All Forum Posts by: Matt Devincenzo

Assuming it wasn't addressed in your PSA specifically then it likely should be them, but the reality is it is likely you. You have the most to lose now since you'd be out all of your investment if the FC goes ahead. I question how you got here though? No one pulled a payoff to confirm the balance or looked at the latest statements before closing? 

I'd look at the closing docs for something related to the pro-ration of expenses etc and see if you have anything there that could be a clause you point to for them to cover those payments. Was it included as a credit/debit on the HUD so it should have reduced your cash to close? But if they don't willingly make the payment your only option would be to sue, and they have the upper hand to let the lender know about the sale possibly triggering DOS. They were already headed to FC, so in a sense they have nothing to lose...

@Anca R. no I'm saying the opposite. You can do an exchange for less than the full amount, but you will owe taxes on the boot. As far as some other comments about like kind etc, you can sell this SFR and then buy a warehouse, or vacant land or even exchange into a DST there are many other assets that are considered 'like kind'. So the question becomes based on their individual and personal tax situation what is the estimated tax burden they'd save?

Once Dave chimes in I think you'll have a better perspective on what that could be...

I don't know that @Dave Foster earlier mention worked...

I'll let him chime in as the expert, but you can 1031 for less it just results in 'boot' which is taxable. Whether it still makes sense will depend on how much you can defer vs. the basis.

Yes you can, you're just selling like any other sale. Ignore seller finance for a second...

Can you buy a house, put 20% down...yes. Can you then decide to list and sell the house two months later...yes. That is exactly what you are doing. In any contract you don't typically need a clause saying what you CAN do, its assumed you can do anything legally allowed as an owner including sell. The seller would need to include a clause saying what you CAN'T do, which is what a pre-payment penalty would address. 

Sure that's the same as any financed purchase that you just sell. The only issue with seller finance and resale is if they don't want to receive a payoff in short order, then they should include a pre-payment penalty. 

If your wife and kids aren't moving in with you, then it's not your primary. That isn't written somewhere specifically that way, but your lender will ask why you would move your primary from (for example) a 2,000 SF SFR to a 750 SF unit in a four plex? Your answer needs to make sense, and be true.

Also refi'ing your current primary into an investment loan also has the potential to be fraudulent if your family still occupies it as their primary. 

To the nuts and bolt question of what defines occupancy, it is the place you reside and spend the majority of your time/nights. So you need to live there. If you're going through mental gymnastics to make it work, then it probably isn't your primary. 

There's some mis-information and mis-understanding of AP, the process and it's effect in this thread. I'm not an attorney or expert in AP specifically, but do have a working knowledge of it for Civil engineering/survey work and have had two projects where this came up and I was able to 'ride along' and see how it unfolded.

First, if you 'know' the property has been taken by AP then there's nothing for you to do with the tax assessor etc. Completing AP requires the other party to file a suit in court during which the judge determines that the case has merits, and ultimately transfers the property to the filer. If that happens then the tax record is updated by the effect of transferring the property. It doesn't sound like that has happened here because you keep saying you want to transfer it etc...essentially you want to give them the property, because right now today they do not own it and have not completed AP...you're doing their job for them. 

Also the idea that occupying a 'piece' or 'portion' of property allows for AP is flawed. One of the criteria is that the filer has paid the property tax on the property for the given time. If your objective is to reduce your own tax burden, you are in essence confirming they have no valid AP claim. Since tax bills are for entire parcels (typically, though not always) then it is highly unlikely that they somehow segregated the taxes for that small portion and paid it. So again their AP claim is unlikely to be valid since they haven't paid the tax on that piece. 

Finally, depending on the use and if they were ever given any permission then there may be no claim. The AP has to be open, notorious and hostile...those terms have a legal meaning and essentially it is that you as the owner have been fully deprived of your right to the property.

Absent those items above, it sounds like at best they have another legal right which is a "prescriptive easement". They could enjoy use of your land that way. Typically these encroachments are much more likely to fall under PE than AP...

Finally if no one has filed anything for AP or PE yet, then you may have the ability to regain your property right. You can begin to shore up your personal case to defend AP/PE before they ever file. If they meet the requirements for a PE right the only way to actually confirm is again through the courts where a judgement is made. Before they ever file start to strategize how to dismantle their claim. You may could give them a license to use the land, provide a temporary or revocable easement or otherwise permit the use in some way. This now places their use back subject to your approval, so their own claim via AP/EP statute is reduced. 

My last AP claim was a fence 4' past the property line and a neighbor claiming the land under AP. My developer client successfully defended the initial challenges and settled on this having PE rights, so he shifted the site plan to avoid the issue. We (developer and all of us as consultants) were sued over this PE three years later, which I mostly believe is because they realized they had no 'proof' of the PE beyond the fact that we had shot holes in their AP until they acquiesced to PE. Suing was their way to create a record...coincidentally the client probably would have just signed an easement for them without the suit...but they chose to file first and then discuss. 

Your cleaner's income has no bearing on yours. I'm sure they also spend significantly more time on their role, than you do in yours....or at least their time spent is more constrained where yours can be remote/on the road. That said it is possible that you need to evaluate your stays and decide if it is worth taking shorter stays or sticking to some longer stays to reduce your time commitment and maximize the revenue for time invested. Just don't make the mistake of comparing what someone else profits on a role, to decide whether your compensation is sufficient or not. 

Yes it's definitely legal, and I've sold a few this way. It's a good way to marry rehabbing distressed real estate equity capture with long term note income for retirement accounts for those that are interested.

I think you're confusing the quantity of items with curb appeal. The term curb appeal is simply referring to the home's exterior being appealing, which doesn't have anything to do with plants or pots or items directly. In some homes planting the front or placing pots could increase the curb appeal, in others it could be paint or furniture etc. It would be like if someone prepared to sell by painting to create fresh visual interest, but chose fuscia and lime green...those colors would certainly catch the eye but I'd never claim that they overdid the curb appeal by painting with too much visual interest. I'd say they chose colors that don't create any curb appeal at all...

In this case the front sounds like it was cluttered, so the way to increase curb appeal was literally to de-clutter.