All Forum Posts by: Robert Taylor

I want to touch on what @J Scott mentioned about people around the Milwaukee area having a generally negative view of flippers/rehabbers, which I would certainly agree with. I even had a previous topic about my idea of starting my own website and possibly other efforts (all on a shoestring budget) to create at least on a small scale a "brand name" or "brand identity" because of the general distrust of any "flipped" house here. Mainly, I'd be trying to get the point across that I do pull permits when needed and don't cut every corner I can, etc. Now, I actually think that this distrust comes much more from just the general mindset of people around here, more so than any sort of problems with poorly rehabbed homes in the area. Milwaukee has been known for a long, long time as an area that doesn't jump into the latest ideas or trends. In general, its a very conservative mindset (conservative relating to resistance to change as opposed to politically speaking)

As far as regulations go, I'm not surprised at all that you can't FSBO more than 5 homes per year, WI has also been known for many years as a state that LOVES to regulate everything!!

Hi Sam,

I'm not in the hard money lending biz myself, although I have to say it sure is tempting! Its tempting because those guys sure charge an arm and a leg for the money, although I also have to say that of course any time a bank, person, etc lends money, the interest charges are going to be based on the amount of risk involved, so because such lending does at least theoretically involve a higher level or risk, I'm not necessarily saying that the hard money lenders are greatly overcharging, which I would say for the "pay day" lenders who often charge over 500%! I've considered trying some lending also because of my experience in rehabbing and flipping, so I suppose if I did make a loan and the borrower defaulted, it wouldn't be all that hard for me to then take over, finish the project and sell it.

Now, I also have the same question as J Scott, how much flipping experience do you have? If its little or none, I'd really recommend treading carefully here because my years of rehabbing and flipping experience have taught me an awful lot, including that even an experienced guy like me that really tries to very thoroughly plan out my projects before doing ANY work has found that its almost a given that unexpected surprises will come along and they always cost more money. The next big lesson is that quite often even after you plan out every last possible detail of the rehab and try to account for every possible pitfall, surprise, accident, etc they nearly always take longer than planned and when you're interest expense is high and especially if it includes extra points or penalties for not making certain payback deadlines, that stuff can also add up quick and literally wipe away your profits.

Now please don't let me scare you away here at all, if you read any book about the history of some of America's most successful businesses over the last 100 years or more, you'll see that many of them were started using some very creative financing to say the least! I would certainly put a large amount of effort in looking for a private lender and that would include extensively plotting out the various interest charges and any other charges you would have to pay and compare that to a wide variety of scenarios for how much your project might cost as well as how long it just might take if you do happen to run into multiple pitfalls along the way!

@Mahesh K. I have to say that I feel for you, this is one of those situations where no matter which route you end up taking, there are many possible pitfalls, so lets hope that things work out for you in the end, which is certainly possible, its certainly also possible that things will work out one way or another here.

I really urge you to read this pdf file that I cut and pasted some of the parts of in my earlier post, I wish I could link to it but its a pdf download but just google "esa dog" and look for the "Right to Emotional Support Animals in "no pet" housingresult, its something I think was written by an attorney that sounds like he comes from the point of view of being an attorney that represents the people claiming disability. Its interesting (as well as bothersome!) how many of the various issues they cover in there are quite open to interpretation, which to me means just more money for the lawyers!

Hmmmm, I'm a bit confused on a few things now, mainly @Marcia Maynard

and the part about "no one suggesting the tenant be evicted" In the original post, he says that his property manager already gave her a 30 day notice to cure or vacate. (and on top of that he added that he would've given her a THREE day notice!) Now, its quite obvious that of her two options after being given that notice that she's not even remotely considering to cure the violation (thus getting rid of the pit bull) as evidenced by her bringing legal aid into the matter as well as presenting the letter from her doctor. So, her only option left is to vacate, which as far as I'm concerned is eviction in everything but name! I'm not trying to be a smart a** here, (that's one thing (of many!) that I really like and respect about BP as compared to so many other web forums where it seems like the members spend more time flaming and putting each other down as they do exchanging actual info!) but honestly, if giving her a cure or vacate notice and you know darn well she won't cure anything, is NOT eviction, then what in the world is eviction???

Now, my other concern for Mahesh here is to find some way out of this mess that is obviously not his fault without having to spend some ridiculous sum of money on legal representation. Sure, going to court and prevailing is great (although certainly not guaranteed!) but if in the middle of the after-court victory bash he gets handed a $20,000 bill from the kick butt attorney that just won the case for him, I'd consider that to be a very hollow victory myself!

As much as I can type nearly a whole book sometimes like I just did, I have to admit that Richard C did sum up my thoughts perfectly! After reading what I read (and posted here for everyone else to read) I come to the same conclusion, if you want to be Mr. Harda** and throw the lady and her "pit bull support dog" out on the curb, don't be shocked if in a year or so, SHE holds the deed to what used to be YOUR building!

After I read the two responses following my (looonmnnggg!) response, I started to think maybe I was off base on my advice, so I did a little more research and I'd highly suggest that everyone here take a few minutes and read something I just found. After having done some more reading on this, I'm going to have to disagree with the last two comments 100% and tell you you're nuts to just summarily evict this woman and I'd move very cautiously! Yes, there are a few grey areas and one thing she did do wrong was to not inform you PRIOR to bringing her "pit bull support dog" on the premesis, but that doesn't at all mean you win just because of that. At best, if you evict her and litigate it and somehow win the case, you still going to be stuck with some BIG legal bills! I'm not exactly sure how to give a link for this, as its a pdf file download, but if you simply google "ESA dog" in the results that I get (which I know people's results will vary-just part of the amazing world of google!) is titled "Right to Emotional Support Animals in "no pet" housing" its from a website, www.bazelon.org. Some of the pertinent parts I found include:

The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act protect the right of people with disabilities to keep emotional support animals, even when a landlord's policy explicitly prohibits pets. Because emotional support and service animals are not "pets," but rather are considered to be more like assistive aids such as wheelchairs, the law will generally require the landlord to make an exception to its "no pet" policy so that a tenant with a disability can fully use and enjoy his or her dwelling. In most housing complexes, so long as the tenant has a letter or prescription from an appropriate professional, such as a therapist or physician, and meets the definition of a person with a disability, he or she is entitled to a reasonable accommodation that would allow an emotional support animal in the apartment.

So, right there it says that a letter from her doctor (or even her "therapist") is good enough for that part of the requirement.

Discrimination under the FHA includes "a refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford [a person with a disability] an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling." 42 U.S.C.

After I read the two responses following my (looonmnnggg!) response, I started to think maybe I was off base on my advice, so I did a little more research and I'd highly suggest that everyone here take a few minutes and read something I just found. After having done some more reading on this, I'm going to have to disagree with the last two comments 100% and tell you you're nuts to just summarily evict this woman and I'd move very cautiously! Yes, there are a few grey areas and one thing she did do wrong was to not inform you PRIOR to bringing her "pit bull support dog" on the premesis, but that doesn't at all mean you win just because of that. At best, if you evict her and litigate it and somehow win the case, you still going to be stuck with some BIG legal bills! I'm not exactly sure how to give a link for this, as its a pdf file download, but if you simply google "ESA dog" in the results that I get (which I know people's results will vary-just part of the amazing world of google!) is titled "Right to Emotional Support Animals in "no pet" housing" its from a website, www.bazelon.org. Some of the pertinent parts I found include:

The Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act protect the right of people with disabilities to keep emotional support animals, even when a landlord's policy explicitly prohibits pets. Because emotional support and service animals are not "pets," but rather are considered to be more like assistive aids such as wheelchairs, the law will generally require the landlord to make an exception to its "no pet" policy so that a tenant with a disability can fully use and enjoy his or her dwelling. In most housing complexes, so long as the tenant has a letter or prescription from an appropriate professional, such as a therapist or physician, and meets the definition of a person with a disability, he or she is entitled to a reasonable accommodation that would allow an emotional support animal in the apartment.

So, right there it says that a letter from her doctor (or even her "therapist") is good enough for that part of the requirement. As far as the part about emotional support animals being considered to be be more like wheelchairs, what exactly do you think the feds would do to a landlord who hated how the wheelchair ramp going into one of his buildings ruined the looks of the place, so one day he came with a Sawzall and just hacked the whole thing apart and told the wheelchair bound residents who complained to "go stick it"?

Discrimination under the FHA includes "a refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford [a person with a disability] an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling." 42 U.S.C.

Wow, when I first read through this, I started chuckling a bit with the whole deal involving the "pit bull assistance dog", yet another section 8 tenant who when given an inch always takes not just a yard, but several yards, etc !!! I don't know if I should laugh at what sounds like more absurdity or pull my hair out pondering the future of our awesome country, which so often seems to be devolving into a sad paradise for people who know how to game the system!

Yet, taking a step back from all of that, I think you really need to take this matter seriously and to proceed with much caution and forethought! First off, no matter how ridiculous the whole idea of having a pit bull as an assistance dog to help with depression may seem at first, the truth is that in SOME cases, depression and/or other mental issues can certainly cause people severe disabilities that are just as debilitating as any physical condition. No, its not anything obvious like someone who's confined to a wheelchair, but it can still really ruin people's lives and it can't be proven or disproved with an X ray or a cat scan that can show whether or not a spinal injury for instance, is really there or not. So, assuming that you're not a psychiatrist, I'd avoid dismissing the validity of this doctor's letter on your own. Also, while the prior malpractice claims may tell us that this doctor is a quack, it also could be a red herring, too!

I'm wondering if you should just go to your insurance company on this or not? I'm not 100% sure, but I think that even if your ins company bans pit bulls (which it seems like pretty much every ins co. does these days) I think there is a law exempting service dogs, much like how service dogs are exempted from being barred from going in to stores, restaurants, etc. So, I would think that the insurance company would likely want to have their attorneys investigate whether or not this particular pit bull is really a legitimate service dog or ESA or whatever they want to call it. Obviously, if you want to keep this quiet from your insurance company, you could just hire your own legal counsel, but we all know that will likely cost a bundle! I guess you have to weigh out whether or not you want your ins co to know about this, I personally would lean towards getting them involved.

My final thought also involves the tenant's threat of getting legal aid involved. This goes back to handling the whole issue of the mental illness claim and all of that. I'd tread carefully there as well because you also certainly do not want some bleeding heart legal aid attorney getting the impression that you are some "evil landlord" that evicts tenants with depression and/or mental illness because you don't like ESA dogs. You just might light a big fire under that attorney and cause him/her to come after you as hard as they can to make an example out of someone they think is abusing the mentally ill! It may sound far fetched, but its not out of the realm of possibility! So, what started out as some section 8 tenant using a bogus depression claim to find a back door way to keep a pit bull could turn into something totally different, there certainly are activist lawyers out there always looking for a cause!

EDIT: After posting that original comment, I saw this thread which I'd certainly recommend you read:

http://www.biggerpockets.com/forums/52/topics/104090-federal-housing-laws-service-and-support-dogs-landlords-rights

It spells out pretty clearly some of what I'd assumed, that service dogs are exempted from dog bans. Having been in the restaurant biz for a while, I know that the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) is nothing to take lightly or mess around with, they can really hang you! Also, as I touched on, even if you think or are even totally sure that this pit bull service dog is just a sham, being backed up with a letter from a sham doctor (which may well be true, I'm not denying its possible!) don't waste your time fighting that case yourself, you'll need a comparable expert to disprove that doctor's letter, even if its plainly obvious to be total crap!

Hmmm, looks like the end of my last comment got cut off! Well, here's what I was trying to say:

I was just finishing up that generally, or really pretty much all of the time, houses coming through the auction are not accessible to be inspected on the inside, at all! So, if you are able to find a homeowner wiling to at least consider the short sale option, you ought to be able to get them to willingly allow you inside for a tour. Now, I suppose that even if the bank has zero interest in any sort of short sale, you'd still come out ahead because you would likely be the ONLY potential auction bidder to have been inside recently and the only one really knowing the true condition of the place, inside and out! One part of that (and I'm not sure how relevant this is in SC compared to WI, where probably 99% of homes have basements) up here is that no matter how many windows you're able to peek in and whatever other cursory inspections you're able to do before the auction, up here you'll often have basically NO CLUE as to the condition of the basement, which can easily turn what looks like a "for sure" money maker into a break even at best or even into a big loser!

I understand your idea, although as I mentioned in my comment (I know it was a long one so its buried in there! ) Assuming SC is similar to WI (they are both judicial foreclosure states) then the property being foreclosed on still remains the legal property of the homeowner who's about to lose it all through the court process, the actual auction and right up until the confirmation hearing which confirms the auction sale. I of course dont know if SC is exactly 100% the same, but that's definitely how it works here in WI. Thus, the law firm handling the case has no more right to the house than anyone off of the street does.

Now, I do have one idea for you if you're looking to get info (I'm assuming that includes touring the place inside and out!) and attempt to make an offer to the homeowner, which would be to go the short sale route. I worked with another broker who would mail handwritten letters to EVERY home that got scheduled for an auction date in Milwaukee county (which is a sizable number! ) and she would actually get a small percentage of responses, of which some she would get listed as short sales, in fact I bought one of them! Anyway, that's also a possibility there, in which case the soon to be former homeowners would obviously have all the incentive in the world to let you inspect the place from top to bottom, which is certainly NOT the case most if not pretty much all the time looking at a house about to be au