All Forum Posts by: Dave Rav

Wow, @Logan M. that’s impressive!  I wish you all the best.  

To start, what area/location are you referring to?

Logan,

Great point!  Owning the land gives you another angle work things- land lot rental allows another avenue.  That never occurred to me.

Leah, i assume this is in Wisconsin?

South or mid-west

I agree with others' sentiment.  And I know you mentioned the state/local laws do not require them to have certain things.  That doesnt mean you cant have requirements!

This arrangement inherently raises your risk and exposure.  Only you know if 1) you are comfortable with that and 2) it is worth it.  

For us, multiple issues with this scenario.  In addition to the liability exposure, we never allow our tenants to use the property for business purposes (properties are for residential purposes).  Businesses invite increased traffic, potential greater wear/tear, and potential community complaints (from neighbors, etc).  Residential is residential, period.

@Logan M. I just know that generally speaking, a foreclosure takes significantly longer than an eviction.  I know the statutes are per-state (and I dont know Utah's), but some states can take as much as 15-20x longer than an eviction.  At least this is the case for real estate (not necessarily MHs)

@Peter Anag no need to go that far into the weeds.  If they dont get coverage, thats non-compliance and you can start to take action.

Though I am in the camp who prefers MHPs with primarily TOHs, I do have some experience with POHs.  

You are right, POHs definitely jump your cashflow.  In your example above, its that 2-year period of exposure thats concerning where you owned homes built in the 1970s and were responsible for maintanance and repair.  That risk involved potentially having to spend more on home repairs than the home is worth.

Also, when whenever we sold mobiles on terms we did so on rent-to-own.  If you seller finance and they stop paying, wouldn't you then have to foreclose on them?

Also sounds like a "side dish" of the inherited tenant on top of them being a handyman.  Some tenants (not all) from the prior ownership can be a challenge.  And out of the ones who are a challenge, the longer they've been there the more challenging they can be.  Yes, this handyman's expectations appear to be based off his experience with the prior owner.  Not always a good thing.

We had a tenant who used to get a reduction in their lot rent (from prior ownership) in exchange for filling pot holes in the Park's gravel road.  When we took over, we quickly discontinued that "arrangement" as we foresaw all kinds of scenarios.  This included: not performing the work, having to fight with them over what is acceptable job completion, and overall having to babysit the whole thing.  Not worth it.  So, we opted out.