PDA

View Full Version : Am I a parasitic scumbag or a knight in shining armour?


Pendaric
06-27-2007, 09:20 PM
I've started a new company up 3 months ago buying houses at below the market value.

So far I've done one deal and am in the process of completing another.

Deal 1:

The property is worth £120k. Owned by an elderly couple with no money other than the equity they have in the house. They cannot get a mortgage because they have no income but they want to access the equity in order to have some money to spend. They don't want to move out of their house, having lived there for the last 30 years.

They are elderly but in full possesion of their mental faculties. They understand what they are doing. They had 2 other offers from similar companies to my own but chose to go with me.

My offer was £88k and they rent the property back from me at £500 a month. They accepted this. The deal cost me £4k to do in terms of mortgage and legal fees. On the day I bought it I took out a mortgage for £97k, therefore I have covered all my costs and have £5k in my pocket and £23k equity remaining in the house. I will be holding it long term and expect it to double in value over the next 10 years.

The mortgage on an interest only basis is costing me £410 a month, so covered by the rental and leaving me some money which will just about cover the running costs (insurance, yearly safety checks, occasional maintenance).

Have I blatantly ripped them off or have I been a benefactor to them?

Deal 2:

The property is worth £185k. Currently owned by a couple who are in a bitter divorce and only speaking when necessary, principally through solicitors. They need to sell quickly due to financial pressures.

I am buying it to sell again. My offer is £156k, which has been accepted. It will cost me £19k to do the deal if I can sell it within 6 months, which leaves me with £10k profit.

Am I preying on their misfortune or am I doing them a favour?

Please note that I am totally comfortable with the ethics of what I am doing - I am transparent with people that I am offering them less than the market value and I tell them what I anticipate making from the deal. The people I am dealing with are fully aware that they are selling their houses for less than they are worth and are making a conscious decision that a quick sale is worth the discount for them.

Having said that, they normally agree to this sort of thing because they are in desperate straits.

I have been told by a couple of people that I am a parasitic, blood sucking leech preying on the misfortunes of others. I don't see it like that myself, but I just wondered what the general feeling on here was.

LadyShea
06-27-2007, 09:37 PM
As long as you're up front, honest and fully disclose everything, the ball's in the seller's court. The elderly couple has few other options for accessing their equity and being able to still live comfortably...the divorcing couple definitely can choose not to accept a low offer. I don't see where anyone has been bled here. I don't know I'd go so far as to say that you are doing them favors.

Kyuss Apollo
06-27-2007, 11:30 PM
It's the market economy. And it's a buyer's market for real estate, at least here in the states.

Which is why we're not gonna sell any of ours at the current moment.

Dingfod
06-28-2007, 12:18 AM
Deal #1 sounds fair. The elderly couple could nearly generate enough income from the money paid to pay their rent and you have positive cash flow. Its a win-win. Question though, do they have reverse mortgages in the UK? They way they work is the mortgage company pays the old mortgage off and either a lump sum or monthly payments back to the mortgagee until they die or sell the property. Upon death, their heirs get nothing unless they want to take on mortgage payments or possibly sell it for more than owed on the reverse mortgage.

Deal #2 sounds more than fair. They need out of it quick and would likely pay a real estate agency most the difference you stand to profit. Around here there are billboards advertising "We buy ugly houses!" Homevesters (http://www.homevestors.com/), the company in question, offers the same sort of deal, they offer less than market value for a quick sale with minimal closing costs. Many people have taken them up on it.

godfry n. glad
06-28-2007, 01:10 AM
:nun: of the above - I cannot vote in your poll.

I personally dislike deal #1. I would rather see the elderly couple get closer to the 'market value' on their property (split the £24K with the couple, so you get a portion for brokering the deal, and then sit on it until you realize even more equity, or wave the monthly charges until both die or are placed in a care facility.)

It seems to me that aging is their problem and they have no way of controlling that, so I think you are taking advantage of something they have no control over.

The second is a different matter and of their own making. If they are willing to take what your offer is, then that's what the market bears. They could sell it themselves on the open market (as could the above couple), if they were patient enough. I guess it's a case of how much one's impatience is worth to them.

I'd like to see "capitalism with a human face" and, to me, scenario #1 does not fit that rather vague exemplar.

I think you're rather decent for even asking.

roastelk
06-28-2007, 07:07 AM
hers some advice..look for property in edmonton alberta canada..there is a housing shortage up here, in under two years my property value has doubled to over $250K. and there is no end in sight to the housing shortage, as things just keep getting worse.....plus im mkin $450 a month just renting out a spare room, which is 3/4 of my mortgage.

Pinecone
06-28-2007, 01:28 PM
If someone believes they need 'cash for their home', then it is most likely that they will be in some kind of misfortune.

There's no sense in starting a repair service for broken tractors, and then worry about how or why those people broke their tractors. Could a tractor repair person be a parasitic, blood sucking leech preying on the misfortunes of others? Sure, but it has nothing to do with how or why their customers tractors got broken, but in what one charged them for the repair. I suppose if you threw rocks in their yard in the night to purposefully break their tractors then offered to repair them, you would have a hand in directly contributing to their misfortune and your gain.

Cash for homes, like repair services, are always going to have some misfortune that resulted in the requested service. If you believe you are giving a fair deal, and the customer believes they are getting a fair deal, then the rest is gossip.

Pendaric
08-02-2007, 02:46 PM
This is the house from deal number two:

http://aspasia.jumpnow.co.uk:81/pls/jump/rv?id=20160

If anyone fancies a beautiful 3 bedroom detached property in the quiet market town of Morley then feel free to talk to me!

Sorrel
08-02-2007, 04:02 PM
Both are fine. There are well established companies who provide the same service of buying your home to provide you with cash while enabling you to continue living there, so you must be offering them a good deal in comparison for them to choose to go with you instead, I'd imagine.

It might be the case that on a small retirement income, the owners in case 1 may not acutally have been able to afford to run their household save by entering a contract of this nature.

Sale and lease back agreements are increasingly being used by companies to release cash for more profitable uses. Additionally, the property company they sell to, as a specialist, may be able to manage the premises more cheaply/efficiently than the original owner could so that they're not paying any more in rent than they did in maintaining the properties. The more 'profitable' use for the old couple being their enjoyment of a good standard of living, living in the home they love, and not have to penny-pinch and worry about bills and such.

Deal 2 confuses me. In the uk housing market I'd imagine that slapping a cheapish fixed price on the property would guarantee a quick sale.

So no, no exploitation in either case. No-one was forced to do anything, and they were aware that they had other options. Ethics seem sound to me.

beyelzu
08-02-2007, 07:07 PM
actually, i would say that both deals are fair, in the case of the elderly couple given the state that they are in, fixed incomes and wanting to enjoy their remaining years, i think that you are indeed doing them a favor.

but that is the nature of good transactions in capitalism or at least it is supposed to be

JoeP
08-02-2007, 09:16 PM
If anyone fancies a beautiful 3 bedroom detached property in the quiet market town of Morley then feel free to talk to me!

Now you're advertising your wares right here on :ff:? ... Can I change my vote?
:wink: