All Forum Posts by: Derek Daun

@Account Closed

I have never heard of any prescriptions requiring smoking, and like you, I can't imagine any legitimate medical reason for such.

For the time being, I think the regular 'no smoking' clause is sufficient. If someone pushes back, I would tell them using a vaporizor is fine. If they push back to that, I would want to see written verification that smoking is a medical requirement, and allow it if they provide documentation.

The question I have, is whether it's legal to ask for written verification. I'd think this is just like having an animal assistant. Is it acceptable to require documentation for a seeing eye dog?

As long as medical marijuana is illegal on the federal level, I'd be comfortable not accomdating them since the Fair Housing Act is a federal law. Here's an article regarding California:

http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-r...

More importantly, there are much better ways for a true 'medical' users to use pot. Tell them you have no problem if they use a vaporizor (or any other method), but smoking of any kind is prohibited.

Welcome to BP. I used to river guide alot up on the South Fork as well; there's not much money in that though!

What are the unit specs and rents on this property?

I saw some specs listed on Redfin, but they don't seem quite right.

These days, they make special paint products just for refinishing cabinets and melamine. No sanding necessary. Rub on a gloss remover; wipe off after a couple of minutes. Paint on a bonding layer; then paint on a color layer. I haven't used them myself yet, but the reviews are generally positive. The Rustoleum product is called Cabinet Transformations. 

@Account Closed

I am worried about the pending sale. My main concern is the seller subconsciously trying to sabotage the deal, even if that is much worse for her in the long run. I'm pretty confident in title and lending being able to get the wires worked out last minute if needed. If she agrees to the SIP, then I have a much higher confidence she'll follow through with everything, and we'll close on Wednesday. Worst case scenario is I have to get her evicted, which could be a learning experience for me. She'll have plenty of money if the sale goes through; so she should actually be worried losing it in court.

Right now I'm only into the deal for $400 on inspections now. If I give her money for a uHaul and a hotel, then I'm putting more money on the line if she doesn't vacate and doesn't perform.

@Ron Manning

 The situation I want to protect myself from is if the seller is incapable/unwilling to actually vacate, or even just unwilling to perform on the sale. Giving her $500 could lead me to being out $500, and her still being in the house, which then get's foreclosed. Then I'm out $500, and my inspection costs, and she has no assests of which to take her to court over breach of contract. Obviously it makes the most sense for her to sell, but sometimes people in these situations just block things out.

We went with requesting a SIP (Seller in Possession) addendum to the contract, but with a very high security deposit. Market rent is about 1200 for this place, so we set terms at 1500/month (50 dollars a day), and with the security deposit equal to last months rent + one months rent ($3000), to be held in escrow. I would havel liked a larger deposit, but I assume the SIP counts as a rental agreement, so I didn't want to violate any exessive security deposit laws.

Hopefully that is enough skin in the game to make sure she vacates on time; leaving the place in good shape.

Also, we requested a copy of her new lease, so we can verify she has intent to leave.

We are in contract to buy a property. Close of escrow is next Monday (Aug 17th), but the bank is ready to fund anytime we want to sign. We weren't planning signing until the property was vacant; but now the seller wants to rent back from us for three days after signing.

Timeline as follows:

Last week the seller informed us that she can not vacate until this Friday, 14th, due to her new lease not starting until then. We offered her a 2:00pm move out date on the 14th, with the option of her storing excess stuff in the garage if needed. That way we could do an inspection of a vacated property, and close that afternoon.

Today they finally responded (after prodding from our agent):

1) Seller says she doesn't have any money to move, so she can't move until escrow is closed. (She's actually making a decent amount on the sale since she bought at the bottom)

2) She wants us to sign as soon as possible; and then rent back to her through Friday. Rent and security deposit would be arranged during signing.

3) The pending foreclosure which which the agent told us (in writing) was postponed until the end of the month, was not actually postponed. Foreclosure is set for this Friday.

Overall, both the seller and her agent have been a pain to deal with, as they incapable of responding and are never on time with paperwork. We have met the seller on multiple occasions, and she doesn't strike me as someone trying to pull something; she just seems young really irresponsible. 

If we do the seller rent back, are there ways to protect ourselves if she doesn't vacate? This is in Sacramento, CA, tenant friendly laws apply.

All of those items seem resonable, with the exception of the mailbox, but even that might be reasonable depending on how bad it is.

If you paid $1200 to a management company to make the property move in ready; they did not do their job. I would address the management company with these complaints.

Be careful on the timing between a  refiance on your current home and applying for a mortgage for the second home. If you refinance as an owner occupier, but then soon after apply for an owner occupier on another home, that could raise flags. Check with your lender to see if they woud have problems with that.