Posted by Ed Copp (OH) on June 08, 2005 at 07:39:37:
Equity is last to be paid if it does, in fact exist. It is normal for property to sell above apprasil here. So the bank gets what is owed them first, then the court system and lawyer get paid. what is left is equity. If there is $75K in equity now it would be common (in my area) for the property to sell for full price, and there would be $75K equity less selling expenses. Possibly about $5k. $75K split two ways when there are two names on the deed. Her half would be $35K (so what are you offering her?).
Mine is in no way a hot market. Buyers often pay more than full price when they feel that they are getting a deal.
So she seems to me to be holding most of the power here. What does she have to lose, by doing nothing at all? I think that if you want her out you will have to pay her, a fair price that is.
Crazy Ex Girlfriend Won’t Sell the House? Help ! - Posted by PJ
Posted by PJ on June 05, 2005 at 11:17:21:
I got a call from a seller today who is in an interesting situation. Let’s call him JOHN.
FMV = 170,000
1st = 100,000 (70k equity)
no repairs, good shape, mortgage current
He bought this house with his girlfriend at the time about 5 years ago.
Now, they have seperated and he has moved out of state.
The mortgage is in both their names along with the deed.
The girlfriend now lives in the house for free and He is getting tired of this and wants to sell.
HE offered the girlfriend 30k of the equity at closing and she refused and simply DOES NOT WANT TO SELL TO HIM but anyone else will do.
So, here is what I came up with as an idea:
JOHN says she will accept 150k for that house and sell to ANYBODY but JOHN.
So, I will buy house from JOHN and his GF and immediately
turn around and SELL back to JOHN, WITHOUT his GF finding out.
JOHN agreed to pay me $2,500 for my efforts. I told him thats too low and I’d consider doing it for $5k.
What, if any, is a legal way of handling this transaction?
Buy her share, and sell it … - Posted by Krum
Posted by Krum on June 08, 2005 at 22:38:48:
Buy her share, and sell it to him.
… The seller is making the payments, the ex girlfriend is living for free…
She has no moral, and legal standing to require not selling to her exboyfriend.
Don’t be scared do it.
Re: Crazy Ex Girlfriend Help ! - Posted by Ed Copp (OH)
Posted by Ed Copp (OH) on June 06, 2005 at 16:12:47:
Let me get this right. You say she is living in the house for FREE, so who is making the payments? She has possession of the house. She has her name on the deed (et. al). She could probably do this forever. Now if everybody stops paying and the house is sold at sheriff’s sale, she will still get most of her equity, and she will have a palce to live until the sheriff sets her out.
If that’s about right, then me thinks someone needs to refigure who is CRAZY.
Re: Crazy Ex Girlfriend Won’t Sell the … - Posted by Sean
Posted by Sean on June 06, 2005 at 07:29:57:
I wouldn’t do it…
Buying the house outright sure… buying to sell back to John? No…
You already have a somewhat vindictive woman in this situation from the perspective of the ex-bf… You really want this woman feeling scorned by you? I don’t know about you, but I sure don’t want what is an ugly domestic situation somehow involve me now as an object of contempt and anger.
A few K after taxes is not worth it to me, this woman decides to come after me with a civil suit and she’ll cost me more than the “profit” you are involved in.
Re: Crazy - Posted by breakup
Posted by breakup on June 05, 2005 at 16:37:54:
If John really wants the home for himself, he should appeal to the greed factor. Tell John to offer her more than half of the equity, like two thirds. She will get twice the equity as he, but in return he keeps the house. That’s fair as can be. He will probably have to refi but he’ll pay closing costs only once. (Of course you’re out of this scenario.)
However, if she still refuses, then John will know it’s totally hopeless and you will have a deal. Tell John you decided you can’t afford the risk of being devious. Then give them a standing offer and wait.
Working way too cheap… - Posted by JT-IN
Posted by JT-IN on June 05, 2005 at 11:37:23:
Playing with situations like this, where emotional stability may not be at its highest with some of the parties involved, could get you more problems than you bargained for… Your intention is to deceive the GF from the outset of this transaction, and I have seen folks in similar transactions that would do serious harm to you for such activity, out of desperation.
If it were me, I’d buy John’s 1/2 interest, (known as a partial interest, at a discount) then buy out the GF, then makret the house for retail price. Any notion of becoming a shill for one side in the dispute is really out of the realm of sensible RE investing, IMO.
Just the way that I view things…
Re: Crazy Ex Girlfriend Help ! - Posted by PJ
Posted by PJ on June 07, 2005 at 11:25:33:
Ex girlfriend name is on deed, but so Is my sellers.
Both names are also on the loan.
The seller is making the payments, the ex girlfriend is living for free.
She wants to sell the house also, just so long as it’s not to him
If everybody stops paying, there is a foreclosure and NO ONE gets any equity. I don’t understand the part where you say she will get most of her equity - how?
Here in my state, 3 months and the mortgage co will start foreclosure and end up at the court house steps.
Re: Working way too cheap… - Posted by LeonNC
Posted by LeonNC on June 05, 2005 at 23:13:05:
Does buying a partial interest violate the due on sale clause? Reason I ask is I’m from NC and we’ve got that possible legislation coming down. House bill 725.
hahah - Posted by PJ
Posted by PJ on June 05, 2005 at 23:09:33:
hey, all I’m tryin to do is make lemonade out of lemons.
I do see ur point.
By the way, How would such a transaction even take place?
Say, the GF agrees to sell me the house… and later I turn and sell to him.
of course, I wont bring in new financing or have cash to purchase it.
so, how would this transaction even work??
Re: May not be the same - Posted by Ed Copp (OH)
Posted by Ed Copp (OH) on June 07, 2005 at 17:59:38:
in every state, and there may be differences for the uninformed. Here in my state when a house goes into foreclosure the property is sold at sheriff’s sale. The loan(s), and selleig expenses get paid off from the proceeds of the sale. Any money left over is equity and goes to the former property owners. How she would get her half would be by check from the court system.
Now if there is no equity at the sheriff’s sale, then there probably is none now either. At any rate she does not sound crazy to me. It seems like she has a good thing going. How much are you willing to pay her in cash for her half of the equity anyway?
Yes it would… - Posted by JT-IN
Posted by JT-IN on June 06, 2005 at 03:21:26:
Provided that a mtg or td exists on the property. This would violate the proposed HB 725, as I understand this. Possibly even a transfer from the GF to the estranged BF directly, may even violate the DOS clause, since they are not related as Husband and Wife. I’m not familiar with your states laws on common law marriage, which could have an impact on this as well.
Sounds like Subj To investing will become a thing of the past in NC, all except for licensed RE agents, who are execmpt from HB 725. So maybe you simply need to be a licensed RE agent in order to invest in NC… which could be part of the focus of the bill, to force people who make a practice in RE in any form, to be licensed agents.
Just the way that I view things…
I can’t advise you… - Posted by JT-IN
Posted by JT-IN on June 06, 2005 at 21:20:59:
On something that I do not recommend that you do… You’ll have to collect that info elsewhere; Sorry.
Your questions are too remedial for such a complex deal anyway. There are more ways to get burned in this deal than there are ways to make money… and I never like those odds… You’ll have to decide for yourself, no doubt.
whoa… - Posted by PJ
Posted by PJ on June 08, 2005 at 02:48:06:
are you saying that if a person has 50k equity and they goto sheriffs sale (we dont have those here), then the BORROWER is entitled to her EQUITY of 50k minus the lender costs???