HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wmoore@comet.ucar.edu (Wayne Moore)
Subject: BOULDER area HOUSE FOR SALE
Organization: no affiliation
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:50:32 GMT

126,900$  6803 Camelia Court, NIWOT, Colorado
7 miles from Boudler NE toward Longmont
in Boulder County

Niwot is a real town, over 100 yrs old, not a bedroom subburb.

1982 Frame Ranch in NIWOT, quiet neighborhood surrounded by open space
with 3 parks within one block in various directions.
4 Bedroom, 2 full and 1 3/4 baths, study,big family room, living room,
dining room, 2-car garage
2220 finished sq ft (1110 on main)
Master bedroom with 3/4 bath plus 2 other bedrooms on main flr
full size windows (3 by 6 feet, 2 side-by-side one alone) in basement
2nd master bedroom with full bath in basement
Very energy efficient
Newer exterior paint (painted last summer)
Newer appliances
2 by 6 outer wall construction
thermal windows
skylights
automatic sprinkler system
garage door opener
clothes shoot to laundry sink
dog run
fireplace
professionally finished basement
attic fan
forced-air gas heat
gas hot water
Left Hand glacier water
Niwot school system (state leader)

Call 449-7000 and ask Jan McRoberts
about property by address
or send e-mail to wmoore@comet.ucar.edu
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
Subject: Re: Refinancing pittfalls?
Date: 13 Aug 92 15:52:59 GMT
Distribution: misc.invest.real-estate
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology

revesz@msc.cornell.edu (Peter Revesz) writes:

>At preset I am at 9.625% 30 years fixed. I have got an offer
>to refinance to 8.375% for 15 years at no closing cost.
>Talking with the bank the guy said the only thing I will have
>to pay is my attorney's fee and maybe the survey re-certification.
>Nothing else. 

>  No application fee, 
>  no credit report fee
>  no appraisal fee
>  no commitment fee
>  no title insurance fee
>  no bank attorney fee
>  no mortgage taxes
>  no recording fee
>  no points
>  not required to increase the present mortgage ballance
>  no obligation to accept any commitment or loan

>What are the (possible) catches, pittfalls?
>What are the right questions to ask?
>Too good to be true?

The interest rate seems a little high.  Maybe that's why there are no
upfront charges.  The average 30 year fixed is now slightly under 8%,
you should be able to find a 15 year fixed lower than that.


Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
                        
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
From: joe@otto.lvsun.com (Joe Barger)
Subject: Taxes
Organization: Hospitality Network
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 17:36:50 GMT

	I would like to know what is a good way to lower the 
	taxes on owned property.  My mother paid off her house
	and now the taxes are as high as a house payment. Would
	it be a good idea to get a second mortage?

	Can you take a second mortage out for less than the total
	value of the house?

	Would this lower the ammount of taxes paid? 

	If there are any other/better ways of getting away from high
	taxes on owned property please let me know!
	
	Thanks in advance.		Joe@otto

	Btw I have verry little experience in mortages as you can tell!
	:)
-- 
*******************************************************************************
     Joe Barger (joe@otto.hn.com {psivax,jimi, mirror}!otto!joe)
 The odds get even You name the game The odds get even The stakes are the same
			You bet your LIFE!   RUSH
From: jfox@hooksett.East.Sun.COM (John Fox - SunExpress IR)
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
Subject: Re: 15 year vs. 30 year loans
Date: 17 Aug 1992 14:00:06 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: jfox@hooksett.East.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: hooksett.east.sun.com

In article 19578@fritz.filenet.com, asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) writes:
(text deleted)
> Despite the fact that 15 year loans sometimes go for a lower interest 
> rate than 30 year loans, I STILL maintain it is MORE ADVANTAGEOUS to
> just get a conventional 30 year loan.
> 
> If you wish the advantages of higher equity accumulation, simply compute
> the difference between payments, and apply that to the principle.  The
> results will be ROUGHLY the SAME as a similar 15 year loan, but you have
> the option of NOT paying the extra if you need the money for something 
> else.
> 
> Like food!
> 
Although this sounds good on paper, I think a primary advantage to the
15 year mortgage is that you *have* to pay the extra. If you try to
tell yourself you'll pay off extra each month, many people probably
won't. Rather, they'll *find* a use for the extra mortgage money, and
fool themselves that it is more important than reducing the term of the
mortgage (like going to the fancy restaurant instead of the inexpensive
one).
If someone is in financial trouble, chances are an extra $150 or so
per month is not going to make a difference, but when all is said and
done, most people would be better off not given the option each month.


John


Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
From: lalla@venice.sedd.trw.com (Bakul Lalla)
Subject: Re: Investment Property Exchanges
Organization: TRW Inc., Redondo Beach, CA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 local 2 PL4
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 22:01:07 GMT

Interesting Exchange:

One of the things you could do is to go to your local library and get
a book that refers a consumer to real estate exchangers in the US.
This eliminates dealing with inexperienced real estate agents who will
probably tell you that they have done something like this. Try to find
a real estate exchange professional who have the CCIM designation
since these guys are really worth their salt.

The exchange you are are talking about is a tax deferred non-concurrent
exchange. The story goes like this: Assuming you find this third party
who is willing to buy your land, you will need to find an accommodator
through whom you will transfer the equity from the old property to the
new one. You will need to check out this accommodator thoroughly since
your equity receipts will be held in trust by this party. The
particulars about RE exchanges fall under the 1031 IRS code. Be
careful to document all the requirements as specified under this code.
The typical requirements go like this: the clock starts ticking as
soon you close escrow in which you are liquidating your property (in
your case the land). You have 180 days from the time count start to
actually consummate the transaction regarding the target property you
intend to purchase. With the first 45 days of this initial time count
you will need to identify your target property (i.e. in your case you
have already done so prior to liquidation of the old property). Now
then, some of this 1031 requirement beast is that your target property
should be equal to or greater the value of the old property. Your
indebtedness of the new property should be equal to or greater than
your old indebtednes. Any hanky-panky regarding this matter will be
considered as transfer of unlike property exchange known as boot. This
boot will be taxed (Ooops!). If you consult a competent CPA he/she
will help you with these sticky/grey areas of the 1031 tax code. This
code is under constant scrutiny in terms of the various requirements.
So be careful.

Also, try to hire an accommodator/CPA who does these things for a
living so that they will (hopefully!) be well versed in these matters.
The original non-concurrent exchange started in a land mark case in
1979 under Starker. Hope this will help. Keep me posted. 

--
Bakul Lalla
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail     : lalla@venice.sedd.trw.com
fax-mail   : (310) 764-6823
yell-mail  : (310) 764-9178
snail-mail : TRW Inc., DH4/2423, 1815 Glenn Curtiss, Carson, CA 90746
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Disclaimer applies....
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
From: eroth@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (elizabeth.s.roth)
Subject: Re: 15 year vs. 30 year loans
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:02:43 GMT

In article <HINKMOND.92Aug18143800@igor.tamri.com> hinkmond@tamri.com (Hinkmond Wong) writes:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:46:37 GMT, loftis@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Loftis) said:
>
>> 	I like the idea of paying off mortgages ASAP.  If you look at
>> the total payments on a 30-year note, you could nearly buy two house on
>> 15 year notes.  It is amazing the amount of interest you pay.
>
>
>
>I think to sum up the whole idea behind paying a 30-year mortgage in 30 years
>instead of getting a 15-year mortgage, has been to
>
>	1) Invest the difference between the 30-year and 15-year mortgage
>		payments in an investment which has a yield greater than your
>		mortgage rate
>
>	2) And, take advantage of the tax deduction for as long as possible
>		(30 years in this case).
>
>The result is that
>
>	1) The money (difference between a 30-year and 15-year mortgage
>		payment) that you invest will be equal to another house.  So,
>		it could be sitting in a bank account somewhere.
>
>	2) You will save a lot on taxes due to the extended tax deduction for
>		30 years.  Why give the government more than necessary?
>
>	3) If your mortgage rate is 8% and you are investing the difference
>		in something with a rate of 15%, you are coming out ahead.
>
>
>
>--
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>+ Hinkmond Wong				Internet: hinkmond@igor.tamri.com     +
>+ Software Engineer			Phone: (415) 872-2722 x3328           +
>+ Toshiba America MRI, Inc. 		FAX:   (415) 875-2915                 +
>+ So. San Francisco, CA  94080                                                +
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Here are the figures the way I see them:


$50,000 @ 8% for 15 years:

$- 77,905.75 paid out ($432.81 x 12 x 15)
   50,000.00 principal being paid off
    7,813.60 tax savings ($27,905.75 interest x 28%)
  ----------
 - 20,092.14 actual cost
 + 84,014.48 savings ($432.81 x 12 x 15 at 15%)
 -  1,710.43 tax on interest  
  ----------
$+ 62,212.36 cash assets at end of 30 years 

## OR ##

$50,000 @8% for 30 years:

-112,590.00 paid out ($312.75 x 12 x 30)
  50,000.00 principal being paid off
  17,525.20 tax savings ($62,590.00 interest x 28%)
 ----------
- 45,064.80 actual cost
+ 46,621.11 savings ($120.06 x 12 x 30 at 15%)
-    111.86 tax on interest
 ----------
$- 1,555.55 cash loss at end of 30 years



I used a financial program to do these figures, so they should be right.
Looks as if the 15-year mortgage is a better idea.  Did I miss anything?



Susan



-- 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> Education never helped morals ... the    -- WILL           (all the usual   <
> smarter the guy, the bigger the rascal.  -- ROGERS          disclaimers)    <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
From: tony2@prefect.uucp (21131-gozdz)
Subject: Re: 15 year vs. 30 year loans
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 18:47:34 GMT

In article <19578@fritz.filenet.com> asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) writes:
                             [stuff deleted]
>I made the comment that rather than getting a 15 year loan, you should
>compute the difference between the payment for a 30 year loan and a 15
>year loan, and pay that towards principle reduction.  On a spreadsheet,
                                 ^^^^^^^^^
>                            [stuff deleted]
>TMPF=this month's principle fraction
>TMPB=this month's principle balance
>LMPB=last month's principle balance
>
>                            [stuff deleted]
etc, etc ...

While your observations are very valuable (pun
intended) and interesting at this time of mass
mortgage refinancing, what happens if you only pay
attention to good investment principles and disregard
the principal? :-)

Tony
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate,co.general,misc.forsale
From: wmoore@spike.comet.ucar.edu (Wayne Moore)
Subject: MY APOLOGIES - BOULDER HOUSE
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR Boulder, CO
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 13:44:15 GMT

Excuse my repeated postings of BOULDER area HOUSE FOR SALE.  I didn't
know Pnews was working on our system...it just went off into limbo and
never returned.  So sorry.   Wayne Moore
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
From: macrakis@osf.org (Stavros Macrakis)
Subject: Re: How important is title insurance?
Organization: OSF Research Institute
	<MACRAKIS.92Aug12112534@next4.osf.org> <1y4m9gp@lynx.unm.edu>
Date: 12 Aug 92 17:04:05

In article <1y4m9gp@lynx.unm.edu> pkrause@triton.unm.edu (Paul Krause CIRT) writes:

   If I buy a house for $100,000 with $5000 down and assume the old loan,
   I really only have $5,000 at risk since the sellers title ins. covers
   the loan value.  Thus it is going to cost me $700-800 for $5,000
   of protection.

This is not correct.  As you pay off the mortgage, your equity
increases.  The bank's title insurance covers only the bank's
potential loss, not yours.  As for assuming the old loan, I believe
that is orthogonal.  Also, you pay a lot less than $700 for your
coverage on $100,000.  More like $150, if I remember correctly.

   In addition, I still have the choice of taking the seller to court
   on my own.

Maybe, if you can find the seller and he has the resources to pay, and
you're willing to pay a lawyer for perhaps years after being evicted
from your own house in order to get back in....

	-s
From: df2tg2n@ties.bell-atl.com (Steve Rosen)
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
Subject: Great Title Insurance Scam!
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:25:10 GMT
Reply-To: df2tg2n@shoes.bell-atl.com
Organization: Bell Atlantic - Phila, PA

All this talk about title insurance companies making too much money brought
to mind a story a good friend of mine told me.

Seems that an office building in downtown Phila. was purchased by some
clever young guy for about $400k.  A bank lent him most of the money. Well,
once the guy got title to the building, he opened his own title insurance
company and then set out to purchase the building again!  Of course he went
to a different bank for a mortgage and guess which title company he used to
clear the title - that's right, his own!  I suppose he set a ficticious so
the bank didn't get suspicious - he was the owner buying his own property! 
According to my friend he did this many, many times (I think > 10 if you
can believe that)- or at least one time too many before he got caught.  He
kept borrowing and borrowing and borrowing before he attempted to run with
the moneny, each time he cleared the title through his company. How this
went on for so long, I don't know.  I take it the guy's in jail now, but
don't know for sure.

My friend got involved when the owners of the first bank, who truely had
clear title to the property after the guy was caught, ask him to buy the
building at an auction (he's a good friend of the bank owners').  Wait
here's the funny part - I'm not so sure he's that good friends with the
bank owners' anymore.  At auction time, the bank had a certified offer for
the building at $450k.  My friend bid $410k and bought the building legally
and he was going to turn around and sell it for $450k to the certified
buyer - why the bank didn't just start at $450, he doesn't know - but his
good buddy, the bank owner came along and said, "hey, thanks for giving us
a good price on the building, we'll take it from here".  So they gave him
$410k and sold it *themselves* to the certified buyer for $450!  They ask
him to bid because they were afraid they'd get nothing for the building
come auction time.  Needless to say my friend had a good laugh at it (he
can afford it, he's rich!) but was pissed too.  Sounds like organized
crime, doesn't it - not far from it in reality.

I have no idea how legal/illegal this was, but had a good laugh since I
happen to be fairly friendly with the family that owns the bank too and
needless to say I don't keep any money there!  There's a good example of
why the banking industry is in the shape it's in.

-- 
 --=========================================================================--
   Steven M. Rosen / Consultant @ Bell Atlantic - SW Engr. Tech. & Standards
                                  1717 Arch Street (6S2), Phila., PA 19103
   Phone Numbers: W (215)466-2061, FAX (215)563-0517, H (215)465-5334
               +++ Internet/E-Mail: df2tg2n@shoes.bell-atl.com +++
 --=========================================================================--
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
From: steinman@is.morgan.com (Jan Steinman)
Subject: Re: 15 year vs. 30 year loans
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Company
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 21:45:35 GMT

In article <19578@fritz.filenet.com> asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) writes:

   Despite the fact that 15 year loans sometimes go for a lower interest 
   rate than 30 year loans, I STILL maintain it is MORE ADVANTAGEOUS to
   just get a conventional 30 year loan.

I agree, with one caveat: banks are basically incompetent. Any thing
you do that cannot be handled by computer will break their system. You
might have to write a dozen or so letters over the life of the loan,
and you should be prepared to keep your own books on the loan, so the
bank doesn't get away with anything. Factor in the value of this
potential aggravation before you choose such a plan.

I've been lucky enough to have never dealt with a bank mortgage, but I
am constantly fighting with banks over credit cards.
--
: : Jan Steinman	   steinman@is.morgan.com		 Bytesmiths : :
: : 2002 Parkside Court				   West Linn, OR 97068-2767 : :
: : 503/657-7703					       212/956-8722 : :
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
From: macrakis@osf.org (Stavros Macrakis)
Subject: Re: Title Insurance
Organization: OSF Research Institute
Distribution: usa
Date: 18 Aug 92 11:17:32

In article <BsxMF8.7rF@nntp-sc.Intel.COM>, sundar@mipos2.intel.com
asks:

   On a different note, why is [title insurance] so high? Is there a
   high risk?  Do the stats show that the TI companies stand to lose a
   lot?

In article <19628@fritz.filenet.com> asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) replies:

   I seriously doubt that in this age of damn near all the information
   being computerized that there's any significant risk.

Although Title Insurance may well be overpriced (there was an article
in the NY Times about a fellow who is starting a TI operation offering
lower premiums by being more efficient), there is in fact a real risk.

A neighbor of mine works in a title company, and he has a bunch of
horror stories.  One involved a million-dollar house where the seller
turned out to have only half-interest in the property, and the title
search had not shown up the other half-owner.  So the buyer/lender
could have been out $500,000....

I don't know their actual underwriting risk, but there certainly is a
real one.

As for `damn near all the information being computerized', this is far
from true.  In Middlesex County (which includes Cambridge, MA), they
do have the past 5-10 years' records on line, but nothing before that.
Many houses being sold today were last sold before 10 years ago.  And
actually understanding what the records say can sometimes be
non-trivial.

	-s
Xref: sparky misc.invest.real-estate:541 misc.consumers.house:11177 misc.consumers:15468
From: briang@bari.Eng.Sun.COM (Brian Gordon)
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate,misc.consumers.house,misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Making an Offer for a Home with a LIEN and Title Insurance
Date: 21 Aug 92 18:19:07 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: bari

In article <23495@alice.att.com> ark@alice.UUCP () writes:
<In article <19651@fritz.filenet.com> asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk) writes:
<
<< Mechanics' liens can also victimize a perfectly well-intended
<< homeowner, who just gets screwed.  It's been known for a homeowner to
<< contract some labor, say building a block-wall with iron-work, and
<< dutifully pays what's owed.  Now, it turns out that the contractor
<< sub-contracted somebody to put up the iron-work, and does NOT pay the
<< sub.  Well, the sub can but a lien against the homeowner.
<
<< Unfortunately, I do not recall the legal remedy to this situation.
<
<Around here, it seems to be common practice, before giving the last payment
<for a job to the main contractor, to obtain a signed statement from the
<contractor to the effect that all subcontractors have been paid.
<-- 

As I learned the hard way, that is _not_ sufficient.  You need a release
directly from the subcontractor.  If the contractor lies, even in writing, and
then takes off, the lien is still on _your_ house, not his ;-{

--
:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:
| Brian G. Gordon	briang@Sun.COM    briang@netcom.COM		      |
| B.GORDON2 on GENie	70243,3012 on CompuServe	BGordon on AOL	      |
:-:- Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in! -:-:
Newsgroups: misc.invest.real-estate
From: dprlcm@inetg1.ARCO.COM (Larry Morley)
Subject: Re: Investment Property Exchanges
Organization: ARCO Oil and Gas Company
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 02:34:21 GMT

In article <W3d-P2#@engin.umich.edu>, cak@citi.umich.edu (Carol A. Kamm)
writes:
> I'm looking for information/opinions/advice on doing what I believe is
> called a 3rd-party investment property exchange.  Here are some details:
> 
> My husband and I own a piece of vacant land.  There is another piece
> of land with a home on it (would be rented at least part time) that we
> are 
> considering purchasing.  To avoid capital gains, we would like to
> exchange 
> our land for the other property.  However, the
> older woman selling the property 
> is not interested in exchanging with us - she
> wants to cash out (or possibly 
> land-contract, to get some income).  So we need a
> third party to take our land.
> (stuff deleted...)
 
My understanding was that to qualify for a non-taxable exchange you
have to swap "like kind" real properties. The IRS has been willing
to stretch the definition of "like kind" quite a bit to accommodate
such exchanges as, say, a rental house for a small apartment. Raw land
and a rental house, however, are clearly two different animals.