Due On Sales Clause -- John Reed Article
Has anyone read this article? If so, tell me what you think about John Reed “due on sales clause. I am not sure if should use the land trust or not.
http://www.johntreed.com/dueonsale.html
Dwan Bent uses the Land Trust, too. I have her Foreclosure and Short Sales books are excellent, and I have all of William Bronchick's,too. Bills books are great!
Thanks for the feedback.
Carol
Let me give my opinion!
Tyrant, bully, boor, destructive narcissist and psychologically abusive person.
Just an in the box thinker!
I fill like a weight has been lifted "LOL".
[addsig]
yeah, it is as if John Reed works for a bank or something. you know, I can understand his point from the perspective that newbies really should not be doing sub2 investing without really understanding what they are doing, because the seller is still on the hook for that loan, and a deed in the wrong hands, could result in serious problems for a homeowner that already has serious problems, so people should really learn a bit before they just run around grabbing deeds as fast as they can, HOWEVER, John Reed is just over the top, and uses his clout as the "guru basher" to sell more of his books and tapes
Best, Dave
This is interesting. I did not know this.
Anyone one else would like to respond, feel free.
Thank you everyone.
Carol
John T Reed is painful to read. I actually bought one of his books and I wanted to stop investing and become an alcoholic. He is certainly a smart guy but has an awful lot of time to bash every aspect of real estate investing and every guru associated with real estate investing. Just my opinion.
[addsig]
I've never bought any of his books, but I've read a good bit on his website. I think he brings up some very valid points. Yeah, I think the man's a megamaniac, very egotistical, but, as I said, he DOES bring up some very good points. I like his GURU test, and I guess subconsciously, I'd applied several of his tests before I'd ever read what he had to say. So, I'd say yeah, take whatever he says with a grain of salt, but he's worth a read. Now, as far as Real Estate investing goes, most of his stuff looks VERY dated, and I wouldn't put much store in that part of it.
He must feel that everyone else is making more money than him, and he's upset about it.
He's living in a small box. He sounds like some of my former colleagues when I was a bank examiner.
[addsig]
William Bronchick said there is no due on sales Jail.
http://www.****This URL Not allowed****.com/articles/no-due-on-sale-jail
http://www.****This URL Not allowed****.com/articles/due-on-sale-clause-2
i thought you might maybe someone would like to check out his articles.
thanks.
carol
[ Edited by CarolG on Date 12/03/2004 ]
Having read both Mr. Reed and Mr. Bronchick, I find Mr. Reed more persuasive. It appears to me that subject-to purchases are likely (in many if not most cases) to obligate either the seller or buyer (or both) to engage in dishonest behavior relative to the existing mortage lender. Just my opinion, though.
My sub2 experience is very limited, but if you do it right, there is absolutely nothing dishonest or unethical about it. Unfortunately, some of the GURUs out there promote out-and-out deception and borderline fraud, and that taints creative real estate for all of us (perceived guilt by association).
[addsig]
thank you everyone for sharing your interest.
Merry xmas
Carol
John Reed is a controversial figure. His main problem seems to be on insisting in telling the truth. Newbies hate him because he dispels a lot of the sunshine their favorite guru has blown up their tails.
Old timers like myself respect him as being right on the money. We've seen a lot of gurus come and go over the last two decades and many of the present crop will fall by the same sword.
Having said that, Reed has another big problem. He is too straight arrow. In order to be successful in REI one should take advantage of things like the lack of enforcement of the DOS, as long as it is ethical. There are many ways to profit honestly, without being bound by the strict letter of the law, and insisting on going by the book.
I am a new investor just learning the ropes. I had a seller come to me and say please buy my house I can’t make my payments. The house needed tons of work and he would have had a very difficult time selling it. We agreed that I would take title and the house would remain under the existing loan. I went to the title company put the house in escrow and have since made every payment on time. The former home owner has no dings on his credit. The bank still has a performing asset. And after six months I should make a profit for my time effort and money (if only escrows would close on time). I really think that as long as the investor is willing and able to make all of the payments on time this is a win-win situation for everyone involved. Speaking of being unethical, banks are rarely always honest. A very large national bank recently took part in stringing me along for about 60 days telling me that the buyer of one of my properties was going to be able to get her loan and that the loan would close in one week. It never happened and this cost me a considerable amount of money. From what I understand of due on sale clauses the main thing to note is that they can call the loan due. As long as you as an investor are willing to take this chance then it is my opinion to go for it. However I don’t think I want to include this strategy for the properties that I hold for long term.
Has any one done a refinance on a property that had a loan in the previous owner’s name? Did this cause any problems?
Thank you in advance for any comments regarding my statements above. I have only done one subject to existing financing deals. However with my first house that I used this technique on it sure has been a great tool to have in the bag.
Since posts keep coming about this I'll chime in.
Two big problems he has; trying to pass off 2nd hand comments as fact and biased "research".
He uses comments from someone who knows someone who's brother-in-law's uncle listened to a course and didn't do a deal. He forgets that 95% of people who try this business fail not because of the ideas but because of they're unwillingness to execute a plan. Check out the Legrand review. His experience with him was listening to one cassette tape. That's a weak argument.
He only presents the whiner's view. Whiner's need someone to justify why they are lazy and can't take action and Reed gives them that avenue. He caters to the lowest common denominator of those who want something to cry about.
Lastly, something in my character just doesn't connect with people who try to tell me not to learn something. It's too Orwellion and not useful at all.
pilot58:
As long as you have the deed (and have recorded it) showing you to be the title holder of record, you should be able to refinance a loan held by someone else.
On my last sub2 deal I needed to refinance the seller's crappy loan immediately upon taking possession in order to make money (10+% interest!). My broker had several lenders who would lend to me provided I could prove that I was the owner. You have to find a broker with good resources--title seasoning is one reason a lender won't do this, so I made sure to tell my broker to ask specifically about title seasoning when researching lenders.
Andy
JohnMichael
Quote:
Tyrant, bully, boor, destructive narcissist and psychologically abusive person"
Don't be shy. Tell us how you REALLY feel.
LOL