Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site hammer.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!lll-crg!qantel!hplabs!tektronix!orca!hammer!andrew
From: andrew@hammer.UUCP (Andrew Klossner)
Newsgroups: net.invest,net.consumers
Subject: Re: Re: "No Money Down" (Other People's Money) Scam
Message-ID: <1749@hammer.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 14-Jan-86 16:18:55 EST
Article-I.D.: hammer.1749
Posted: Tue Jan 14 16:18:55 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 17-Jan-86 06:33:52 EST
References: <131@molihp.UUCP> <4794@alice.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 23
Xref: watmath net.invest:1037 net.consumers:3890

> IE.  There doesn't seem to be any advantage in selling the house to 
>     the person who *states* he will pay cash, when that is the condition
>     of the sale anyway - unless he was trying to sell it through a
>     broker of some sort, and needs money NOW.
>
>		
>			I would apreciate flaws in this thinking
>			to be pointed out, if any.

The discussion of cash vs bank loan and points paid by the seller is
correct, but, at least in these parts, "pay cash" is the alternative to
"enter into a land contract."  In many real estate transactions, the
seller takes a mortgage rather than cashing out because the buyer
cannot or will not get a conventional loan.

During the interest rate peak of the early 1980's, more than half of
residential house sales were by land contract.  For example, my first
house was bought when bank interest rates were at 18%, and I got an 11%
land contract with 12% down payment from the seller, who was anxious to
sell.

  -=- Andrew Klossner   (decvax!tektronix!tekecs!andrew)       [UUCP]
                        (tekecs!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay)  [ARPA]