All Forum Posts by: Joseph Ziolkowski

Hi all! I have a deal that I am working on, and am strongly considering contracting it as a sub2 to wholesale. It is a probate property, and the mortgage is paid off (great, right?!) Only thing is, the owner took out a 75,000 heloc to make repairs, spent maybe 20,000 of it on the actual repairs, and still owes most of it. My cash offer would have only been in the 45,000-50,000 range because of needed repairs that I know of so far. So my question is, how do I get that heloc out of the way? I would have to do it sub2 if I can't, I think. Is it possible with it being in the 1st position to short it (since the owner is 2 months behind) or modify it in some way to make a cash offer in that range work? Thanks! :cool:

Dammit that's nice! Thanks for sharing all of that Nick. I'm still trying to get ahold of this lady, but I'll let you know as soon as I do what she says. I'm going to have to switch up my strategy with her a little bit, but She might just go for it. She's also moving out of state, so hopefully having to deal with the tenant herself won't be a deal-killer for her.

Steve, that is an excellent point! What would be the best way to assure that the line gets closed? Great ideas here!

She took out the heloc, not the deceased. She did fix a lot of things up. There were major problems with the plumbing and some mold/water damage in the basement. She fixed that and got a sump pump system installed around 2002. I imagine that she didn't spend all of it wisely.
When I talk to her again (today sometime if I have anything to say about it) I will tell her she will have to deal with the tenant and bring the heloc and taxes current. Should only be 2500 to do that, so I'm sure there's someway she can come up with that.
Normally, when you buy a property sub2, how long do you keep the seller's name on it, so I know what to tell her? Would you want to refinance it and get some cash out, or sell it?

Hey Nick! The property was willed to her, her sister, and her nephew. They've owned it for 9 years, though she's really the person that handles everything in that regard. She assured me that they are all on board.
I just spoke with her, so I haven't been in the property yet. I left her a message saying that I had 2 offers for her, and am awaiting a return call. She was really upfront about what the place needed. She said it needed a new roof. The old one is ok, but it's 20+ years old so I just figured it in. It needs a new furnace, updating of the electric (not the service, just wiring and outlets). One of the 2 bathrooms needs some updating, though not much. New toilet, sink, and maybe some fixtures.
Basic patch and paint in the basement. $20,000 was a pretty conservative estimate, only because I haven't seen it yet. That included about a 5% fudge factor as well.
I would be chomping at the bit to take a look at this place, but my question is, would it be worth risking life and limb dealing with the tenant, and if so, what would be the best way to deal with him? I don't think she's going to evict him if she feels I (or a buyer) can handle it for her. That seems to be her main motivation, so I wanted to leave that on the table for now.
I figured if that could be done, it wouldn't be a bad sub2 candidate. The payments are roughly $250/mth on the heloc. Taxes are roughly $1800/year. The house in good condition would easily bring in 1200/month if not more, so the cashflow potential is definitely there imo.
The other thing that I thought might work (and this is just me thinking here) :idea: is that if she could somehow negotiate the heloc down with the bank, a cash offer would work. Or alternatively, she is already 2 months behind, so possibly it could be short-ed for the cash offer as well. Man, the wheels are turning... :D

Hi all! I am speaking with a woman who has a probate property she wants to get rid of. I figured the quick sale ARV to be around 110,000. It seems to need about 20,000 in repairs, 2,000 in back-taxes. The original mortgage is paid off, but there is a 75,000 heloc on the property @3% that the owner took out to fix it up. On the surface, it seems like a really workable deal. Perhaps as a sub-2? Only problem is, she has a tenant in there that hasn't paid rent in 7 months. And she's afraid to evict him because he's a bit of an unsavory character. If I could get rid of the tenant for this woman, she would probably be happy to give me the property at a great price, or let me take over payments (and wholesale my position). Any thoughts on how this might be accomplished, or if it's worthwhile to deal with a tenant like this? Thanks guys! :cool:

Wow! That's horrible. I sincerely hope that that guy gets exactly what he deserves.

It seems the main difference, Steve, between the MLS and the health club analogy, is that the MLS's product (information) is being artificially controlled. Just like the stock information, and the travel information. I'm a law-abiding guy myself, but I'm not afraid to color outside the lines on occasion if a group of people are giving themselves an unfair advantage at my expense. It's called leveling the playing field. If the field was aritficially uneven in the first place, that is wrong. I understand what you're saying, but I can't say that I entirely agree.

Very true, that's how it's advertised. That's the enticing part of the RIGHT to buy the property at such and such a price. Any intelligent investor that's bought from a wholesaler would no doubt know that before even making the phone call.
If you look at any ad, it of course emphasizes the benefits of buying the advertised product. While it might be a little "out of the box" by some conventional wisdom standards, I would defy any jury in the world to convict you of wrong doing :) Once you sell the advertised right, the buyer does have the option to buy the property, but also has the option not to (if they don't mind giving up the assignment fee, that is).

A quick note on that too, though I'm not a lawyer by any stretch. It's my understanding that a contract is always assignable, unless it specifically states that it isn't.
As far as marketing, whether or not you can market the property is irrelevant. If you're looking to assign the contract, what you are really marketing is your rights in the property. That's what you own once you sign the contract, not the property.
Those rights, or the "paper" are considered personal, and not real property. And you can market personal property all day long :) HOpe it helps!