"Subject to" vs. borrow-ability - Posted by Tony

Real Estate Investing
1

Posted by Jim Kennedy - Houston, TX on January 09, 2003 at 15:24:12:

Hi Dave,

That is definitely weird. There must be something wrong with the links at Tim’s site. I’ve alerted Tim to the problem. I’m sending you a copy of the article directly via e-mail.

Sorry about the confusion.

Best of Success!!

Jim Kennedy,
Houston, TX

2

“Subject to” vs. borrow-ability - Posted by Tony

Posted by Tony on January 04, 2003 at 19:49:24:

I want one of my past customers who sold me their home “subject2” to be able to work out a deal so that they can get a new home. “subject to” meaning subject to existing financing, of course.

I have heard of sending the seller a non-recordable contract which states the same thing as the subject2 agreements.

I have done some searching of the site.

The property is in a trust in the old customer’s family name.

Are there now mortgage companies that exist now that will overlook an existing mortgage on a person’s original home–if they have sold it to me subject to existing financing.

Or, rather, what are their requirements.

Thank you very much.

Tony

3

Re: “Subject to” vs. borrow-ability - Posted by Jim Kennedy - Houston, TX

Posted by Jim Kennedy - Houston, TX on January 05, 2003 at 04:38:03:

Tony,

Check out Tim Randle’s article on this subject at:

http://texasrealestateclub.com/articles/randle/sellerloan.html

Best of Success!!

Jim Kennedy,
Houston, TX

4

Huh? - Posted by DaveD (WI)

Posted by DaveD (WI) on January 09, 2003 at 14:18:08:

Jim, I think that’s a bad link, it goes to Tim’s article on directional signs.
-Dave