All Forum Posts by: Thomas S.

"Could the Mom be a co-signer on the lease"

In the majority of cases it is a mistake to find creative ways to qualify a unqualified applicant. It is adding a unnecessary level of risk that is 100% avoided by simply rejecting the applicant.

@Marcel Williams

"Its business, and you have to do what you have to do"

I do not have to do what I do, it is my business that is doing it. A business has no feelings and no emotions, it is not human. How it operates and what decisions are being made is all predetermined in the business plan for operation. Unlike many "landlords" I avoid having to make personal decisions. Strict predetermined operating practices, in this situation, removes all need for "feelings". Always return to the fact that it is the tenants decision/choice to be evicted as opposed to voluntarily moving. Poor life decisions. There is no reason to feel anything although anger and hostility toward the tenant is often unavoidable for many.

@Account Closed

"If certain people had their way, you would be subsidizing their entire existence out of compassion for their poor life choices".

Every tax payer is already being involintarily forced to do this. If I am not mistaken I believe it is referred to as S8.

It is necessary to put this one investment into perspective. Obviously the argument supporting one property ownership is much different than that of someone looking to grow a business. One property, viewed as a single nest egg for retirement, with $300 - $1000 per month negative cash flow is much different than looking at having 50 doors with each one having the same equity/same negative cash flow. This should be viewed as a retirement fund requiring a personal monthly contribution ($300 - $1000) on the part of the owner. Contribution level will vary based on maintenance requirements over time. In essence a variable forced savings plan. A retirement fund disguised as a real estate investment.

This thread is based on a single property not a business. The decision one way or the other is not particularly important. This is not a wash, rinse, repeat plan that would be a sustainable business scenario. That is not the intent.

Not only do they not qualify based on income, which would be a automatic rejection for me, they are also unstable. I require applicants to have a minimum 2 year employment relation with one employer. I do not rent to anyone moving/starting a new job in my area. In addition I would never bother screening a applicant that needs to move the same month they are applying. Very unstable, too many red flags to bother screening based on my standards.

My concern is you are too highly motivated/desperate based on filling the unit immediately to be making rational decisions.

This applicant is a automatic pass based on my screening standards. What are your standards, do you have standards.  

Being married means I am in business with family. It can be difficult due to the injection at times of emotions. Something which I have a very strong personal aversion to in making business decisions. If I could operate my business separate from family it would be preferred but not realistic. Being in business with family has a negative impact on both my business and my personal relationship.

I would prefer to be in business solo but do not have that option without a major financial loss at this point in time. A time machine would see an very different outcome.

Does not matter if they can help or not, or that you are taking her in. List the home and sell it at full market value. That would be the best way to help with her retirement. You will avoid the guaranteed resentment that will follow from your siblings if you do not. This is definatly a offer you do not want to take advantage of. Alternately purchase it at full value off market, less real estate fee, and have her hold the loan/mortgage at 1% interest 10 year term. Keep in mind the money may be your siblings inheritance some day. Do not short change them. Best decision would be to list and sell at market to avoid all resentment.

Take your mother in if you want to help not for a financial advantage. Charge her rent if necessary.

Your purchase price needs to be based on todays rental rates not future. When determining purchase offer never base value on future rates. Sellers need to be punished for not maintaining market rents. The rent to price is way out of line. Ideally you want rent to be a minimum 1% of property value. Maybe not realistic to achieve in this case but no way you should be paying anywhere near $318K plus repairs. 

Do not offer it unless it is absolutely necessary, as in she is leaving if she can not get it. The fact is if she can not afford the rent splitting the payment will only prolong the inevitable. At best a stall tactic.

Since it is a SFH you should not bother being concerned about fair housing. If she is not already on M2M get her on it as soon as her lease ends. If things go bad you will want to get her out as quickly as possible. Being late with rent considering she has been a tenant for less that a year is a very bad sign. The writing is on the wall already.

Be extremely carful with your efforts to accommodate this tenant, it could become extremally expensive for you. Compassion cost money.

Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. There is no winning in this situation. It will be a flip of the coin to see if he can hold on long enough to break even.