|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
wow, immensely useful (Reply to this comment)
by benho
this, like the credit review was immensely useful. I have no clue how the process works, though I have been thinking about it recently. Definitely another one to save.
|
Jun 22 '01
12:39 pm PDT
|
|
Re: My+rating (Reply to this comment)
by matochak
Thanks for clearing up some things. However, I disagree with you on some points. First, please keep in mind that I am talking about a highly competitive urban market. There are very few of such competitive markets anywhere in the country, aside from NYC and SF. Also, I know this advice to be true for NYC (because I just went through it), and I clearly mentioned that it may be able to be extrapolated for other markets, not that it is exactly the same.
One thing you mentioned that I feel is completely false is "in the unlikely event you can find an apartment to rent in NYC, it's much better than buying." This, as a blanket statement, like you presented it, is absolutely FALSE. How do I know? Because I bought another apartment, which I rent out, and the amount of rent pays all of my expenses, including my mortgage, my maintenance and my real estate taxes, and gives me a profit every month. In addition, I get huge tax advantages and am building equity. How in the world can it ALWAYS be better to rent under these conditions?
|
Apr 18 '01
5:13 am PDT
|
|
My rating (Reply to this comment)
by Arthur.Rubin
This review is unusually well-written, and it may be accurate in NYC (not SF, but that's another story) -- but I don't think it's completely accurate in any other areas of the country, even so.
First, in most of the country, "apartment" means something you rent from the building owner, rather than a condo or co-op. In fact, in the unlikely event you can find an apartment to rent in NYC, it's much better than buying. Nonetheless....
(I've found I've written almost as much as you...so we'll try a few quick notes instead.)
1. In most areas, the seller does not have a lawyer -- and some of things that you are having the seller's lawyer do are done by the seller's agent or the escrow company. (I notice you don't mention escrow companies. Do those not exist in NYC, either?)
2. In CA, the seller's acceptance (step 4) is usually dependent on the buyer's deposit of cash, usually around 1% of the value.
3. I'm not saying that you, as buyer, shouldn't have a lawyer -- but it's not traditional in CA.
4. Your steps 5 (mostly) and 13 should be done before step 2.
You wrote: The most important thing to remember is that the broker works for the seller, NOT for you. .
This is not entirely correct -- in CA and AZ, at least, you can contract with a buyers' broker. That broker works for you, and cannot make side deals or redirect sellers to other clients.
You wrote: Pre-approval means nothing.
That may be correct in NY, but not in CA, at least for some kinds of loan. (BTW, it appears, from what you wrote, that the bank you attempted to get a loan from was not allowed to loan in NYS. That's a good reason to deal with a mortgage broker. Again, a buyers' broker will know some mortgage brokers.)
You wrote: Tips for the Title Closer. Yes, in traditional American fashion, you even tip this person.
This may be a NYC thing -- I'd never heard of it before, and I've been involved as the seller in 1 property and the buyer in 3.
I don't say we've done everything right, but some of the things you recommend would have been wrong.
|
Apr 09 '01
1:00 pm PDT
|
|
I have suddenly lost the will to live (Reply to this comment)
by Lobstergirl
Oh sweet Jesus, that was just horrifying. I feel like I've been stunned with a Taser. I think I'm just going to live in an abandoned refrigerator.
Excellent job of scaring the moosephuck out of me.
|
Apr 06 '01
11:55 am PDT
|
|
Wow you use a lawyer and everything! (Reply to this comment)
by skippio
Man, We do everything we can within the powers of the universe to exclude them.
Great review!
Sarah and Ed
|
Apr 05 '01
9:01 pm PDT
|
|
|
|
