Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've done such a transaction. No lawyer needed. A title company can do a long term escrow agreement. Figure out the terms between you and your brother and contact a title company. Call more than one because there are fees for this and it can vary by a lot. There is more than one way to write it up too, so I would recommend getting their help.
People like to do this type of arrangement because one family member as an investor makes some money by lending while the borrower saves a great deal because there aren't the loan fees the mortgage company charges which are in the thousands.
I've done such a transaction. No lawyer needed. A title company can do a long term escrow agreement. Figure out the terms between you and your brother and contact a title company. Call more than one because there are fees for this and it can vary by a lot. There is more than one way to write it up too, so I would recommend getting their help.
People like to do this type of arrangement because one family member as an investor makes some money by lending while the borrower saves a great deal because there aren't the loan fees the mortgage company charges which are in the thousands.
Nobody, and certainly not a licensed agent, should be telling people over the internet whether they do or don't need a lawyer for a particular transaction. Every case is different and whether a consumer requires legal representation depends on the complexity, the legal risks, and other factors. In this particular case it may be best for a lawyer to represent both brothers or separate lawyers for each. Or no lawyers at all. I certainly wouldn't try to advise what legal representation may or may not be necessary when we know very little about anything.
Nobody, and certainly not a licensed agent, should be telling people over the internet whether they do or don't need a lawyer for a particular transaction. Every case is different and whether a consumer requires legal representation depends on the complexity, the legal risks, and other factors. In this particular case it may be best for a lawyer to represent both brothers or separate lawyers for each. Or no lawyers at all. I certainly wouldn't try to advise what legal representation may or may not be necessary when we know very little about anything.
People...am I wrong?
Yes. Once again. You’re plain wrong. Your insatiable need to spin everything under your warped looking glass has missed the difference between opinion and advice.
Even you say “may be”. Not “has to be”. Why? Because YOU DON’T NEED A DAMN LAWYER IN THIS CASE.
And I have done a very similar transaction. No attorney, Title company only. Easy.
Oh. FYI. There’s this old saying - never use 20 words when three will do - try it out.
I'm sorry if everything must be 1,000 words in order to be understood. See, he asked this question:
My answer was:
a broker isn't required in any real estate transaction.
a broker doesn't need to be paid 6%, even if you use one.
if a party comes into a sale/purchase arrangement and "one or both party has hired a broker" (assuming on an exclusive agency basis), that's when a broker has to be involved ("go through").
have you had the time to link us to your "a broker claimed I was ESL" charge? this seems an appropriate time to remind you to do so, given that my short answer confused you so much.
Well you were kind of saying something like:
No purchase is necessary until you make a purchase.
or
Customers aren't required to order an appetizer until they order an appetizer.
So you scratch your head and read it 8 times and wonder what the heck is trying to be said.
Frankly, I wouldn't insult others for the number of words or characters they write when you so often struggle to string together a simple sentence.
Nobody, and certainly not a licensed agent, should be telling people over the internet whether they do or don't need a lawyer for a particular transaction. Every case is different and whether a consumer requires legal representation depends on the complexity, the legal risks, and other factors. In this particular case it may be best for a lawyer to represent both brothers or separate lawyers for each. Or no lawyers at all. I certainly wouldn't try to advise what legal representation may or may not be necessary when we know very little about anything.
People...am I wrong?
In this case, with this particular OP, I agree with you.
Nobody, and certainly not a licensed agent, should be telling people over the internet whether they do or don't need a lawyer for a particular transaction. Every case is different and whether a consumer requires legal representation depends on the complexity, the legal risks, and other factors. In this particular case it may be best for a lawyer to represent both brothers or separate lawyers for each. Or no lawyers at all. I certainly wouldn't try to advise what legal representation may or may not be necessary when we know very little about anything.
People...am I wrong?
I'm bored today JB so what the hell.
Personal experience. I have done this. It works fine. People can pay a lawyer if they want to, but they are done all the time without one. I am likely not the only one here. Of all the people giving advise on this, how many have actually been either a borrower or a lender in something like this? What did you do? How many others are just making suggestions but haven't done either?
In this instance, I disagree. While a lawyer is never required for any transaction, I think the OP would be well advised to consult with a knowledgeable real estate attorney. The OP seems to have relatively little knowledge about real estate (based upon a number of other posts) and I think it's best that they have someone looking out for their interests. It's also important that they have proper legal advice because we have no idea which way the OP will go. If a Land Contract or other Seller financing is involved, it's almost imperative that they have a legal representative. It's much cheaper to avoid a mistake than it is to correct one. Those experienced with real estate transactions may choose to avoid attorneys under certain circumstances, but I think the saying "better safe than sorry" is an appropriate one for the OP.
In this instance, I disagree. While a lawyer is never required for any transaction, I think the OP would be well advised to consult with a knowledgeable real estate attorney. The OP seems to have relatively little knowledge about real estate (based upon a number of other posts) and I think it's best that they have someone looking out for their interests. It's also important that they have proper legal advice because we have no idea which way the OP will go. If a Land Contract or other Seller financing is involved, it's almost imperative that they have a legal representative. It's much cheaper to avoid a mistake than it is to correct one. Those experienced with real estate transactions may choose to avoid attorneys under certain circumstances, but I think the saying "better safe than sorry" is an appropriate one for the OP.
True. But I wasn’t referencing the OP. Simply the one post I replied to.
In all honesty, the scenario described in the OP is rife with disaster, one in which the attorneys will be the only ones that profit.
In this instance, I disagree. While a lawyer is never required for any transaction, I think the OP would be well advised to consult with a knowledgeable real estate attorney. The OP seems to have relatively little knowledge about real estate (based upon a number of other posts) and I think it's best that they have someone looking out for their interests. It's also important that they have proper legal advice because we have no idea which way the OP will go. If a Land Contract or other Seller financing is involved, it's almost imperative that they have a legal representative. It's much cheaper to avoid a mistake than it is to correct one. Those experienced with real estate transactions may choose to avoid attorneys under certain circumstances, but I think the saying "better safe than sorry" is an appropriate one for the OP.
What is it about the opening post that makes you conclude that the OP has relatively little knowledge of real estate? I read that OP and don't think its obvious one way or the other. I agree that maybe there are some questions left unanswered but you can't fill in the blanks with what you imagine may be the case.
People are always very quick to spend other peoples money without a thought. I think its irresponsible to tell someone they definitely need a lawyer like so many on here are quick to tell people to do. A lawyer is one option. Others like myself have done it another way. Let the OP decide.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
