All Forum Posts by: Account Closed

@Steve Wilcox

I agree, partnerships need to navigate everything together while continuing to improve communication. Be ready to provide proof of funds in a cash deal if requested. Our scenario is contingent upon financing so, were going to provide a preapproval letter.

@Jeff S. Here' where some of those twists and turns do matter because the cost to purchase effect the final numbers.

If a seller has an agent and the property were listed in the mls, the commission structure would be set in stone. This property was off market and we made our initial offer through John who was doing a "favor". It wasn't until after our initial offer the seller brought in an agent to review the deal. The sellers agent then presented a counter which only increased the sales price to cover a 6% agent split. Once the SA was involved, John doing the "favor", subsequently wanted a buyers agent agreement and refused to present any counter offer without proof of funds. If John is to be the BA who's he protecting by not presenting the buyers offer unless it inlcudes proof of funds? Not a cash deal and funding is not a problem so, presenting an offer with a preapproval would be acceptable.

@Robert Williams I agree with most you said. It doesn't really apply to the situation because it has been a long and twisty road that somehow I got caught traveling.

My buddy, Joe, who is an investor was shown this off market property in DC and he inturn showed it to me. We subsequently entered into an JV agreement to pursue it. Apparently, He had a relationship with this broker and the broker referred him to an agent. The agent, John, was the one who initially showed him this off market property.

After I viewed the property with Joe I spoke with John on the phone. I specifically asked John who he represented. HIs answer was the he represented neither the seller or buyer and was doing each a favor. Then I asked how and if he was getting paid. John stated the he was forming a new relationship and was hoping that Joe would buy and list with him in the future.

Well since this happened, John wants to be the buyers agent becuase the Seller got uneasy working with John and hired a listing agent. John also said he and Joe agreed he would have the outsale listings. Joe says this never was agreed to. The seller does not want to pay for the realtor fees and wants us (me/joe) to up our offer in order to cover the costs. Additionally, we have yet to sign a brokers agreement with John.

Here's whats got me really stuck on how to proceed, John wont send our offer unless we show proof funds or a preapproval letter. This is not a requirement in DC that I know of. Am I somehow stupid and thinking that you cant have a noncontingent contract in DC??? The approvals are easy enough but I always leave "contingent upon finacning" in my agreements for good reason.

If anything, my partner might be obligated to work through the agent but, I am not. Because my frustrations are running so high I am thinking of going directly to the seller. I RARELY do this but this seems to be one of those cases. I mean who wont send the offer?? I'm all for being ethical and trying to do the right thing even if it costs me a little bit of money to save face but, I've had my fill.

We're so far giving up a lower purchase price, a portion of realtor fees, now I have to use a closing company and were 3 weeks into this but, no closer to a ratified contract! The seller wants 60 days to close because its coming out if his fathers estate and this pushes me into the summer before I have building permits. This means at best I'm going vertical after site improvemens by July/Aug and get a C.O. by December. WTF.

For the record let me say all players are personally good people its just business and money working its magic.

Who thinks I should stick with the realtor? Save face, preserve my buddies reputation with this broker and my name as well. Maybe, I need to cool off as I'm being unreasonable and hot headed.

Who thinks, just get it done. If you aint first your last. To bad the realtor never got their brokers agreement in order beforehand. That I should go directly to the seller?

Who thinks walk now. If its difficult now its only going to get messier with this property?

This should be interesting.

Ditto that @Andy luck!

You can also use concrete to encapsulate the ground in a crawl space and then install a sub slab depressurization system, aka radon abatement fan. Be sure to put at least a 6mil vapor barrier under the concrete. Use rigid foam board polustyrene insulation as well for added benefits.

Check out www.moldpro.org as well. (no afffiliation)

Hi Katrina! Make sure to check out the podcasts and set your keywords.

I always ask if I can put my points into escrow or have a letter of credit sent to them. If they balk I walk. To many pretenders out there thinking they can run game. Oh wait, that's the big banks pretender lenders! lol

Just was wondering what the general consensus was for starting a trust to manage llc's? Does anyone do this?

@Karen Margrave the questions asked and tapping those on BP is really helping. Thank you.

@Will Barnard if you bring multiple lenders into a deal, guarantee a certain % return on their money, partially secured by a fractionalized interest of 1st position on the note; is this not equal to what @Bill Gulley refers to as creating a security?

@Kyle Hipp Some of what you say I agree with. However, Frank was known to kick the banker lobbyists out of his office when this bill was being considered. As he said it was all out "war". When his party members started pulling back their support because the bank lobby was throwing their moneyat them; Frank aligned the small mainstreet bankers in order to gain support. Have you heard the commercials asking congress to curb lending guidelines for credit unions??? I highly doubt any ABA lobbyist was happy with the Volcker rule either.

Here's the simple skinny without all the deep financial talk as I see it:

When the mega banks found out it was losing the battle to public opinion; they supported the incumbent politicians and changed their tactics. The megabanks decided to limit the damage and gain as many benefits they could by supporting the act which allows them to live to fight another day. This change in tactics is probably what you refer to as "solidified their power". As others here have said, It was one of those bills that needed to be passed in order for us to know what is in it.......but the informed already knew.

What I do enjoy about this thread is the entrepreneur spirit will find a way to succeed no matter what it must endure.

Just a small guys opinion here:

This bill basically transfer all control ,aka power, to the Government et. al. It consolidated the "mega" securities and banking industries. One political party, along side some smaller industry players aligned themselves for obvious reasons.

Mainstreet America was blaming the megabanks as the source for all that was at the core of our latest economical problem of the day. Right or wrong there was a lot of truth to these claims and everyone was pointing a finger. The government had to act or every incumbent was going to be facing a losing battle during their next election. So those in office wanted to be percieved as the champoin of consumer rights and cast the other political party into the same bucket with the Megabanks. The real prize was.....VOTES.

No way your few donors contributing $5K each is going to unravel this behemoth. You need much more firepower than that. This power grab was part of a fundamental change to how our country would operate not only domestically but internationally. Not even the biggest lobbying group was able to stop this steam roller. Only because of their immense lobbying power were they able to get some carve out provisions.

The two biggest players, one the proponent and the other opponent, referred to this as an all out "WAR".