InnoVest Resource Management's Foreclosure Forum

Home Discussion Board "Hands-On" Training Title Holding Trust Speaking Schedule Store Code References 50 State Resource Data Foreclosure Glossary Foreclosure Statistics 70+ Yrs Interest Rates Fillable Forms Archived Articles Dingbat Retirement Plan Links Contact / Map About Us Home

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Forum Board ] [ FAQ ] Re: Unconscionable Advantage & EPA Posted by Jerry - Ca. on September 08, 2006 at 9:35 AM In Reply to: Re: Unconscionable Advantage & EPA posted by DustyOC on September 07, 2006 at 6:56 PM : : : Ward : : : As a subscribing member of County Records Research, thanks for this Discussion Board-also will be attending more of your meetings with CRR. : : : To my point, as a real estate licensee in Lending and new Investor, I am concerned with just a few points and hope that you will answer my post. Finally, I have poured through posts on this issue, as well as, Civil Codes 1695 and 2945. : : : Specifically, with the spiraling downward and very slow market we are experiencing here in CA, how can we protect ourselves as investors ( I've read several of your responces on the 50/ 50 rule after expenses ) : : : First, provided that we can get the seller to agree, can we effectively get the seller to agree to a lower equity price since in this market we may have to discount 10-20% just to unload in this market? Here is what I am thinking- agree to a 50/50 split after expenses, but protect ourselves because of the downward market. : : : Second, in the EPA, on page 1 it has a section for Present Market Value, and next under Consideration the Sellers Equity. : : : Under Consideration, can we make a reference to see the Addendum where we Clearly spell out the 50/ 50 Split after Expenses, And Reference uncertainty as to todays market, but make this all predecated on whatever final sales price we can Obtain? : : : Please excuse the lengh and wordiness- I'm just trying to make myself clear on this. : : : Best Regards : : +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ : : Hello Wayne: : : You cannot get the seller to agree to agree to lower percentage of equity (10-20%) because : : of a slow selling market! The unconscionability law of 1695 basically says you got to give : : the seller approximately 50% or more to be fair! : : However, you can lower the net amount of actual equity to be paid by lowering the " Projected : : Sales Price of Property" on Ward's "Projected Net Equity Worksheet". On the E.P.A. form ... : : the "Present Fair Market Value" is just that ...what the property is worth right now. The : : F.M.V. is required by CC 1695... Why I don't know because it actually relates to none of the : : amounts used in the equity computations! The E.P.A. Form F.M.V. and and the Worksheet Projected : : Sale Price are two different things! : : You must establish a F.M.V. at the time of signing the E.P.A. Form and you must also determine : : the agreed upon purchase amount for the 50%+ of equity! at that same time of signing! It cannot : : be based on some future happening ... You're buying the equity NOW! : : The refence to the addendum in the CONSIDERATION clause is where you spell out how you are going : : to pay the money for the equity. For Example... $2,000. on signing the E.P.A. Form; $3,000. on : : move-out day and executing a unsecured note and trust deed for the balance! : : Jerry : Jerry, : Sorry, it's been a long time since I looked at the code. Where does it say you have to split the equity 50/50? : : Dustin +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Hello Dustin: CC 1695 does Not specifically say 50%/50% split! It does however say that you cannot take unscionable advantage of the defauled owner. By dictioary definition unscionable means: not guided by conscious, unscrupulous, not just or reasonable, or excessive! Let your conscious be your guide! P.S. I usually take 51% of the Beneficial Interest to be in control and not have "tie votes"! Jerry Follow Ups: Re: Unconscionable Advantage & EPA Jerry - Ca. 10:33 AM, 09/09/06 (0) Post a Followup: Name : E-Mail : Subject : Comments: : : : : Ward : : : : As a subscribing member of County Records Research, thanks for this Discussion Board-also will be attending more of your meetings with CRR. : : : : To my point, as a real estate licensee in Lending and new Investor, I am concerned with just a few points and hope that you will answer my post. Finally, I have poured through posts on this issue, as well as, Civil Codes 1695 and 2945. : : : : Specifically, with the spiraling downward and very slow market we are experiencing here in CA, how can we protect ourselves as investors ( I've read several of your responces on the 50/ 50 rule after expenses ) : : : : First, provided that we can get the seller to agree, can we effectively get the seller to agree to a lower equity price since in this market we may have to discount 10-20% just to unload in this market? Here is what I am thinking- agree to a 50/50 split after expenses, but protect ourselves because of the downward market. : : : : Second, in the EPA, on page 1 it has a section for Present Market Value, and next under Consideration the Sellers Equity. : : : : Under Consideration, can we make a reference to see the Addendum where we Clearly spell out the 50/ 50 Split after Expenses, And Reference uncertainty as to todays market, but make this all predecated on whatever final sales price we can Obtain? : : : : Please excuse the lengh and wordiness- I'm just trying to make myself clear on this. : : : : Best Regards : : : +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ : : : Hello Wayne: : : : You cannot get the seller to agree to agree to lower percentage of equity (10-20%) because : : : of a slow selling market! The unconscionability law of 1695 basically says you got to give : : : the seller approximately 50% or more to be fair! : : : However, you can lower the net amount of actual equity to be paid by lowering the " Projected : : : Sales Price of Property" on Ward's "Projected Net Equity Worksheet". On the E.P.A. form ... : : : the "Present Fair Market Value" is just that ...what the property is worth right now. The : : : F.M.V. is required by CC 1695... Why I don't know because it actually relates to none of the : : : amounts used in the equity computations! The E.P.A. Form F.M.V. and and the Worksheet Projected : : : Sale Price are two different things! : : : You must establish a F.M.V. at the time of signing the E.P.A. Form and you must also determine : : : the agreed upon purchase amount for the 50%+ of equity! at that same time of signing! It cannot : : : be based on some future happening ... You're buying the equity NOW! : : : The refence to the addendum in the CONSIDERATION clause is where you spell out how you are going : : : to pay the money for the equity. For Example... $2,000. on signing the E.P.A. Form; $3,000. on : : : move-out day and executing a unsecured note and trust deed for the balance! : : : Jerry : : Jerry, : : Sorry, it's been a long time since I looked at the code. Where does it say you have to split the equity 50/50? : : : : Dustin : +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ : Hello Dustin: : CC 1695 does Not specifically say 50%/50% split! It does however say that you cannot : take unscionable advantage of the defauled owner. By dictioary definition unscionable : means: not guided by conscious, unscrupulous, not just or reasonable, or excessive! : Let your conscious be your guide! : P.S. I usually take 51% of the Beneficial Interest to be in control and not have "tie votes"! : Jerry Optional Link URL: Link Title: Optional Image URL: [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Forum Board ] [ FAQ ] WWWAdmin 2.0a © 1997 Matt Wright and DBasics Software Company, All Rights Reserved

Information provided by this website is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional advice. Please consult your investment advisor and/or attorney before entering into any transaction. Read our privacy policy.

Copyright © 1997-2006, InnoVest Resource Management
http://www.foreclosureforum.com

InnoVest Resource Management, 4569-A Mission Gorge Place, San Diego CA 92120-4112
(619) 283-5444, Fax (619) 283-5455