|
Why would a seller agree to allow you to take
over a loan that is in their name?
There is definitely some risk involved for a
seller who agrees to sell a property "subject-to" the existing
mortgage. For one thing, if the buyer decides to walk away from the
deal, or fails to make those mortgage payments, the seller is the
one who will suffer. A sellers credit rating could be ruined by a
buyer who fails to make the mortgage payments on time. Therefore,
most sellers are very reluctant to agree to "subject-to" terms
unless they are highly motivated to do so.
Seller motivation is the most common reason a
seller will agree to this type of arrangement. There is usually some
extreme circumstance or personal issue that is forcing the seller to
do something they might not ordinarily do. This is why we often say
that you are looking for motivated sellers, rather than houses,
especially when it comes to creative financing options.
I once did a "subject-to" deal with a seller who
was getting married and moving out of state. She had been trying to
sell her property for several months, with no takers. It was in a
great area, in a nicer neighborhood, but the house needed some
updating and the colors were rather drab inside.
Time was running out. The wedding was only weeks
away, and the seller was planning to take up residence with her new
husband in his house. Because of this she was motivated to sell the
property any way she could.
She accepted our offer to buy her property
subject-to the existing mortgage, for two years. That meant that we
had two years to get new financing and pay her off. She understood
the risk to her credit and was concerned, but we were able to
produce references and other documentation that made her feel
comfortable doing this deal with us. Had she not been in the
position she was in, she likely would never have agreed to accept a
sale that would leave the mortgage in her name, so motivation was
the primary factor in this deal.
We updated the house, and sold it a few months
later to a buyer who was able to qualify for their own mortgage, so
the seller got her money about a year and a half earlier than
expected. We had planned to lease/option the property to a buyer if
necessary, then help them get qualified for a new loan. As it
happened, we did not need to do the lease/option to get a buyer. Of
course, we did spend some money fixing the property up first. This
helped us find a qualified buyer faster than anticipated.
The "subject-to" arrangement allowed the seller
to solve her immediate problem. It also allowed us to buy the
property without having to qualify for a new loan. Everyone was
happy.
Another time, I did a deal with an investor who
sold to us "subject-to" an existing mortgage on a multi-unit
property. He was motivated to get out from under the payments on
this property due to some other financial problems he was having.
When writing "subject-to" offers, you need to get
the seller to provide you with a copy of the current mortgage terms.
You will want to include these terms in your offer, so that they are
spelled out to the letter.
For example: "Offer price $125,000 dollars,
subject-to existing mortgage payoff of $95,780, with payments of
$789 per month, principal and interest, (the sellers current
payment) interest rate 6.5%, for 24 months. After 24 months, buyer
will obtain new financing and payoff existing mortgage balance.
Buyer also agrees to pay seller $5000 cash at this time".
So we are going to carry this note for up to two
years, and when we either sell or get new financing, we will pay off
the sellers existing loan, and we will owe the seller an additional
$5000 in cash. 24 months is used in this example, but of course,
your terms and time frame will vary with each deal.
You can put in any terms you and the seller agree
to. It just depends on the situation and the level of seller
motivation. Just keep it legal and moral. You can't enforce terms in
a contract that are in violation of existing laws, or attempt to
circumvent legal procedures that are required by law.
If the sellers payment also includes an amount
for taxes and insurance, you would want to specify that too. You
want to be sure you clearly document the exact terms of the existing
mortgage. You will usually need your own insurance in your name,
since you are the title holder of record, even if the mortgage is in
the sellers name. Discuss this with your closing attorney to be sure
you handle this correctly.
The payment and interest rate are taken directly
from the sellers existing loan terms. You are merely documenting
them in the offer, so that you are clear on how much you are paying
each month. If there are additional arrangements, such as a second
mortgage, or other terms you and the seller agree to, you should
make sure that they are also clearly documented in the offer.
Writing a good offer is really just a matter of
making sure every specific detail of your agreement is stated in
terms that are clear. Should you ever wind up in court over
contract, a crucial issue will be the clarity of the terms in the
agreement.
You may want to have your attorney review the
terms of an offer before you and the seller sign it, to insure
things are correctly stated. It is pretty basic stuff, but if you
need advice, get it BEFORE the seller accepts your offer. Don't risk
making a mistake if you are not sure how to word your offer. This
article is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice.
As with any deal where you are taking over the
payments, you want to be sure that your exit strategy will work with
this existing mortgage. For example, if you agree to buy a property
subject-to an existing payment of $925 per month, and hold it for
rental, be sure the rent will be higher than the payment and
expenses. This sounds like a no-brainer, but sometimes people get so
caught up in the idea of buying property without having to qualify,
that they forget to make sure that the numbers make sense.
If you are paying $925, but the property will
only rent for $875, that ain't such a great deal is it? Just because
you can buy a property "subject-to" does not mean you should. Make
sure the numbers work for the exit strategy you intend to use. If
you are going to fix and resell, you should check comps and be sure
you can sell for an amount that is higher than the payoff on the
existing loan. Don't forget to include all of your anticipated
expenses.
You should have at least $10K or more left as
profit. Most professionals like to see more than $10K. Some have a
minimum $20K profit margin, simply because you can always incur more
expenses than expected. Extra profit margin in the deal helps guard
against losses.
Your offer price plus all repairs and expenses
should not exceed 80% of what you know the property is worth. (Note
I did not say what you "think" the property is worth) You must
double check and be absolutely as sure as you can be. Pay for an
appraisal if you must, but the ARV has to be right. I have suffered
the consequences of that myself. It is an easy mistake to make, even
when you THINK you know.
Use 80% LTV as a general benchmark to judge your
deal numbers. If total cost is above 80% of the after repair value,
the deal gets less and less do-able. At 80% of ARV, the cash flow is
generally positive and there is enough margin to produce at least a
10K profit. The farther below 80% you can get, the better. This is a
good rule of thumb for those who are buying to hold for rental or
retail. It gets more difficult to break even if you get too far
above 80% of ARV.
Closing a subject-to deal is like closing any
other deal. Paperwork will usually include a document that the
seller will sign, which will be sent to their mortgage company. It
will notify the lender that the seller is now assigning management
of this property to "xxx management company". It will also direct
the lender to send all correspondence related to this property to
the management company address. This may vary in your state. Discuss
the details with a competent closing attorney.
There is a long standing argument about whether
"subject-to" deals trigger the "due on sale" clause commonly found
in virtually all mortgages these days. This due on sale clause says
that the lender can call the loan due if they find that the title of
the property has changed hands without their knowledge. There are
many people on both sides of this argument, but to be honest, this
is a change of title without the lenders direct knowledge, and in my
opinion, this does give the lender the right to invoke the due on
sale clause. If the lender did call the loan due, you would have to
be prepared to sell or put other financing in place.
I have knowledge of many such deals, where there
was no issue with the due on sale clause. But more recently, I have
seen a few lenders taking a harder line and threatening to call some
loans in.
If the numbers are good enough, I would do a
subject-to deal any time. As long as I have enough equity in the
property, I feel that the deal is worth doing. And being able to buy
without qualifying is a nice benefit.
Donna Robinson is a real estate investor, author,
and consultant located in Atlanta Georgia. You may read more of her
articles on her website at
http://www.realestateinvestorhelp.com/
or you may contact her by email at
drobinson@reihelp.com or call 404 542-9903. |