All Forum Posts by: Burt L.

I am building a buyers list for a new market for myself. I pulled a list of absentee buyers in the last six months and have been looking into the individual buyers and whether they have multiple properties.

Its easy enough to google them as well, and many come back as either an attorney themselves, or a R/E broker. Many of the registered agents of LLC's are attorneys, as I use, but the underlying investor usually can be determined.

 I'm pretty sure I don't want to wholesale to an attorney/investor due to last minute legal surprises I could be "leveraged" with and have my contract expire. Similarly, some brokers can take offense, though one of my better local buyers is a broker. Do any of you have personal policies about whether you seek or avoid attorney/broker investor buyers?

I obtained an E & O report from title, and it clearly shows the uncle quit-claimed the house to both himself and the nephew. He had stated he quit-claimed it all, but said that he wasn't that familiar with the process. The quit-claim deed makes no reference to whether it is held now as Tenants in Common, and the Assessors office shows it as being owned by both the uncle and nephew.

The uncle has said he just wants the issue with the nephew and the mortgage company and his own credit to go away and that he had asked the nephew to quit-claim it "all" back to him so he could sell it, but of course the nephew refused. The uncle didn't know he still owns half, apparently.

But if I solve the uncles problem as he seeks - he can immediately "forget" who I am and sell it himself, or more likely I find myself as a half owner with the uncle, by giving the nephew cash for keys and the nephews quitclaim..

How can I solve the uncles problem without a prior agreement with the uncle? Again, there is no reference to a Tenancy in Common, although I believe this is presumed if nothing to the contrary is indicated, though I'm not sure. Based on upcoming conversation with the nephew, I can start incurring legal fees, but I'm not there quite yet.

Thanks for any suggestions.

I missed the nephew and his large pick-up truck again this afternoon; I would like to have a remote camera across the street to stop wasting trips - lol.

Will call the uncle tonite and clarify whether he is still on the title in any capacity. The house is worth about 70-80K more than the debt and estimated arrearages, less fix to make it a working rental.

The public records show it as being a Quit Claim deed and the uncle states that it was. I just double checked and now it appears that he quit claimed it to both himself and the nephew, which could muddy the water.

The uncle has told the mortgage company what happened, so they are aware of a violation of a Due on Sale Clause, but my understanding is that that is rarely exercised.

I am in agreement - if the uncle has quit claimed it entirely, there is nothing he can do. But it does show that the uncle was the seller, and both the uncle and the nephew were the buyers on the quit claim deed, so there may be more at work than I see presently. Otherwise, the lender and the uncle can send any paperwork they want back and forth, and it wont matter until eviction.

I was contacted by the uncle, who made the obvious mistake of Quit-Claiming title instead of doing a Contract for Deed, etc. The Nephew has refused to pay the mortgage or to respond, and has said he will be there until "the bitter end".

The uncle has told me he received paperwork from the lender which authorizes them to sell the property and the uncle wants me to review that paperwork with him. As the nephew will refuse access to anyone, I don't know what practical benefit that could have, but I am sure they are also having him sign over some legal rights the uncle may still have. I encouraged him not to sign it initially, and especially since no action would be taken during the holidays anyway. I am not sure what the lender is trying to accomplish in having the uncle authorizing the lender selling the house. What is the lender doing with a such paperwork sent to the uncle? The nephew has been clear he will be there until eviction.

I am going to door knock the house and speak to the nephew and explain what is forthcoming and offer him cash for keys. The uncle says he is only 6'6' and has a pit-bull, but so it goes! I just don't know what the lender is trying to accomplish in getting authorization for the  uncle, who no longer holds title.

@Rick H.

Got back the O & E Report and I hadn't encountered such a situation. As part of the documents showing the transfer of 20% ownership on a Commissioners Deed, the other documents show that the "girlfriend" was also the mother of their three children and that it was determined to be a common-law marriage and that the transfer was part of a separation agreement. The subsequent quit-claim of the 20% to the "girlfriends" son really a quit-claim to the majority owners middle son as well - all three children being adults now. This is more likely a family war of abandoned children as he has never mentioned any other connection to the kids. but only that he doesn't owe the "girlfriends son" anything, and that his former girlfriend and "her son" hate him. I don't know how long he has lived in Asia, but may have avoided all other financial responsibility, though probably would have lost the other 80% for non-payment of support. Its a pretty incredible string of legal documents. I don't think this one is for me!

I would have to pursue a judicial foreclosure against the middle son for not forwarding 80% of the rents for the last seven years. The son may have reason to hate his father and I don't care to live in that type of atmosphere through a long legal proceeding - its already troubling.  The house would probably also be destroyed before possession was turned over and the father doesn't sound like the person I would want to trust in through a long process without getting a claim against me once I got the other part resolved. Its no longer a real estate deal, but an ongoing family tragedy. Thank goodness for a thorough O & E report. I've done lots of deals in ridiculous situations, but this is a new champion. Back to matters of real estate...

I should also mention the house is worth 450-500K, has no debt, and is in excellent condition...today and rents for$3K per month. My attorney said this morning that Actions for Partition can be messy but thoughts of taking the 80% on owner carry with that deed set in escrow so that  if I cant force the sale, I give the majority owner his stake back. I may also be able to get a power of attorney to pursue the $200K in gross rents the minority owner received but kept over the last seven plus years. I'm sure the rent wasn't $3K per month seven years ago, though, and so the majority owners math may be skewed a little as these things are laced with emotion.

 The attorney mentioned that the minority owner can claim that they are entitled to more than 20% as they did the upkeep on the property, though the non-forwarded rents can be a large or complete offset to that, and that the court would require an accounting of their expenses. And lastly that there isn't a great deal of case law on Actions for Partitions, but that she is researching the same matter for another client and that we could split an hour of her time, to see what can be found.

The property is located in Colorado;  ordered an O&E report at $4, I presume its held as tenants in common currently. Attorney wanted me to pay particular attention to what the document was that the court used to order the 20% transferred to the minority owner in year 1980.

Heard from an owner whose former girlfriend got a judgement against him in 1980 for a house he bought as a single person in 1975. The former was awarded 20% of the house. A few years ago that 20% ownership was quit-claimed to a son who has controlled the entire house and has refused to forward the 80% of the rent for the last seven or so years. The majority owner wants to sell the 80%.

Not so sure I can find a buyer to buy the 80% or how it would likely play through in court. The majority owner likely has a claim against the son for monies not forwarded but I suspect that right would not transfer to a new owner, unless specifically included. That part could be a good source of leverage to force the current minority owner to release control of the house. The house is currently rented with a management company, and I don't know if they have any culpability for not forwarding rents or if that management agreement is valid without the majority owner - or if they even know about the majority owner.

The majority owner wants to get rid of this, after 35 years of strife- would you run towards or away from this deal, and how to proceed as a wholesaler? The majority owner lives out of the country.

I certainly agree about the need for eviction as the seller let the contractor move in, with permission. I'm certain he will respond with a Mechanics lien for work done as there was no agreement on that part of it either. The contract is 70 days in length, if an issue with the title.

I see myself trying to do some door-step negotiating with a hostile tenant in order to do walk-thrus, which is never fun. What have others had success with, on the front door-steps?

I am working to get a property under contract. I made an offer to the seller six weeks ago, showing him pictures of kicked and punched in walls, doors torn off, and a foundation corner being propped up with wood blocks. He elected to have someone move in who said they were a contractor and assured him they would fix up the property. They had no written agreement.

The "resident" installed new doors that the owner paid for and sheet rock was also delivered. The owner now wants to sell but the resident refuses to return his calls. The neighbor says additional people have since moved into the same house as well.

I saw the house before the resident moved in and it cant be worse than before. I will have to get buyers into the house and have little I can do other than knock on the front door. The seller says the people are now squatters, but the resident/contractor moved in with the sellers agreement - although not in writing. I'm sure the resident contractor will immediately file a Mechanics lien, then clouding title. I put a clause in the contract that if there is an issue with the title, the contract will be extended for up to 30 days.

Can this person be removed as a trespasser/squatter? How can the seller or I proceed, with my equitable interest? If I record my contract before he records a mechanics lien, it probably wont matter; the seller also lives out of state. This one looks even tougher than my last wholesale.