Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 16%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$39 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime

Let's keep in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter for timely insights and actionable tips on your real estate journey.

By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions
Followed Discussions Followed Categories Followed People Followed Locations
Tax, SDIRAs & Cost Segregation
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated over 10 years ago on . Most recent reply presented by

User Stats

31
Posts
5
Votes
Alis B.
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Central Texas
5
Votes |
31
Posts

Did the existing building ownership transfer with the land ownership?

Alis B.
  • Rental Property Investor
  • Central Texas
Posted

We live in Texas. Earlier this year we transferred commercial property out of our (husband and my) names and into a holding company's name. 

The existing  building (dims or other specifics) were not specifically mentioned on the Quit Claim Deed other than "tenements, hereditaments, and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, to said premises"

For tax and liability reasons, we want the building to also be property of the holding company, and not just the land it sits on.

How iron clad is a quitclaim deed (with the above general terms yet no specific description, to prove that neither the land or the building are in our personal names anymore?

Loading replies...