All Forum Posts by: Matt Huber

@Eric James thank you. Yes, the more I look at certain markets, the more I see this. In particularly trendy areas, I've seen a number of freshly renovated duplex that wouldn't pass the 1/2% rule! (Following them to see the settlement price if/when they close.)

Anyhow, your advice corroborates what I was already thinking. Thank you for the reply.

Hello!

I've been practicing my deal-analysis skills using the BP calculators. I'm looking for cash flow properties (duplexes in particular), just using Redfin to get a feel for the analysis process and what inventory might be available. Lots of my deals are losers (at asking price) and some seem to be "base-hits." But even the "base-hits" don't pass the 1% test. (ie 1% rule) So... am I underestimated expenses? Overestimating rent? A link to one example is below. Many thanks for any thoughts.

View report

*This link comes directly from our calculators, based on information input by the member who posted.

The county tax collector would be a good place to start. Property owner information is generally public. Sometimes you can get it from the tax collector's website. Or you might have to email them to get it. Or maybe call or visit the office.

@Marco G.

Of course! What would a story be without knowing how it ends?

In the end, here's what happened:

I hired my regular pool guy to replace the heater and filter, which were both on our to-do list within the next year or two anyway. I submitted for the maximum reimbursement permitted by HW contract, and did indeed receive it about six weeks later.

From complaint to resolution, the time footprint was almost exactly a month. Part of this was because of the HW company stalling, and part of this was that every pool repair place I was able to get ahold of was taking vacation when the heater failed. (It was 4 days before Christmas.) In the end, it was financially about the same with or without the HW company, just with a lot more stress and time.

 You know, in a way this is almost preferable. We're having our regular pool guy do the work, and that's great because we trust him to do a good job. And in the end, we should at least get our money back (and then some) on the additional money we paid to have the pool equipment covered. 

But still... no more home warranties in the future.

Many thanks for all of the replies. I think the point is well made and taken. 

Update: Select HW replied yesterday afternoon. They're approving a payout of $400, which they claim is the cap on their exposure. I checked the section of the contract that they cited, and yep, "For additional coverage options the repair/replacement allowance is $400." As the pool equipment is an optional coverage under this contract, I suppose their assertion is valid.

I probably wouldn't have purchased the pool coverage if I had know about that. Lesson learned: read the contract before comitting!

Thanks all for the advice.

Thanks for the replies.

All good info. Clearly the pool is not a necessity (especially this time of year), but it sounds like they've been using the spa quite a bit over the winter. Since the rent is, of course, higher than a home without a pool, I feel obligated to put it back in service for them in a reasonable time.

Will post an update when I get some news. In the mean time, I'll be careful of who's advice I take when it comes to investing matters!

An update on this, just in case anybody green like me is interested:

We installed a safety fence and alarms on all of house doors that lead to the pool area. Our legal counsel also recommended bulking up our liability insurance. He said that landlord negligence judgements involving pools have been in the $4-5MM range in CA.

The tenants are enjoying the pool and I'm sleeping better at night. Thanks all for the advice.