Skip to content
×
Pro Members Get
Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
ANNUAL Save 16%
$32.50 /mo
$390 billed annualy
MONTHLY
$39 /mo
billed monthly
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
×
Try Pro Features for Free
Start your 7 day free trial. Pick markets, find deals, analyze and manage properties.
All Forum Categories
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

All Forum Posts by: Matt Mason

Matt Mason has started 4 posts and replied 229 times.

Post: What state do I open my LLC if investing out of state?Ca resident

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260
Originally posted by @Jeb Brilliant:

Hi All,

I need some input here. I need to open an LLC so I can get a business loan, seems simple enough but I'm investing out of state. I live in California and currently have rentals in Indianapolis. Do I open my business in California, a state that is more friendly to small businesses like Nevada/Florida/Delaware or Indiana?

I'll take any input you have but I know I will ultimately have to run it by a lawyer, so if you're a lawyer that specializes in this stuff can we chat???

Thanks in advance. 

Even if you set the LLC up in Indiana, which you probably should, you will have to pay the CA LLC fee. This is different from other states as CA charges their LLC fee as long as you are doing business in CA and you being the managing member of the LLC and having residence in CA qualifies as doing business in CA.

Post: Building a 4-plex instead of buying one...

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260
Originally posted by @Chad Duncan:

I am wondering if building would be better than buying. I live in Portland Oregon and the cap rates for multifamily are around 5-6% max.

My idea is to buy some land, and build a 4-plex on it. House hacking on one of them. Anyone have advice, ideas, or subject matter experience on this?

Thanks.

I'd talk to people in your local market - maybe at your local real estate clubs.  The above posts that state that you can't possibly build for anything close to existing stock may not be true at all in a market like Portland.  The Midwest is a different animal with very low population growth and housing costs.  You may be able to find a run down house in an area zoned for 4 plexes and make yourself a nice return by building a small apartment building in a strong market like Portland.  I think it is going to cost you a lot of money up front however.

Post: Future Los Angeles Multifamily Sales Onslaught/LA Retrofit Law

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260
Originally posted by @Jason Insalaco:

 Owners of thousands of Los Angeles wooden apartment buildings at risk of collapse in a major earthquake will begin receiving retrofit orders as early as February 2016, according to the Los Angeles Times

The LA City Council recently enacted the strictest seismic regulations in the nation that will impact an estimated 13,000 "soft-story" wood frame buildings. Seismic retrofits are estimated to cost between $60K to $250K for wood structures. Soft-story wood-framed buildings have large openings where parking is tucked underneath. 

Orders to comply are expected to be released in the next year or two. Those compliance orders will require the owners to submit a plan with permits within two years. Folks, this is going to be costly. 

I suspect this will lead to a large inventory of soft-story hitting the market within the next 2-3 years. Owners struggling with cash-flow or lacking financial reserves could be especially susceptible to selling soon.  Apartment brokers will surely be stepping up their aggressive calls to apartment owners to amp up this new ordinance to boost their commissions and listing inventory. 

It looks like there will be opportunity for investors to find lower cost multifamily properties in the next few years, albeit, with the inevitability of significant future repair costs for soft-story buildings. This new City council ordinance might be the catalyst that raises cap rates in the city of Los Angeles. It will be interesting to see if neighboring cities like Glendale, Burbank, Culver City, Pasadena and Santa Monica enact similar ordinances. 

I am wondering if other BP'ers sense opportunity in the market? How do you think it will change Cap rates? Will this lead to the exodus of mom and pop owners lack the resources to comply with these retrofit orders?

More on the LA Times story here:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-la-bui...

San Francisco has already done this and I don't believe they had a flood of sales. You may see a few of these post war buildings be torn down in favor of new building, but that is always hard in LA. 

The whole requiring covered parking was a terrible zoning mistake that resulted in these ugly post war buildings with tuck in parking and unstable footings.  Thank goodness much of LA was built in the 20s before these things went everywhere.

Post: What is your everyone's thoughts for a rate hike in December?

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260

Yes.  25 basis point hike in Dec.  A quarter point in and of itself is practically nothing.  It is really more symbolic than anything.  Unless the Nov. jobs report comes in with less than 100k jobs or there is some other major event, it is a no brainer that we'll get a raise IMHO.

Post: California City, CA - is this town going downhill?

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260
Originally posted by @Logan Allec:

So I recently sent out some marketing pieces to all of the Antelope Valley.  But strangely enough, of the 10 people who called me in response, 9 want to dump their properties in California City.  Hardly a peep from Palmdale or Lancaster, which are much larger cities to which I marketed much more heavily.  What's the story here?  Is California City on the way down?

More like it never really took.  California City was planned out around 1960 by a sociologist who hoped it would grow to be something close to Los Angeles in population.  By area it is one of the larger cities in the U.S.  By population not so much....

Post: Multifamily Under Contract - Potential Property Tax Increase?

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260

CA property tax is roughly 1.25% of purchase price give or take a little depending of the locality. With Prop. 13 the seller could be paying just a fraction of what the new tax is going to be and has no bearing on what the tax is going to be for you.  No seller is going to give you any type of rebate or price reduction for this.  They are going to expect you just know this.  Sorry.

Post: Looking for positive stories about property managers...

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260
Originally posted by @Account Closed:

This might be a Bay Area thing. I believe our property manager is better than all of the above combined. 5% flat fee of gross rent. No junk fees and no first or half of first month rent crap. 

His company manages over 1,600 units in the Bay Area, and they do a fantastic job. Our tenants love him so do we. He takes care from A-Z. We only approve invoices. I like the guy so much that sometimes I volunteered to help him out such as posting notices and meeting contractors.

He was referred to us by our attorney. I don't know how he has enough time in the day to do all of his work, but he does. Wonderful wonderful guy. 

Minh,

The 5% is probably more a function of the Bay Area, but it sounds like your guy does a great job for it.  Here in LA I pay 7% for my manager, but people think I am insane for paying so much.  I do think he does a fantastic job and is especially noted for his tenant screening, which I agree with.  I think in most markets where rents are lower you are looking at 8-10% for property management.

Originally posted by @Blake F.:
Originally posted by @Account Closed:

Now you do hear the story of idiots that buy rent controlled properties and then try to do illegal evictions.  Sorry those people are just greedy and stupid  CA recognizes the restrictions of rent control so properties are sold at less than market and the property is taxed at less than market.  So some idiot can't wait for a couple of grannies to die naturally so their rents and value jumps dramatically so they do stupid stuff and get smacked.  Don't say CA is unfriendly based on this.

I always wonder about this, because I see it so much on here - what exactly is so unfriendly to landlords about tenant laws in CA?  As Bob said, a lot of the situations that are labelled "unfriendly" seem to be greedy people trying to screw tenants out of rent controlled apartments by doing illegal evictions.  As a landlord in SF, I don't really have a problem with any of the tenant laws.  At least so far...

It is always cited here.  I have never had an eviction and haven't heard of any of my friends having one either.  My guess is that when you have $500 tenants in a market that is not very tight, you are going to have a lot more evictions and problems and really need to rely on the eviction process vs. a tight market with $1,500 tenants with big security deposits who need a reference from their landlord to move to another place.

There are turnkey guys on here that setup their clients in Class C or D properties that they call Class B and then they have an eviction after the tenant has destroyed the place and they say to their client, well at least you were smart to invest with us here in XX State where we have landlord friendly laws instead of CA where this eviction would take another 3-4 weeks.

Post: Buying a multifamily in socal anyone?

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260

I actually purchased my first rental property, a 4-plex in Koreatown in 2011.  This was right about the time I started logging into Biggerpockets.  Most people would have told me not to buy it, but I am glad I did as I don't have time to deal with properties not near me and I felt LA properties were kind of a bargain at the time even though they were comparatively expensive to places in the middle of the country.  It did cash flow immediately after accounting for capital reserves, management fee, repairs and vacancy and so forth, but barely.  However, rents have soared and the place was previously mismanaged some.  I ended up buying another triplex in 2013 and did some rehab work that added quite a bit of rental income and value.

SoCal properties, especially those in LA have some pros and some cons.  The pros are:

1.  There are quite a few 4-plexes as much of LA was developed in the 20's when these were popular to build.

2.  There is basically no vacancy if you are a decent manager

3.  You often get good professional tenants, because in LA people with even very good jobs can't easily buy a house.

4.  The mild weather takes a smaller toll on roofs and property and you don't need big HVAC systems.  Most of my units do not have A/C and only basic heating units, which is common.

5.  Lots of opportunities and ways to increase rents.  If you do nice renovations you generally get paid for it if you are in the right neighborhoods.

6.  It is easy to sell your property when you need to exit.  Tons of buyers unless you overprice.

7.  Prop 13 is a huge benefit that few people really appreciate.

Cons are:

1.  It is hard to get in as you need a lot of money, especially considering that you need big money to renovate to.

2.  It is harder to score a great deal and competition is fierce for properties.

3.  Properties tend to be older, so when you do a rehab you often need to replace electrical, piping, etc...

I think newbies look too much at the current rent ratios cash flow and not enough on the vision for adding value and increasing rents.  It is like buying a stock solely on the basis of its dividend yield.  You gotta dig a lot more to really see if it is a good investment.

If you buy well located CA property in a downturn you will do very well.  I grew up in a nice  middle class area but it was near a very wealthy area.   Many of the people here had made their money in real estate.  I wanted to be more like them and not so much like my Dad who was the last one in the neighborhood to come back home from work every night.  Many people say that was a product of the 70's and 80's and can't happen again, but they are proven wrong again and again from people who bought during the downturns of the 90's and 2009-2013.

Post: The Rent Crisis Is About to Get a Lot Worse - Bloomberg business

Matt MasonPosted
  • Investor
  • Los Angeles, CA
  • Posts 231
  • Votes 260
Originally posted by @Anthony Gayden:

Places like Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, and Phoenix, do not suffer from this issue because there are few restrictions preventing builders from greatly increasing the number of available units. These are not declining rust belt cities. These are huge rapidly growing metro areas with tons of wealth and jobs. 

The so-called "rent crisis" was created by strict building regulations, zoning, and NIMBYism.

 Those cities also have no natural barriers with no mountain ranges, oceans or major bodies of water nearby too.  It is a little different story and decision making process when you have to get into up zoning existing neighborhoods because there is no land available.