Land Contract vs. Seller Financing–Questions!? - Posted by Lora Alexander
Posted by Lora Alexander on October 05, 2005 at 13:16:02:
Hi everyone,
I am a newbie. And I’m sure the answers to my questions are somewhere within this website but I dont really know where to look. Can someone explain the difference between a Land Contract or Land Trust Vs. Owner Financing? I want to buy an acre of land w/an old mobile home on it for $25K from my brother. Since he wants to keep it in the family, he’s willing to take a couple of thousand dollars now and payments for a year until I can pay for the whole thing when I refi another home I own. Anyway, for some reason, I was thinking the only way to do this is with a Land Contract, which enables him to keep the title. Then I saw the following post on here that said
“In my opinion, a land contract benefits the seller more than the buyer. If you are the buyer, there might be better solutions like asking the seller to do the financing. At least that way you will have the deed”.
For me this sounds much better to me. I would like to have the deed to the land (I want to put a new modular home on it eventually and I just think it would be easier to get the financing for it if I had the land in my name…although i have other reasons for liking this way better). What are the differences between the 2 deals? Tax consequences? What are the benefits and pitfalls for each?
Thanks so much for any and all help you can give me!!
Posted by Brian (UT) on October 06, 2005 at 11:38:22:
Lora
Most of my experience was in California as an investor and realtor, and I saw to many ruined buyers who bought on an Installment Land Contract. I once attended a California Bar Continuing Education course on the subject and the message was there are three times you should use a land contract in california, and they are never, never, and never! I’m sure the bar agrees in many other states, I just don’t know which.
I know they are common in other states and I’ve been offered them by sellers in other states but as far as I’m concerned there is no real benefit for a buyer only risk, and that includes family.
Land Contract is Seller Financing - Posted by John Behle
Posted by John Behle on October 05, 2005 at 17:14:05:
Whoever wrote:
“In my opinion, a land contract benefits the seller more than the buyer. If you are the buyer, there might be better solutions like asking the seller to do the financing. At least that way you will have the deed”.
has things confused. A land contract IS seller financing. “Land Contracts” refer to a form of seller financing and are called different things in different states. Different names are used like; land contract, contract, contract for deed, uniform real estate contract, etc. But all refer to a form of seller financing. A Land Contract is different from a Land Trust which is what may have some people confused.
With seller financing, there are three primary types. A land contract (or contract for deed), a trust deed or a mortgage. All forms can be used with some variation from state to state. When a property has no existing loans, any of the three can be used. If there is an existing loan, then it is a “wrap” situation and you can use a contract or a variation of a trust deed that is an “All Inclusive Trust Deed” or AITD. Some others seem to think a “wrap” or wraparound loan is a trust deed or contract only. It can be either. A wrap refers to the situation, where a contract or AITD is the actual form used.
With your brother you can use either form. It does depend on your state though. The statement that a land contract benefits the seller more than the buyer is also inaccurate. Land Contracts and the foreclosure laws and procedures vary state by state and can benefit buyer or seller. In many states, the potential problems with contracts can be a concern to buyers, but also to sellers. Trust Deeds are usually the better bet - but it would be important to check specifically with your state.