8 posts shown.
Thanks for all the input on the co-signer issue; I think I've got that sorted out, though it might not even be necessary. Now I’m facing a different headache.
The house was just finished this year and doesn't have a certificate of occupancy yet. From what I've read, getting one can take a full year, but if I want to secure a mortgage, I really need everything wrapped up by this summer. Waiting a year isn't really an option for me.
Does anyone know if there's any way to bypass the certificate of occupancy requirement when applying for a mortgage? The house is brand new and perfectly livable—it’s actually been used as a rental for a year already.
Keith Hernandez21 said:So, you're basically saying you want to borrow against 25% of the property's value, even though the work actually costs 30%. That implies you already have about 16% of the cash on hand. I guess it might be smarter to just wait and save up the remaining 84% rather than dealing with high interest rates, only to end up needing to earn that 84% plus an extra 15% anyway.
The reason is that I need the funds to finish the floor I intend to rent out. Since I live on the coast, I’m already renting out the first floor and it’s doing quite well. In my estimation, the rental income would cover the loan and leave me with some profit from the upper floor. If I just wait a few years, I suspect I'll just be losing money in the meantime, and there's no telling when I'll actually have the cash on hand.
It’s not just four walls standing there; the first floor is actually finished. The loan is really just to cover the interior work for the second floor, which is roughly 30% of the total property value.
The borrower qualifies for the loan on their own, but the bank is insisting on a co-signer. If that's the case, what's the point of using the property as collateral? They could just take out a standard personal loan against a guarantor instead.
Just one question,
I went into JPMorgan Chase to take out a mortgage, but they’re asking me for co-signers. I don't really get why, considering the property itself is worth four times the loan amount. It seems like that should be enough.
Before I bother checking with other banks—since it's already the weekend—does anyone know if this is standard practice across the board at most major institutions?
Thanks
Jose Miller3 said:Look at it this way: $12333 you paid tuition just so you wouldn't have to lend cash to people you barely even know 🙂
It’s all just window dressing at this point—nothing but IOUs, empty promises, and total scams. You’re never actually seeing that money again... unless some guy happens to get hit by a falling icicle from his roof and suddenly decides he's a saint who wants to do right by you.
Fair enough, but if he actually signs that blank promissory note he's promising to sign, what happens if I go to Chase in ten months and freeze his accounts? I doubt he can live his whole life without a bank account, given he runs several businesses. I assume he wouldn't be allowed to open a new one until the debt on the old one is settled?
northerntiger said:What gives the bank the right to use YOUR savings as collateral for someone else's loan?
Maybe you haven't quite grasped how this works. It isn't a direct loan. I put my $6,000 into a CD, and the bank used that as leverage to lend him $6,000. I get my money back only if he pays the bank back within the year, plus interest.
Call it a loan or whatever you like, I suppose.
Do we both need to be present at the notary's office, or can she just mail everything over?
Is the invoice addressed to a private individual, and does it pull directly from their checking accounts? I wonder what happens if they don't have the funds available. I suppose they could try canceling their card and getting a new one to dodge the debt, though that seems unlikely to work.
Hello, and thanks to everyone joining this discussion.
So, about sixteen months ago, I lent $40 $0.00 to someone I barely know—no need for details. We essentially structured it through a secured loan; I had $40,000 $0.00 in a CD, and the bank issued him $40,000 against it. He was supposed to pay the bank back in installments, which would eventually release my funds. Unfortunately, he’s only managed to pay back $3,000 $0.00, despite promising early on that he’d have it settled within two months. I suppose I was being naive by trusting his word 🙂 and thinking a year was plenty since I couldn't touch the CD anyway.
The issue is this: I have zero documentation of the loan, and legally speaking, I can't hold him liable right now because, technically, it looks like a gift.
But that’s all in the past.
We are still in contact, and he maintains that he wants to make things right, offering to pay me a few thousand dollars a month. He even gave me another one of his promises that everything will be cleared by the end of this year.
So, here is where I am...
Since I'm backed into a corner, I don't see much point in picking a fight. If I push too hard, he might just block my number, and I'd really rather not have to settle this in person if I can avoid it.
He has agreed to the following...
He said he is willing to go to a notary public—or wherever else is necessary (which is why I'm starting this thread)—to formalize the debt and grant me an extension.
Basically, he’s agreed to meet at the proper office to sign a legal document stating that I handed him $37,000 $0.00 as of today, and that he must repay it within, say, ten months. If he fails, I want the ability to freeze his bank account.
I could use some guidance here. I'm completely out of my depth. Is a notary sufficient for this kind of thing? And if we do this and those ten months pass without payment, can I actually go to court to garnish his wages or freeze his account? What happens if there's nothing left in his account? How would he pay me back in a way that the courts can track? I assume he can't just hand me cash or send it to a different account without it being visible to the authorities...
I'll likely have more questions, but these are the main ones for now.