Profile picture for SoCal_Engr

SoCal_Engr's Advice

Contributions are sorted newest to oldest.

  • 7334 Contributions
  • 81 Best Answers
  • 5880 Helpful

SoCal_Engr wrote:

Can someone please explain why sellers should subsidize what ought to be the buyer's responsibility?

Answer
"While I sincerely appreciate everyone taking the time to contribute... I am fascinated that nobody seems willing (or able?) to provide a straight-forward answer to straight-forward questions around here."Let me start off by saying I'm just another consumer (albeit an opinionated one), and not a RE pro...With that said, let me re-phrase to match the direct question you asked.A seller should subsidize what ought to be the buyer's responsibility if that is what is required to meet their (the seller's) objectives for the transaction. The same can be said for any of the seller's actions involved in marketing the property, negotiating price and terms, and conducting the transaction.The cynical (realistic?) perspective is that this is all a process of self-interests.-- The seller has objectives they want to achieve, and selling the property is a means to an end.-- The buyer has objectives, and typically is looking for best "value" for their money.-- The REAs would like to get paid, and this doesn't happen unless a transaction is closed.As a seller, you take actions in the process to further your self interests, to achieve your goals, to allow you to move forward to "the next thing". If you believe an action is necessary to achieve your goals, then you should act on it. If not, or if you think the action inhibits achieving your goals, then don't.The reason I answered with the original phrasing is that it sounds like you are asking for some justification of the potential buyer's request...and that's purely in the buyer's mind/arena/yadda-yadda. What one person thinks is reasonable, another will not.Cheers...
July 03
(4)

Can someone please explain why sellers should subsidize what ought to be the buyer's responsibility?

Answer
My $0.02...who cares?As a seller, you should have already determined what you need out of the deal, and whether or not you can reasonably expect to get it. And, while there is usually a $$$ threshold that you want/need to clear, often there are "other things" can you are also after. It could be a quick sale, a clean offer, etc.As for the buyer's side, all you should really care about is "Will their offer allow me to walk away with what I need?". Everything else will just give you headaches, or ulcers...or, more likely, make the whole transaction overly stressful as you worry about the "other side's motivation/benefits/etc.".We all want to get "the best deal" we can. Unfortunately, too many have no idea what constitutes "good enough" going in...and the only way to "know for sure" is in hindsight, if even then.
July 03
(3)

Aren't there conditions where bankruptcy is preferrable to cash-out refi?

Answer
"I get what sunnyview is saying but if you promised to pay someone shouldn't you try to pay them? "Yes, I agree, you should. The questions then becomes "at what cost?" and "under what conditions do you exercise a valid, legal option?"I'm watching friends do everything they can "to be honorable and live up to their promises". So far, they've trashed their retirement savings, and then someone "helped" them into a 125% loan to literally "mortgage their future" to "live up to their promises". And, it is not unreasonable to project that the new loan is just delaying the inevitable...at which time I seriously doubt the mortgage holder is going to give credit for "having acted honorably with their other creditors".At some point, it simply makes sense to make the same sound, personal finance decisions that a business would make. Cut your losses, save what you can of the core business, and roll up your sleeves to rebuild.BTW - Why is it "smart" for an individual to organize to isolate the ramifications of "promises" they make as a business entity, but it's "dis-honorable" if an individual chooses to exercise similar options with unsecured business transactions?
July 02
(1)
Aren't there conditions where bankruptcy is preferrable to cash-out refi?
With property values rebounding in some areas, the "cash-out refi to consolidate debt" adverts are popping up again.In some conditions, wouldn't a bankruptcy be better? Especially if the cash-out refi essentially converts unsecured debt to secured debt?
July 01
(1)

what is the average price per square foot to build a house in zip code 65355

Answer
Try this site. Costs are dependent on many variables, including location. This site allows you to provide a fairly specific description of the house you would like to build, and will provide you with a detailed breakout of costs, tailored for your location.It's likely not 100%, but it (a) will get you "in the ballpark", and (b) will provide you with a baseline for comparison with other's information.
May 27
(1)

Questions re Home in Trust, PoA, and HELOCs...

Answer
Had hoped to be able to find the "lazy way" to get the answers to my questions, but...Here are the answers I found to my questions:#1 - As long as the trust paperwork is all properly filed, shouldn't be a problem.#2 - More interesting.Congress passed a law on 15 Oct 1982 referred to as the Garn-St. Germain Act. One of the interesting things this law did was to identify situations where a lender is not allowed to invoke any "due on sale" clause.The general clause is 12 (U.S.C.) Section 1701j-3(d), which declares that a lender may not exercise the "due on sale" clause for the conditions specified in the subsections.-- 1701j-3(d)(5) prevents exercise of due-on-sale when a relative receives the property due to death of the borrower.-- 1701j-3(d)(5) prevents exercise of due-on-sale when a spouse/child of the borrower becomes the owner of the property (i.e., supporting intra-family gifts/transfer for estate management).So, the HELOC would not need to be paid off in the scenario described.Ciao...
May 21
(1)
Questions re Home in Trust, PoA, and HELOCs...
General Situation...-- Home is in a trust-- Primary trustees unable to manage trustQuestion #1...How difficult is it for an acting trustee, using PoA, to take out an equity loan (HELOC or otherwise) against an otherwise un-encumbered property?Question #2...Somewhere down the line, there is a presumption that the house would need to be gifted to a different trust. Would any in-place HELOC need to be paid off at the time that the property is transferred between trusts?Thanks...
May 17
(0)

HELOC rates on 2nd home higher than on primary?

Answer
Thanks Clay. Home's free-and-clear, so CLTV is not a worry. Just want to be able to access equity on an as-needed basis vice lump-sum.Go Padres! And take the Chargers with you!  ;-)
May 14
(1)

land / lot loans

Answer
It was a while back, but I purchased a lot in San Diego using Chase. They required 25% down, and had construction-to-perm loans for the eventual build.Good luck.
May 13
(0)
HELOC rates on 2nd home higher than on primary?
Are HELOC rates on 2nd homes comparable to those on primary? Took a quick look on some local CU sites, but the answer wasn't easily found, and I'm feeling lazy.
May 13
(0)