All Forum Posts by: JD Martin

Based on what you wrote I would take the house back, if it's legal to do so (i.e. not considered an asset that he owns by the bankruptcy court). If you're going to end up with the house back anyway, why would you wait another year to get it back? Take it now, evict (or collect rent from) the people who are there, and either try to cut your losses or put a little work into it to make it worth renting. Look for another insurance company, as they are not all equal on these things; in fact, you may want to aim for an online insurance company, as they are less likely to come out to inspect the house. When you say it is a slate roof, is it because you know that for certain from an inspector or having the material in your hand, or is it because it looks like slate? If you don't know the answer to this for sure, then when you go to get insurance you answer honestly when they ask for roofing material composition: "I don't know, I have never been on the roof". If they ask further, tell them it looks like slate, and leave it in their hands to determine if that's what it is. A lot of online insurance companies, writing property insurance on a house that isn't worth much anyway, won't bother to spend money verifying whether you have vinyl siding or a slate roof. 

You probably need to consult an attorney on this since he has now declared bankruptcy to see what your legal rights are to the property. 

 I don't know the market there but we have different standards of profitable, apparently. $600 per month rent - $500 payment = $100/month, which also has to cover your initial vacancy, rehab, insurance, property taxes, and maintenance? Based on these numbers it looks like you are in the hole for a fairly significant amount of time before this place begins to turn any kind of profit. $20k/500 = 40 months, tack on some vacancies, maintenance, property taxes, and lost opportunity costs and it sounds like 6/7 years at least before you break even. 

Anyway, back to the original question, based on what you've posted here I would rent to them as any kind of vacancy is going to be a killer. 

Everything I have bought has come from the MLS. Maybe I could get better deals if I wanted to beat around the fringes and find off-market or under-the-table type deals, but I just don't want to deal with that kind of thing. While I'm not against the idea of wholesaling, and couldn't care less how anyone else makes their money, I personally can't see the point of it, i.e. I think it's a fairly worthless endeavor. There are plenty of avenues available for someone to sell a house that legitimately wants to sell it, and I would rather negotiate my best deal with the seller directly than deal with a go-between who, in my opinion, adds no value to the transaction (what did they do? find the seller? find the buyer?). Further, I think wholesaling, when the wholesaler has no intention of carrying through with a sale if they can't find a buyer, is at best unethical and at worst should probably be illegal.

Thankfully, I live in a market small enough that no one bothers with wholesaling by and large. Most wholesalers give me the impression of people that have none of their own money to play with and are simply trying to insert themselves into deals that would happen anyway in order to skim some off the top, i.e. guys that don't have to pay to play. The whole thing makes no sense to me - if it's such a great deal in the first place, why not be the one to take advantage of it? Why bless me with such a bounty of riches? 

If there is a lease in place, it should list how and when notice is to be given. If it does, follow that, and go forward. The old lease is enforceable, unless the tenants don't want it to be enforceable, in which case they are squatters rather than tenants and you simply change the locks and move their belongings to a storage facility. Otherwise, they abide by the lease. Now, it is possible they won't abide by the lease, in which case you'll need legal help (not the cops, they don't enforce civil contracts, only criminal law and court orders). 

Congratulations! First lesson of landlording - don't be a nice guy. Be a business guy :D  . You should have collected rent *and* given them their notice. I am certain it was no surprise to the tenants that the house was being sold - whose problem is it that they have to move? Their problem. Now you've made it your problem by being a nice guy. 

If I were you, I would begin the formal eviction process since they don't sound like they're going to leave nicely. 

 It's been a little while since I last bought it but it runs a buck or two per foot. You need enough length to cover your riser & tread when you measure, and I'd add at least a foot or two on to that to be safe. As for padding, you can skip it, since the staples (or riser bars, if you use them) hold it in place, but I like having the rubber steps carpet-taped down to keep from abrading the treads. It's not so much padding as it is kind of like area-rug grip pads. If you put down the carpet without the rubber pads, if you decide to go carpetless later you'll have scratches on the treads. 

It sounds like they had issues with the ownership and was trying to avoid having you talk to them for fear they would shoot down their app. That said, they should have leveled with you on the front end. Your issues are why I don't buy property in these types of areas. If you can't keep a good tenant in there, this might be your best option. If it were my property, I would sell.

I collect prorate plus deposit plus first month at lease signing. No moving in anything until lease is signed and money delivered. As far as moving things in early, depends on how early and what the status of the place is; if it is clean and ready and vacant, a few days early is no problem to me, meaning 2-3 days or so. Anything more than a week, they pay that prorated period and take over utilities.

 Exactly. Further, the ruling only holds Portsmouth's code unconstitutional for the reasons listed in the opinion. Other municipalities in that District can simply alter their codes to fit the ruling and they will be fine.

It means nothing without a direct challenge to the law for those jurisdictions. Also, that case deals with one jurisdiction's codes in particular, rather than rental inspections in general.

Let her go. You won't get any sympathy from a court in your situation. You said it is no problem to get another good tenant, so you could probably apply the deposit to November and get another tenant by December first. She could easily say she never got the paperwork.