Connect with us

Real Estate News

Terrible things buyers do to upset their realtors

Published

on

Real estate agents are an integral part of real estate. They help buyers identify their dream property and guide them through the buying process to make it easy for them. A good broker is well informed about current market trends, knows the value of a property and its surroundings and has mastered all legal procedures and documentation formalities relating to real estate investments. They do everything in their power to ensure the buyer has a hassle-free buying experience.

But most buyers are unaware that they are doing terrible things that can upset the agent who works with them. Realtors understand that buying a property is the biggest investment most of us make in our lives. As a result, real estate agents are under a lot of pressure to get everything right. But when home buyers act in ways that put too much pressure on our agents, the journey to buy a home becomes a mess.

To make sure you don’t stress your broker, here is a list of things to avoid when working with a broker:

Confused buyers

Don’t hire a broker unless you know exactly what you need and want in your new home. If you decide to buy a property, make a checklist of your needs and desires. Then prioritize each of them so you can narrow down your search. Remember, there will be a huge difference between a place you need and the kind you want.

Write down all the details like the number of rooms, proximity to locations, amenities, or whatever is high on your checklist. Knowing exactly what you and your family need can make buying a home an enjoyable journey. If there is no room for confusion, you will not waste time or frustrate your agent.

Disappearing buyers

Real estate agents invest their time, energy, and money in connecting buyers to their ideal properties. As a result, a buyer who has worked with a particular broker for weeks and months suddenly disappears, frustrating and discouraging a broker. You must complete the purchase with the same agent that you started the journey with. Unless you have had an uncomfortable experience or there has been no communication between you and the agent, it is decent to work with the same agent. If you can’t, at least politely show that you no longer need their services.

Buyers can avoid this situation in the first place by interviewing a few realtors and taking the time to get to know them individually before looking for a home. At the interview, ask all the necessary questions and see if you feel connected to them. This allows buyers to work with the same agent until the end.

Unrealistic buyers

We talked about making a checklist of the things you need and want. However, some buyers end up creating an extremely extensive checklist down to the smallest detail. You can ask about comfort, safety, and convenience, but with small things like interiors, furniture, landscapes, etc., it doesn’t make sense to do anything special. It’s impossible to find a place to check everything on your list.

Be sensible so your agent can find a spot that suits your budget. Overlook the imperfections that minor repairs and renovations can fix. A perfect property with luxurious furnishings costs a lot of money. If, on the other hand, your agent shows you a place that has room for improvement, you can renovate and decorate it to your liking.

Know-it-all buyers

Thanks to the internet, you can research everything from the comfort of your own home. But it doesn’t give the buyer the upper hand over someone who makes a living helping people buy and sell real estate. Realtors have the experience and knowledge of real estate, houses and the whole process. When you decide to contract with a broker, you have to trust their expertise.

Sometimes your emotions can get in the way when choosing a property, so it makes sense to seek advice from an experienced real estate agent. They know the market and the value of a property, so they can give you an unbiased opinion.

Not pre-approved buyers

Buying a property costs a lot of money. So if an agent asks you to provide proof of your funding opportunities, don’t be offended. Buyers are wasting their and the agent’s time searching for homes unless they have pre-approved a loan or mortgage. Most buyers make the mistake of waiting to find an ideal property to get pre-approved.

Real estate sellers, on the other hand, are not interested in negotiating with buyers who do not have pre-approval for a loan. This is because sometimes the buyer is unable to secure the desired loan amount after submitting a bid. This brings the agent into a solution and it won’t be able to show you any properties if you don’t have pre-approval. Brokers want to increase the chances that the buyer’s offer will be accepted, so they insist on pre-approval.

Stubborn buyers

Some buyers think they could have it all; a great place for a lot. But in reality it never happens! Agents will do their best to provide the best deals to their buyers. But when you have your eye on a remarkable property that has it all, there is no room for negotiation. It is unfair to ask your agent to continue negotiating in order to lower the query rate. Buyers who have the financial support often pass out at large houses due to the lack of a discount just to invest in substandard property; later they blame the agent.

Desperate and restless buyers

When it comes to finding an apartment, we need to be patient and take slow and steady steps. Often times, buyers rushing their brokers cause stress and find themselves owning unsuitable property. There are many factors to consider when looking for an apartment and it takes time. Real estate agents often want buyers to give them the space and time to find the best deals for them.

Affectionate buyers

If buyers use brokerage services, it does not mean they are theirs. They will spend their working hours finding property for you, arranging open houses, and taking care of all other aspects of a property purchase. However, that doesn’t mean buyers have the right to contact them outside of office hours or to keep track of them. A real estate agent works with multiple clients so they may not be available to you all the time. When you want to meet her, set an appointment that works for both parties rather than appearing unannounced.

Buyers who change jobs or make large purchases before completing the purchase

Money is an essential part of buying a property. Buyers planning to purchase a property through mortgage or loan should refer to the guidelines. Buyers who make drastic career changes while their loan is still in progress increase the risk of the loan being rejected. This causes the agent’s months of hard work to go down the drain. In the end, they lose their time and money for nothing!

Similarly, some buyers make large purchases before closing the home deal. This action also jeopardizes the buyers’ chances of securing the loan money. Real estate agents have often seen buyers make large purchases, change jobs, open new lines of credit, and take on more liabilities once pre-approved. All of these actions will lower your credit score and affect your credit report. A financier will only offer loans to those who have a stable source of income, consistent credit report, and sufficient savings on their account. If buyers want their agents to help them get through the buying process successfully, they need to avoid temptation and follow their agents’ financial advice.

Conclusion

There are potential obstacles and pitfalls that buyers face when purchasing a property. You need to trust and follow your broker’s advice to avoid or overcome mishaps. Nobody has the best know-how when looking for an ideal property like a realtor. Real estate agents are professionals and licensed to help buyers make a successful real estate investment. If you are thinking of investing in a property, reach out to the best real estate agent in town to help.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Real Estate News

San Diego City Council Reviews Audit Of Troubled Real Estate Deals

Published

on

Photo by Shalina Chatlani

Above: 101 Ash Street in Downtown San Diego. August 21, 2020.

An examination of the string of bad San Diego real estate deals received its first public hearing on Wednesday, with city council members saying major changes are needed to regain public confidence.

The reason for the audit was the city’s catastrophic attempt to lease the high-rise office building at 101 Ash Street and buy it later. The city had hoped to hire hundreds of employees to consolidate its workforce in the downtown area. The move-in date, however, kept being postponed as the city discovered more and more problems with asbestos and the building’s HVAC and electrical systems. The latest estimate of the cost of repairs and improvements is $ 115 million.

The report found that former Mayor Kevin Faulconer and his staff were not following best practices such as: B. require independent appraisals and building inspections, and withhold important information from the city council.

RELATED: San Diego Audit Mistakes in Real Estate Deals under Faulconer

“My 500-square-foot condominium has had more inspections than these city buildings,” said city council member Vivian Moreno, who chairs the city council’s audit committee. “Having seen all of this in this review, it is absolutely critical that any proposed property purchase is moved forward before the council is required to prepare a due diligence checklist.”

A checklist to ensure that every real estate transaction is in line with best practices is one of the main recommendations of the audit. Mayor Todd Gloria has agreed to implement it.

RELATED: NBC7 admits the 101 Ash Street story is based on a forged document

In addition, the audit found that city officials were not giving council members enough time to review complex contracts, nor were they showing real alternatives. Councilor Joe LaCava acknowledged that the security measures recommended in the audit could slow the process of the city’s property acquisition process.

“We can lose some good home purchases because we need extra time to make sure we’re getting things right and a seller may not be willing to wait,” said LaCava. “And I think that’s fine. As I said, it’s more important to protect the city and the taxpayers than to close a real estate deal.”

City attorney Mara Elliott announced last month that the city would order a judge to suspend leases at 101 Ash Street and another downtown office building that is currently occupied by several city departments. Both deals were crafted with the advice of commercial real estate agent Jason Hughes.

The city’s amended lawsuit followed revelations exposed through subpoenas that Hughes, who claimed he was acting as an unpaid volunteer, actually paid $ 9.4 million in fees from the sellers of the buildings.

While the audit focused on 101 Ash Street, it also looked at other questionable real estate transactions. This includes the purchase of a closed indoor skydiving facility through the city in the East Village and a piece of land in Kearny Mesa that is intended as a repair yard for fire engines and is also uninhabitable.

SELECTED PODCAST

San Diego News Now podcast branding

News from San Diego; when you want it, where you want it. Get local stories about politics, education, health, the environment, border, and more. New episodes are ready on weekday mornings. Hosted by Anica Colbert and produced by KPBS, San Diego and Imperial County’s NPR and PBS broadcaster.

Photo by Andrew Bowen

Andrew Bowen

Metro reporter

opening quotation marksclosing quotation marksI deal with local government – a broad beat that encompasses housing, homelessness, and infrastructure. I am particularly interested in the intersections of land use, traffic and climate change.

To view PDF documents, download Acrobat Reader.

Continue Reading

Real Estate News

Doma, the Company Architecting the Future of Real Estate Transactions, Completes Business Combination with Capitol Investment Corp. V

Published

on

SAN FRANCISCO – (BUSINESS WIRE) – Doma Holdings, Inc. (formerly known as States Title Holding, Inc.) (“Doma”), a leading force in disruptive change in the real estate industry, and Capitol Investment Corp. V (NYSE: CAP) (“Capitol”), a publicly traded special purpose vehicle, today completed its previously announced business combination. Doma leverages machine intelligence and its proprietary technology solutions to create an easier, more efficient and more affordable real estate deal experience for current and potential homeowners, lenders, title agents and real estate professionals. The combined company’s common stock and warrants are expected to trade on July 29, 2021 on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol DOMA and DOMA.WS, respectively.

The proceeds from the transaction will be used by Doma to drive growth, both through market expansion and new product development aimed at expanding the strategic advantage customers receive from Doma’s machine intelligence platform. Capitol shareholders approved the transaction at a special meeting instead of the 2021 annual general meeting on July 27, 2021. CEO Max Simkoff and the rest of the Doma management team will continue to lead the combined company.

“For us, this transaction is about accelerating our ability to penetrate and revolutionize first the antiquated $ 23 billion title, escrow and closure market, and finally the broader $ 318 billion home ownership services market.” said Simkoff. “Ultimately, our vision is to have many of the most important experiences when buying a home, instantly and digitally. Today’s milestone is evidence of Doma’s impressive growth to date and the strength of our business. We look forward to this next phase as a stock corporation. ”

Citigroup Global Markets Inc. acted as financial advisor and Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP acted as legal advisor to Doma. JP Morgan Securities LLC acted as financial advisor and Latham & Watkins LLP acted as legal advisor to Capitol. Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. also acted as capital markets advisor to Capitol. Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and JP Morgan Securities LLC acted as PIPE placement agents with JMP Securities LLC, Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. and DA Davidson & Co. acted as co-placement agents.

About Doma

Doma (formerly States Title Holding, Inc.) is shaping the future of real estate transactions. The company uses machine intelligence and its patented technology solutions to transform residential real estate and make closures instant and affordable. Doma and its family of brands – States Title, North American Title Company (NATC), and North American Title Insurance Company (NATIC) – provide solutions for current and potential homeowners, lenders, title agents and real estate professionals that greatly simplify and efficiently close deals, reduce costs and increase customer satisfaction. Doma customers include some of the largest bank and non-bank lenders in the United States. To learn more, visit www.doma.com.

Legend for forward-looking statements

This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the US Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. “plan”, “project”, “predict”, “intend”, “will”, “expect.” “,“ Anticipate, ”“ believe, ”“ seek, ”“ seek, ”or other similar expressions that predict or indicate future events or trends or that are not statements of historical matters. The absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Such statements are based on beliefs and assumptions about the information currently available to Doma’s management.

These forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements regarding estimates and projections of financial and performance metrics, projections of market opportunities, total addressable market (“TAM”), market share and competition, and potential benefits of the transactions described herein. These statements are based on various assumptions, whether or not mentioned in this press release, and current expectations of Doma management and are not predictions of actual performance. These forward-looking statements are presented for illustrative purposes only and are not intended as a guarantee, assurance, prediction or final determination of fact or probability and should not be relied upon as such by any investor. Actual events and circumstances are difficult or impossible to predict, differ from assumptions, and are beyond Doma’s control.

These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including changes in business, market, financial, political and legal conditions; Failure to achieve the expected benefits of the business combination; Risks related to the uncertainty in the forecast financial information relating to Doma; future global, regional or local economic, political, market-related and social conditions, including due to the COVID-19 pandemic; the development, impact and enforcement of laws and regulations, including those related to the title insurance industry; Doma’s ability to manage its future growth or to develop or acquire improvements to its platform; the impact of competition on Doma’s future business; the outcome of potential legal disputes, governmental and regulatory proceedings, investigations and investigations; and the other factors described in the “Risk Factors” section of Doma’s filings with the SEC from time to time.

Should any of these risks materialize, or should Doma’s assumptions prove incorrect, actual results could differ materially from those implied in these forward-looking statements. There may be additional risks that Doma is not currently aware of or that Doma currently considers to be immaterial and which could also mean that the actual results differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements. Additionally, forward-looking statements reflect Doma’s expectations, plans or projections of future events and beliefs as of the date of this press release. Doma assumes that subsequent events and developments will lead to a change in Doma’s assessments. Although Doma may update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, Doma expressly disclaims any obligation to do so, unless required by law. These forward-looking statements should not be taken as a representation of Doma’s opinion at any time after the date of this press release. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements.

Continue Reading

Real Estate News

What Would Equitable Real Estate Finance Look Like? – Non Profit News

Published

on

“The Art of RE Membership, How To Be Human,” Lola Audu

“Real estate is a big issue in America,” noted Avery Ebron, who runs The Guild’s Atlanta business. Ebron made these remarks last month at a press conference to mark the release of the Inclusive Capital Collective’s (ICC) first “black paper” entitled Building Community Wealth: Shifting Power and Capital in Real Estate Finance. Ebron co-authored this paper with The Guild CEO Nikishka Iyengar and Chicago Trend CEO Lyneir Richardson. The report provides an important framework not only to identify how structural racism is penalizing real estate development by and for BIPOC communities, but also to identify specific changes that could significantly reduce these barriers.

ICC defines itself as “a growing network of community fund managers and entrepreneurship support organizations that have designed and developed a common technical and financial infrastructure for the aggregation and delivery of financial capital and other resources to entrepreneurs and colored communities in the United States.” The group was formed at a meeting in Denver in the fall of 2019 and is incubated by the 2015 Zebras Unite Cooperative, which aims to promote access to capital for socially minded companies, especially women-owned and black-owned companies.

Often the discussion about real estate focuses on home ownership and the gap between black and white ownership rates. Here, however, the focus is less on residential properties and more on the actual real estate development business. As Amanda Abrams wrote in the New York Times earlier this year, “Commercial real estate remains an area where the vast majority of developers are white.” Abrams found that a 2013 industry survey found that only 4.4 percent of the commercial real estate professionals were blacks. A recent 2020 survey by the Urban Land Institute found that only five percent of its members were black, while 82 percent were white.

In their paper, the authors state that “current community development practices and institutions tend to focus on outcomes (especially affordable housing) rather than outcomes that drive structural change.” In their report, Iyengar and her co-authors claim that a commercial Real estate industry, in which blacks and other colored real estate entrepreneurs played a bigger role, would not only be more diverse and inclusive, but would also focus on the goal of collective wealth creation. According to the authors, a “community-centered” real estate market would:

  • Prioritize affordable operating space for local BIPOC businesses
  • Be more democratic and involve community organizers, small business owners and local residents in the development process
  • Focus on providing space for important common goods like groceries and common areas
  • Leverage infill development to support affordable rents and home ownership that stabilize existing BIPOC neighborhoods
  • Create opportunities for blacks, indigenous peoples and other colored residents to have a stake in commercial real estate
  • Better connect residents and businesses to public resources such as technical assistance, basic financial literacy programs and business grants

Real estate redesign for equity

An important contribution of the report is that it provides a thoughtful list of both the barriers to equitable real estate development and potential solutions. As Joe Neri, CEO of IFF, a leading Chicago-based community development financial institution (CDFI), explained, one of the many effects structural racism has on real estate is that BIPOC neighborhoods are valued lower than white neighborhoods, what it is makes it more difficult to fund projects (as the credits are drawn up to a percentage of the appraised value), which means that a developer has to raise more money.

As Neri put it, “Old government-sanctioned banking regulations have depreciated property for decades, and now current banking regulations prevent investment in areas where appraisals are low.” Building on Neri, the ICC report calls for one “Income-based lending” (ie, lending based on a percentage of the income the project is expected to generate), which is forward-looking, not ratings that bake in past discrimination.

The authors describe specific loan products that could lower financing costs for BIPOC real estate developers. These include “patient justice,” which the authors of the report describe as a long time horizon (e.g. 10 years), low interest rates (zero to five percent), and provisions to protect development projects from early costs (e.g. payments for the first 12 to 24 years of age) Months of the loan). Foundations, according to the authors, are the most likely providers of such funding, and that funding could be five percent of the project’s value. Another 20 percent of the financing structure could be “friendly debt”, such as low-interest loans from CDFIs. The remaining 75 percent could be standard bank loans. In other words, while the need for philanthropic assistance is clear, the report also shows how limited philanthropic dollars can enable more common commercial funding.

The authors also describe additional steps in overcoming barriers – for example, easier access to credit lines, reducing zone restrictions, loan guarantees (possibly from CDFIs or foundations) to reduce interest costs, and partnering with public land banks to help BIPOC real estate developers get low-cost land.

In the report’s conclusion, the authors note that “there is an abundance of black developers creating equitable and contextualized real estate solutions for their communities – transforming the way real estate development is done and transforming them into a vector for creating Transforming Prosperity for All Americans ”. In the appendices to the report, the authors document this through case studies of BIPOC-owned real estate companies in four cities – Philadelphia, Chicago, Atlanta and Fort Myers in Florida.

When the report was released, Kevin Williams, a member of the Black Squirrel Collective in Philadelphia, spoke about the urgency of the work. “You see a lot of study and research into the plight of minorities in America,” noted Williams. “But you don’t see any follow-up. Someone writes a newspaper and says black people are poor. Yeah we know that. But has anyone followed up to see what was being done to address this issue? … We have to keep being vocal … and we have to keep pushing the point that justice has to happen. “

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending