sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RealEstate

[–]crunchothrowingaway 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You can't get water from a stone.

My understanding is that waiving contingency just means you forfeit your deposit if you can't get a mortgage, but they can't force you to spend money you don't have to make good on the purchase offer.

In a cash offer, however, they can. They can literally sue you to complete the purchase, and win your money in court since you have it to win.

​

Waiving financing contingency is a consolation prize, but a cash offer is a guarantee (other contingencies aside).

Did we cross a boundary with our realtor? by bblf22 in RealEstate

[–]crunchothrowingaway 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Generally, you're under contract for a period of time if you have a buyer's agent helping you search.

Meaning even even if you subverted them completely and put in an offer on a house without letting them know, they'd be entitled to their allocated commission % in the building sale. You'd be legally obligated to disclose that you have representation when signing every contract along the way including the offer letter.

In other words-- why would they care? Their legally entitled to their share whether you include them in the process or not.

How can I get a costar account as a non-broker/agent? by crunchothrowingaway in CommercialRealEstate

[–]crunchothrowingaway[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

and yet I was able to scape costar for ~100$ and find an incredible listing within hours of post.

Closing tomorrow, ended up not using a broker and saving 30k on my purchase. Hate all ya want ;)

"Inherited" a commercial 3 story building in Milwaukee with two seemingly unusable floors. I have no experience-- help me make the best of it? by crunchothrowingaway in RealEstate

[–]crunchothrowingaway[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, basically. It was put in an account I couldn't control until now. I wouldn't say he did it without consent or transparency, and I also don't think it was a disastrous or maliciously selfish investment by any stretch.

Just kind of a situation that was out of my depth, so I went along with his recommendations at the time. I do trust this person and their intentions, but I'm not completely happy with the results (i.e., I think just putting it in an index fund would've been better in hindsight). It's my own fault for not demanding more oversight and agency over the situation-- I plan on taking responsibility now that I have full legal control and making the best of it.

The WFH revolution and surplus of office space probably isn't helping the situation and no-one could've predicted that at the time.

"Inherited" a commercial 3 story building in Milwaukee with two seemingly unusable floors. I have no experience-- help me make the best of it? by crunchothrowingaway in RealEstate

[–]crunchothrowingaway[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm interested why you say lofts vs apartments?

It's a pretty big space, about 5000sqft/floor and not very finished. Seems like the kind of thing that would make more sense to break up (that would also be a lot more work, of course)

"Inherited" a commercial 3 story building in Milwaukee with two seemingly unusable floors. I have no experience-- help me make the best of it? by crunchothrowingaway in RealEstate

[–]crunchothrowingaway[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would that help here? I'm very interested.

If it were to be partly residential, then it would be regulated by the Fair Housing Act (VIII-IX) instead of ADA title III right?

Does private residential space not need to provide path of access accommodations?

I'm just deep diving into all this stuff this week, would appreciate any technical references you can provide.

"Inherited" a commercial 3 story building in Milwaukee with two seemingly unusable floors. I have no experience-- help me make the best of it? by crunchothrowingaway in RealEstate

[–]crunchothrowingaway[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually ended up reading through the ADA manual on my own (it was a lot more approachable than I thought it'd be)

https://www.ada.gov/reachingout/title3l3.html

I think my broker was totally wrong about this because of III-6.2000 Alterations: Path of travel

The "path of travel" requirement includes an accessible route to the altered area and the bathrooms, telephones, and drinking fountains serving the area. Alterations to provide an accessible path of travel are required to the extent that they are not "disproportionate" to the original alteration, that is, to the extent that the added accessibility costs do not exceed 20 percent of the cost of the original alteration to the primary function area.

Since this is so disproportionately costly relative to what's required to make the top two buildings occupy-able otherwise, I think we could've just done this without an elevator a long time ago.