup what you are arguing, by promising to only buy at 80% or higher, before repairs?

    In the spirit of showing my flexibility, how about 70% or higher, before repairs?  I would be fine with either personally, as a wholesaler or investor. 

    If so, please join me in my effort of asking BP to remove this calculator, or at least modifying it to say, 125%? I am open for negotiations, so whatever the majority thinks is fair, I am good with it.

    I mean, it's in the best interest of the seller, right? 

    for these very reasons wholesaler who have no clue which is unfortunately many.. they tie up property and never close.  thereby hurting sellers who thought they had a deal. and made other financial arranges because this nice wholesaler told them he would close with cash on a day of their choosing.. ever heard that one before LOL 

    I agree with U on fix and flip..  buy and hold is different though in a hot market someone may take a 10% discount off of retail and be happy as heck.. 

    That’s so funny.....I heard wholesalers telling s guy they can close on his 3 unit stone and brick that he was asking 250k in 7-10 days LOL....I wanna know what title company this guy used because after 3-5 days of the title search being ran that means the buyer has 250k liquid just landing around in a bank LOL  funny because of the time time those wholesalers don’t even have a buyer lined up already. It’s things like that which really p i s s off a lot of people. I don’t say nothing about people whom are new because I was new at a point  but after a year and a half or two and your still doing the exact same thing. That’s saying something. 

  • Wholesaler/Investor · Dallas, TX · Member since 2018 · 260 posts · 222 votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
    Originally posted by @John K.:

    I am not going to comment on the bill or what the state of Illinois thinks it's going to stop, by writing this into law. Instead I will point out some actual facts that should have been considered, prior to wasting taxpayer resources. 

    I won't pretend to know the motivation behind the state's desire to draft this bill, because I was never invited to the discussion. I will simply go on a limb and say that one of those factors, was probably this gross misconception that we steal equity, and I would guess that it's this 50% number that has the "ouch" factor. 

    It would be my guess that the wholesaling industry makes up less than half of 1% of the overall market, or worse. That alone should have been enough to make anyone realize that this law is going to have zero effect, overall. However, it's easy to say that the investor industry out numbers wholesalers, by a bunch. Would 100x, 1000x or more, be reasonable? 

    Now I would suspect that those agents/brokers and investors themselves, that are quick to put a wholesaler on blast for their thievery, utilize the very popular 70% rule when it comes to evaluating a property. This of course means that according to that rule, you should never offer more than 70% of its value. Now I have no idea who came up with this rule, but I feel comfortable in saying that it was NOT a wholesaler. So let's see what that looks like, in real numbers. 

    Little bit of a test here.

    Subject Property
    3/2 1800 sq ft. ARV 200K
    Needs the following:  HVAC system replaced and updating of kitchen/baths, paint and floors. No other mechanicals are needed. 

    Let's start:
    200K ARV * .70 = 140K purchase price. Right out the door 30% equity, GONE!
    For those that have actually renovated/updated a home of this size, what are the odds you get this done for 40K? Because if the 50% equity creates the problem, you only have 40k to spend to renovate and state within that 50% equity grab. Of course, this math only works if you do NOT use HML or private money, only if you use cash.

    Let's be real. Doing a professional renovation on a 200K home that needs updating and an HVAC system, for 40K, is going to be very very difficult. With over 100 renovations to my credit, I can tell you the only way this stands a chance, is you have a rock start crew that turns this within 3 weeks, or you are stealing the material. 

    To summarize my point in paragraph 3. If theft of equity was a strong motivator and investors grossly out number wholesalers, then by the popularity of the 70% rule, it would actually be the investors causing more of this problem, than us wholesalers. The irony that there are many agent/brokers that are investors themselves, and live by this rule, yet preach fiduciary responsibility, is not lost. 

    However, I am not going to be the one that criticizes and then not offer an alternative view, in fact, a solution that apparently would satisfy all. 

    If there is so much concern over the theft of equity, the solution is real easy. 

    To the fine folks of BP that provide this great community for all of us to speak freely and offer advice. 

    Would you please dropkick the 70% rule calculator out of the window, because it is causing a lot of stress for those brokers/agents and investors that have an issue with wholesalers bringing 50% deals, but they can only buy at 50%, themselves. 

    Are all of you that are actual investors that fix/flip and buy/hold, willing to backup what you are arguing, by promising to only buy at 80% or higher, before repairs?

    In the spirit of showing my flexibility, how about 70% or higher, before repairs?  I would be fine with either personally, as a wholesaler or investor. 

    If so, please join me in my effort of asking BP to remove this calculator, or at least modifying it to say, 125%? I am open for negotiations, so whatever the majority thinks is fair, I am good with it.

    I mean, it's in the best interest of the seller, right? 

    for these very reasons wholesaler who have no clue which is unfortunately many.. they tie up property and never close.  thereby hurting sellers who thought they had a deal. and made other financial arranges because this nice wholesaler told them he would close with cash on a day of their choosing.. ever heard that one before LOL 

    I agree with U on fix and flip..  buy and hold is different though in a hot market someone may take a 10% discount off of retail and be happy as heck.. 

    I 100% agree that those wholesalers that put something under contract and have no clear exit strategy, are absolutely the cancer of the industry. The only good that comes out of those wholesalers, is their staying power is very limited, as they will just give up because they do not want to put the work in, to get it right.

  • Brandon DukesPro Member
    Wholesaler · MD · Member since 2019 · 15 posts · 8 votes
    7y

    @Nate Marshall how was that person taken advantage of? If she signed the contract for 200k and got the money she agreed in the contract why would she cared if is sold for more. It wasn’t her job to find somebody to buy it. I would imagine all she cared about was getting rid of the house.

  • Real Estate Consultant · Evergreen, CO · Member since 2018 · 1k+ posts · 735 votes
    7y

    @Jay Hinrichs

    I agree with you. I believe that wholesalers should be watched with more scrutiny and possibly even licensed or required to register. Eliminate daisy chains and require written agreements with the seller's or seller's attorney with power of attorney. 

  • Real Estate Consultant · Evergreen, CO · Member since 2018 · 1k+ posts · 735 votes
    7y

    @gerald Williams

    @Gerald Williams Jr

    It wasn't a "him" it was an elderly widow in the her mid 80's that was taken advantage of. It happens everyday. The elderly and people who at risk should be protected and not taken advantage of. 

  • Jay HinrichsBusiness Member
    Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Nate Marshall:

    @gerald Williams

    @Gerald Williams Jr

    It wasn't a "him" it was an elderly widow in the her mid 80's that was taken advantage of. It happens everyday. The elderly and people who at risk should be protected and not taken advantage of. 

    Just think of your own elderly parents  what would you like to see happen ??

  • Real Estate Broker · Naples, FL · Member since 2013 · 9k+ posts · 6k+ votes
    7y

    https://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/549/topics/652248-colorado-may-look-to-regulate-wholesaling

  • Bronx, NY · Member since 2014 · 148 posts · 34 votes
    7y

    @Jay Hinrichs Thank you Jay. Good to have ethics and not feed the predatory element that can sometimes exist in real estate.

  • Newport News, VA · Member since 2019 · 28 posts · 4 votes
    7y

    @Patrice Boenzi

    I’ve only closed one wholesale deal and i learned that disclosure is everything. Disclose the intent and profit margins and as long as everyone agrees i dont see the problem. Sellers don’t have to sign if they don’t agree to the conclusion of sale

  • Flipper/Rehabber · Louisville, KY · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Chris DeSisto:

    @Patrik P 

    This is America, correct? You can't do that without a license, but once you get that license, you can't do that here... It's a conflict of interest... Wtf! Why do you require me to get a license then?? 

    They want it both ways! 

    You are wayyyyy over reacting. Yes, it is America. That is exactly why this particular brokerage gets to make the decision whether they want to allow their agents to flip for personal profit. The owners may want to portray a particular message to customers that we are all about you, not about us. There can be many reasons for it and they are allowed to adjust their business model as long as they are upfront to their agents about the rules....and the agent is allowed to leave. THAT IS AMERICA.

    Just quit being offended by the big bad government. This is part of living in a huge country. The government has to make some decisions to protect a small number of vulnerable people. And doing that is always clumsy and has unintended consequences. That is just the way it goes. It is impossible for it to be any other way in a large, diverse society. 

    When you say, "who is to say how much is too much to make on a deal?", well the government is. Is there a perfect allowable amount of profit? No. But it is kind of like porn. What is porn and what is art? You know it when you see it. Most of us can look at a deal and see when the profit or commissions are reasonable and when they are unreasonable and fraud or deception has occurred. Is there a perfect line or amount? No. Will some reasonable transactions get called unreasonable? Yes. Deal with it. That is how it goes.

    There are a very small minority of wholesale deals that are fraudulent and people get taken advantage of. Some people are going to push it too far. Some people are criminals. You need to make laws for those few cases.  That is the way it works. Very few people murder, but you need laws about murder.

    Deal with it. 

  • Flipper/Rehabber · Louisville, KY · Member since 2008 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Brandon Dukes:

    @Nate Marshall how was that person taken advantage of? If she signed the contract for 200k and got the money she agreed in the contract why would she cared if is sold for more. It wasn’t her job to find somebody to buy it. I would imagine all she cared about was getting rid of the house.

    C'mon. Think about your 85 year old grandmother. She should be able to have a reasonable expectation that she can sell her house and get a reasonably fair price. How easy is it for slick talking predators to take advantage of these people? It isn't about being smart or anything else. There are millions of people out there who are vulnerable to fraud. Even you can be defrauded. And you want protection too. The government's job is to protect against these situations as much as possible. They can never do it perfectly. But having a law like this just helps a little bit more to make sure these types of transactions are done by licensed, trained, regulated people who know the law and are subject to boundaries.

    Have YOU ever agreed to something that you didn't quite understand or hadn't really read or terms got switched after you agreed? I sure have. And you have too.  When Facebook sells all your private data and you get pissed and want them stopped...should we just say well, YOU AGREED?

    In a perfect world everyone can fend for themselves and protect themselves equally. We don't live in a perfect world. Some people are more vulnerable. You may not think you are one who needs protection so no one does, but that is not true. You know people who need help and protection. These laws are for them.

    Think about 

  • Attorney · Northbrook, IL · Member since 2017 · 719 posts · 549 votes
    7y

    No one is going to read a long ranting post, but I wish some of you would be more honest about your business practices. Yes, some of you do it the right way, but many don't. You mislead the public in your mailers, you mislead the seller, and try to hide how much you are getting paid. The state is protecting the public.

    It's not like wholesaling is illegal. You can still do it. Go get your license. 

  • Specialist · SC · Member since 2016 · 79 posts · 19 votes
    7y

    @Eric Micheals

    For the most part I'll agree to disagree.

    ill agree a very small minority of wholesale deals are the problem. I am not one for to much government, they screw things up most of the time with wide blanket reforms that are not thought out. They are slow to fix things and over react to a very small amount cases. This really just comes down to NAR wanting a bigger piece of the pie, it's just disguised in "keeping the vulnerable people safe". Come...on... This about money, not saving the little people. It's always about the money. They don't like people profiting and not getting their share.

  • Jay HinrichsBusiness Member
    Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Chris DeSisto:

    @Eric Micheals

    For the most part I'll agree to disagree.

    ill agree a very small minority of wholesale deals are the problem. I am not one for to much government, they screw things up most of the time with wide blanket reforms that are not thought out. They are slow to fix things and over react to a very small amount cases. This really just comes down to NAR wanting a bigger piece of the pie, it's just disguised in "keeping the vulnerable people safe". Come...on... This about money, not saving the little people. It's always about the money. They don't like people profiting and not getting their share.

    Man I have to totally disagree with you.. you think this is a money grab..  your just not that experienced in real estate to think that.

    the state makes no money on real estate licensees  just like they make no money issuing drivers license.. this is consumer protection from predators.. simple as that..  Just like the ragging gun debates..  granted very few kill people with guns % of the population wise so its the same with this aspect of real estate ..  only people that would condone or agree that taking huge profits from elderly or minority or non English speaking owners are those that are financial sociopaths they don't care they only care about what they make.. I have been doing this end of the business for 3 decades now.. I see the carnage the all hat no cattle buyers do to people either in stealing equity or failing to close and owners either get total goofed up making other financial arrangements thinking their deal is going to close.. to people losing their houses at foreclosure because they believed the wholesaler was going to close and in fact had no means to close unless they found another mark.

  • Brandon DukesPro Member
    Wholesaler · MD · Member since 2019 · 15 posts · 8 votes
    7y

    I agree with @Chris DeSisto. I think just an over reaction. If that same  85 year old grandmother didn’t want to sell her house then she shouldn’t have sign the contract. If she did want to sell her house herself and not use a realtor then she could have marketed the house and found a buyer herself.  However, since she went with a wholesaler that didn’t require commission, or have her do repairs. Secondly , she didn’t have to marketing to find the buyer. The profit the wholesaler makes is the cost of doing business. As long as you get the money agreement on in the initial contract then there shouldn’t be any confusing or accusing of  shady business practice. 

  • Specialist · SC · Member since 2016 · 79 posts · 19 votes
    7y

    @Jay Hinrichs

    Not really talking about the state or the city. NAR is a pretty powerful organization. You don't think they had anything to do with getting this pushed through? That's what I meant about wanting more money.

    I don't disagree with the fact that people have taken advantage of others in some cases. Who condoned taking large amounts of money from an elderly lady or non English speaking people? There is nothing right about that, lol. This happens in every industry, someone is going to be taken advantage of, doesn't make it right. You just can't protect every person from every situation, every time. People need to think for themselves.

    Were all those people that took advantage of those people that you've seen, wholesalers? Where they investors? Agents? My guess is everyone one of them had a part. 

    To me this is NAR wanting more, now more people need to become agents (2 week course will now make them an expert and ethical....). Plus the brokers may get a cut of the wholesaling fee.

    I don't wholesale but if the opportunity was there I guess I'd make the deal. I just think it's a power move from NAR.

  • Mike B.Pro Member
    Developer · Chicago, IL · Member since 2013 · 434 posts · 357 votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Elbert D.:
    Originally posted by @Jay Hinrichs:
    Originally posted by @John K.:

    I am not going to comment on the bill or what the state of Illinois thinks it's going to stop, by writing this into law. Instead I will point out some actual facts that should have been considered, prior to wasting taxpayer resources. 

    I won't pretend to know the motivation behind the state's desire to draft this bill, because I was never invited to the discussion. I will simply go on a limb and say that one of those factors, was probably this gross misconception that we steal equity, and I would guess that it's this 50% number that has the "ouch" factor. 

    It would be my guess that the wholesaling industry makes up less than half of 1% of the overall market, or worse. That alone should have been enough to make anyone realize that this law is going to have zero effect, overall. However, it's easy to say that the investor industry out numbers wholesalers, by a bunch. Would 100x, 1000x or more, be reasonable? 

    Now I would suspect that those agents/brokers and investors themselves, that are quick to put a wholesaler on blast for their thievery, utilize the very popular 70% rule when it comes to evaluating a property. This of course means that according to that rule, you should never offer more than 70% of its value. Now I have no idea who came up with this rule, but I feel comfortable in saying that it was NOT a wholesaler. So let's see what that looks like, in real numbers. 

    Little bit of a test here.

    Subject Property
    3/2 1800 sq ft. ARV 200K
    Needs the following:  HVAC system replaced and updating of kitchen/baths, paint and floors. No other mechanicals are needed. 

    Let's start:
    200K ARV * .70 = 140K purchase price. Right out the door 30% equity, GONE!
    For those that have actually renovated/updated a home of this size, what are the odds you get this done for 40K? Because if the 50% equity creates the problem, you only have 40k to spend to renovate and state within that 50% equity grab. Of course, this math only works if you do NOT use HML or private money, only if you use cash.

    Let's be real. Doing a professional renovation on a 200K home that needs updating and an HVAC system, for 40K, is going to be very very difficult. With over 100 renovations to my credit, I can tell you the only way this stands a chance, is you have a rock start crew that turns this within 3 weeks, or you are stealing the material. 

    To summarize my point in paragraph 3. If theft of equity was a strong motivator and investors grossly out number wholesalers, then by the popularity of the 70% rule, it would actually be the investors causing more of this problem, than us wholesalers. The irony that there are many agent/brokers that are investors themselves, and live by this rule, yet preach fiduciary responsibility, is not lost. 

    However, I am not going to be the one that criticizes and then not offer an alternative view, in fact, a solution that apparently would satisfy all. 

    If there is so much concern over the theft of equity, the solution is real easy. 

    To the fine folks of BP that provide this great community for all of us to speak freely and offer advice. 

    Would you please dropkick the 70% rule calculator out of the window, because it is causing a lot of stress for those brokers/agents and investors that have an issue with wholesalers bringing 50% deals, but they can only buy at 50%, themselves. 

    Are all of you that are actual investors that fix/flip and buy/hold, willing to backup what you are arguing, by promising to only buy at 80% or higher, before repairs?

    In the spirit of showing my flexibility, how about 70% or higher, before repairs?  I would be fine with either personally, as a wholesaler or investor. 

    If so, please join me in my effort of asking BP to remove this calculator, or at least modifying it to say, 125%? I am open for negotiations, so whatever the majority thinks is fair, I am good with it.

    I mean, it's in the best interest of the seller, right? 

    for these very reasons wholesaler who have no clue which is unfortunately many.. they tie up property and never close.  thereby hurting sellers who thought they had a deal. and made other financial arranges because this nice wholesaler told them he would close with cash on a day of their choosing.. ever heard that one before LOL 

    I agree with U on fix and flip..  buy and hold is different though in a hot market someone may take a 10% discount off of retail and be happy as heck.. 

    That’s so funny.....I heard wholesalers telling s guy they can close on his 3 unit stone and brick that he was asking 250k in 7-10 days LOL....I wanna know what title company this guy used because after 3-5 days of the title search being ran that means the buyer has 250k liquid just landing around in a bank LOL  funny because of the time time those wholesalers don’t even have a buyer lined up already. It’s things like that which really p i s s off a lot of people. I don’t say nothing about people whom are new because I was new at a point  but after a year and a half or two and your still doing the exact same thing. That’s saying something. 

    With all due respect, just because you can't close in 7-10 days doesn't mean everyone can't. 

    I wholesaled a Pilsen property to @Chris Titcomb, he performed in 4 days. I have used @Yan P. to finance several deals within 7 days (He doesn't't prefer it, but always gets it done). I've used Barrister Title, Network Title and GNT Title to close within 7 days on several deals as well. A delay will pop up here and there but it usually has to do with the water reading or zoning cert...not about funds to close.

    I agree with everyone in regards to ethics. The bulk of my deals come from time sensitive properties. 

    -Someone was left a property that they can't afford via probate and they want out yesterday. They were barely making it with their own bills and now have an additional house filled with expenses that they can't keep up with. 

    -Pre-foreclosures with a 30 day or less sale date. If someone doesn't show up with cash right away, the bank takes it and they get nothing.

    -Hoarders who are too embarrassed to let you take pictures let alone advertise to the public that they live this way.

    -The rental owner whose tenants stopped paying rent and can't afford the mortgage.

    -The cancelled/expired listing who was previously lied to by a RE agent and overpriced their house to secure a listing. They are now frustrated, have a bad taste in their mouth in regards to RE agents and just want out.

    Quite honestly, the law doesn't affect me negatively as my company is licensed...as a matter of fact, we're working with our lawyer now to see how we can market to wholesalers to sell their deals for them. When life hands you lemons...

  • Specialist · Northeast, TN · Member since 2019 · 10 posts · 4 votes
    7y

    Personal responsibility, like a lot of this thread is based on opinion. More times than not its a way to justify an outcome that isn't popular. So and so is a grown up and can make their own decisions. How often do we hear via the news that so and so was scammed out of thousands of dollars just based on a telephone call. Now put a real person in front of them that has knowledge, is personable, and persistent and see what happens. They can convince a lot of people (not everyone) that their property is only worth so much versus what it could be worth. 

    I've worked in sales for over 10 years and the easiest people to take advantage of are the ones who have no idea about the value of what you're selling or want to sell (their home in this case). I'm no realtor but their commission % is up front and the client knows what that is . If the client decides to sell to that realtor or another investor for less money off market then that is their choice but they know their estimated home value and have choices. Transparency.  

    Transparency makes things tough sometimes. Your intentions have to be fully known and you lose some of the control you have. But it's ethical and is in the best interest of all the parties involved. 

    If you're wholeselling ethically and transparent then I applaud you. 

  • Developer · NY/NJ/PA · Member since 2018 · 758 posts · 935 votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Brandon Dukes:

    I agree with @Chris DeSisto. I think just an over reaction. If that same  85 year old grandmother didn’t want to sell her house then she shouldn’t have sign the contract. If she did want to sell her house herself and not use a realtor then she could have marketed the house and found a buyer herself.  However, since she went with a wholesaler that didn’t require commission, or have her do repairs. Secondly , she didn’t have to marketing to find the buyer. The profit the wholesaler makes is the cost of doing business. As long as you get the money agreement on in the initial contract then there shouldn’t be any confusing or accusing of  shady business practice. 

    Are you a sociopath? You're seriously blaming a 85 year old grandmother? 

  • Brandon DukesPro Member
    Wholesaler · MD · Member since 2019 · 15 posts · 8 votes
    7y

    @Syed H. I’m not blaming anyone. All I’m saying is if an 85 year old grandmother sign a contract for 200k to a wholesaler and that wholesaler re-assigns that contract to a Rehabber for 100k(300k-200k) and that Rehabber rehabs the property and sell it for 520k. Explain to me how is the grandma being taking advantage of when she walks away with 200k for a property that is in As-is condition.  

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