OfflineThe investor I was working with did Lease Options using a wrap around mortgage. I'm seeing some guys on here saying their doing this using a subject two contract. Why do this subject two when you assume the liability of the property when you can do the same and let the owner keep liablity?
Just a thought..
__________________
You can make excuses, or you can make money, but you can't make both. -Dean Graziosi
I was under the impression that "subject to" kept the liability on the original owner. Since he is the mortgagee, if you being the new buyer would just be making the payments to the bank & leasing out the property to a tenant, if the tenant didn't pay you, & you didn't pay the bank, the original owner, the mortgagee would be foreclosed on ... the idea is that he, the original owner was about to go into foreclosure anyway, so you, the buyer, just stepped in to take over his payments & help his credit.
I'm confused? I made a post about it earlier. Could someone clear this up?
You can make excuses, or you can make money, but you can't make both. -Dean Graziosi
just checked it out. made a mistake. subject to leaves obligation on the original person who took out the loan.
You can make excuses, or you can make money, but you can't make both. -Dean Graziosi