"Subject To" vs "Subject To" - Posted by Jim

Posted by Nate on March 18, 2001 at 12:41:08:

I agree. The only reason anyone would ever SELL subject-to is out of sheer desparation. Just because you bought subject-to doesn’t change that fact.

“Subject To” vs “Subject To” - Posted by Jim

Posted by Jim on March 17, 2001 at 13:04:25:

If we are buying subject to the existing mortgage from our seller and we get all the necessary documents signed by that seller (especially that CYA Letter) and then we advertise the property for sale by owner and get a buyer that has a nice down payment to purchase, and we decide to let them buy the house exactly as we did “Subject To” …What would the procedure involve to get it done?

I know that they need to sign a CYA Letter as well, but is the Assignment of Contract for Purchase and Sale needed only, or do we need to do a whole Purchase & Sale Agreement with the new buyers named in it?

I get the part when we’re buying, but the selling has me a bit confused…

Thanks for the help


Re: "Subject To - Posted by Jonathan Rexford

Posted by Jonathan Rexford on March 17, 2001 at 14:24:08:

Subject toooo, Well I would never let my buyers buy like I did. Too many headaches and liability. A better solution is to L/O or Agreement for Deed. That way you still have legal title of the property. You would do a new Purchase agreement and The documents that you need to excute your exit stradgey.

Thanks Jonathan… - Posted by Jim

Posted by Jim on March 17, 2001 at 14:54:35:

I guess you’re right on that! (It does make more sense)

I just asked because I was reading in the LeGrand material about selling like this, and I know a local investor in my area that has done a few just like that.

But you’re right, why create the unnecessary headaches and the possibility of making a bad name for yourself from a deal that went bad. If we hold title until the actual sale to our buyer it’s really better for us.

Thanks for your input Jonathan.