why? Why would anybody do this?

cindy-e · #1 03/20/12, 08:11 PM

So a realator wants me to consider purchasing a home on the reservation. waterfront. good price. but in 5 years the res takes back the land under the house and you have to move it or walk away. realator said "so, basically it's like glorified renting." ?? Am I missing something here? What is the upside of paying 77,000 for a house you don't get to keep or you know you're gonna have to move in 5 years?

sunshinytraci · #2 03/20/12, 08:16 PM

That sounds shady. Maybe you need a new realtor. Is it insanely cheaper than buying a house on non-reservation land? Otherwise, I have no clue what the benefit to that would be.

springvalley · #3 03/20/12, 08:25 PM

Not a good deal far as I see, must be a good house for 77,000, I think I would pass on it. > Thanks Marc

wogglebug · #4 03/20/12, 08:40 PM

About $1,300 per month, paid lump sum in advance for five years, getting none of the interest you might have received for that money over the five years, and at the end of it you have nothing to show for it.

I can see some pluses in it, but they aren't on your side.

Joshie · #5 03/20/12, 08:44 PM

I cannot imagine anybody would give you a mortgage for that. If your realtor understands you so little it's probably time to get a new one.

cindy-e · #6 03/20/12, 08:48 PM

around here, you're lucky to get an acre with nothing on it for that. And this is a waterfront property with a 3 br 2 ba house on it. That is why I called. Seemed too good to be true. It was. L! This lady is not MY realator. Basically she said that you would have to walk away from it after 5 years because it would be too expensive to move. Is that even legal, or is she talking about defaulting on a house... on purpose!?? WOW!

But I am not from here, never lived near a rez before, and I wondered if there were some deal that I didn't know about that would make that appealing to somebody... like if you walk away, there are no financial or legal rammifications. So basically, in that case, you would get to rent for really cheap (for around here) without the harrassment of a landlord, whilst saving for a purchase of something better. But that would be bad for the bank, who has to float the whole note, so I can't imagine that would be true.

No, I don't want a house I have to move, but I can't figure out why they are even offering this as an option... there has to be something that I don't understand about it.

Cindyc.

jassytoo · #7 03/20/12, 09:06 PM

Land on reservations is almost always leased not sold. Once the lease is up maybe you can renew it maybe not. A fancy development near here is going through that now. Beautiful homes, gated community on the water. The lease is up in two years. The homes are going for a song.

ryanthomas · #8 03/20/12, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cindy-e

around here, you're lucky to get an acre with nothing on it for that. And this is a waterfront property with a 3 br 2 ba house on it.

With property values that high, it sounds like a pretty good rental deal. If you could get a mortgage on it at all, I think it would have to be a five year mortgage.

Pink_Carnation · #9 03/20/12, 09:32 PM

From what I remember most the land leases are much longer so part of why it is cheap is because of the length. There doesn't have to be an upside for it to be offered and in some cases there really isn't.

kasilofhome · #10 03/20/12, 11:19 PM

Look up "salamanca, NY" & Indian & lease. Then RUN or show a BIA card.

PNWest · #11 03/20/12, 11:32 PM

Cindy-e
There are some red flags flapping in the breeze here. If you are not Native American; if you buy, rent, lease on a reservation you are subject to the laws and regs. for that reservation. They are different than the laws an inch the other side of the res line.

How far away from, say Seattle, are you looking? The res laws usually prohibit non-whites from buying Indian land, so please beware.

KrisD · #12 03/20/12, 11:44 PM

I would stop by the Rez and ask some question. It is possible the realtor isn't explaining it right. I have friends who live on Rez land and I've not heard of this. It could be true but I bet there is more to this story.

Jackie · #13 03/20/12, 11:57 PM

where I live there is a huge development on reserve land. People are building BIG million dollar cabins on the lake. Like walk out basement three story type cabins. Massive! No way to move them. Blows my mind. What happens if the reserve decides they want that land back? I have a mobile home on an owned lot in TOWN less than a mile away and there is no way I am gonna get $30,000 for it. Yet a mobile home on reserve land a bit closer to the lake is going for $200,000. *shakes head* Not in a millions years would I build on reserve land. Certainly not something that could never be moved.

ChristieAcres · #14 03/20/12, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cindy-e

So a realator wants me to consider purchasing a home on the reservation. waterfront. good price. but in 5 years the res takes back the land under the house and you have to move it or walk away. realator said "so, basically it's like glorified renting." ?? Am I missing something here? What is the upside of paying 77,000 for a house you don't get to keep or you know you're gonna have to move in 5 years?

I am a WA Real Estate Managing Broker and I say

That is ludicrous! Sounds like an Agent who just wants pockets lined with $$$, laughing all the way to the bank.

I often wonder why I am not busier with Clients hearing all this nonsense...

Farmerwilly2 · #15 03/21/12, 04:27 AM

I would think the place would be yours for as long as grass grows and water flows or till the treaty, er lease runs out, then we'll sign another one, for as long as the rocks live. Where is this place, Payback Acres?

haypoint · #16 03/21/12, 11:17 AM

Res property is always sketchy. Around here, a native (1/8 or more) can get a house on Res land, no property taxes.

A know a gal that married a native, bought a house together, on the Res, she worked, he didn't. She poured everything she had in labor and cash into that house for 8 years. He moved to Las Vegas and she couldn't stay there because she's not native. She moved out and her ex BIL moved in.

30 years ago, grovernment grant built 50 houses on Res land. Tribe formed a Housing Assoc. and rented the houses to themselves. Since they are low income, they get monthly housing assistance of $500 per house ffrom the federal government.

Because of the inability to repossess Res land, no bank will finance a home on a Res. Unable to finance a home, many natives had to build as they could afford to. That resulted in many tarpaper shacks.

RebelDigger · #17 03/21/12, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haypoint

30 years ago, grovernment grant built 50 houses on Res land. Tribe formed a Housing Assoc. and rented the houses to themselves. Since they are low income, they get monthly housing assistance of $500 per house ffrom the federal government.

I have to say, although in general I am totally against entitlements, this one I love!!! Score a point for the Native Americans! They are getting a little payback.

I am 1/8 Cherokee on my mother's side, although I have never attempted to use it to claim any benefits, so I guess I am biased.

As far as the OP goes, I smell a rat. I would drop that like a hot potatoe (did I spell that rigjt--never sure if there is an "e" on the end or not LOL). I sure wouldn't want to put the work into a place, esp. if you are homesteading minded, that I may or may not be living on in five years. It takes that long just to get a good garden plot built up. You would be having to walk away right about the time all that composting and work started paying off.

o&itw · #18 03/21/12, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cindy-e

So a realator wants me to consider purchasing a home on the reservation. waterfront. good price. but in 5 years the res takes back the land under the house and you have to move it or walk away. realator said "so, basically it's like glorified renting." ?? Am I missing something here? What is the upside of paying 77,000 for a house you don't get to keep or you know you're gonna have to move in 5 years?

It is possible this could be reasonable in some areas if the local prices were high enough for this kind of house (and there were no reservation rules causing a problem) The price per month would be $1283, plus upkeep and insurance.

If similar houses were renting for $2500 a month, and in some areas a nice big house on the waterfront could, this might be a good deal. Many people don't want to buy right now, and if they know they are going to be in the area 5 years, it might be just the thing for them. They rent the house for (maybe) the equivalent of $1700 a month and don't have to worry about selling it at the end of that time, though they have all the advantages of owning it, and perhaps no property taxes. If it is an area where rents keep going up, they are "locking in" a price that they are certain of. For some professional people with high incomes, this would be a fairly cheap vacation house!

Now to me that kind of rent is way too high, as I figure it is for most of us on HT, but in some places for very nice houses, that would be awfully cheap rent (for those who could afford such a place). My daughter lived in Pasadena until a few years ago, and $1500/month for a 1 bedroom apartment was normal.

Yvonne's hubby · #19 03/21/12, 12:36 PM

Why would anybody develop leased property? I dunno.. ask the Brits, they seemed to think it was a great idea. And I spose it was for the first 400 years... but a few years ago their lease expired and they had to give Hong Kong back to China.

oregon woodsmok · #20 03/21/12, 01:42 PM

It's very common in Oregon, and probably Washington (and for sure in Hawaii) for recreational land to be leased and not sold. There are lots of vacation cabins located in the National Forest on leased land.

Leases are usually quite long, 25-100 years. So I suspect that what you have been offered is the tail end of a longer lease. The owner is trying to bail out before the lease expires.

If I liked the house, I would go to the tribal offices and see if I could negotiate an extension of the lease. If that was possible, I'd get it in writing, keep my mouth shut about it, and offer the seller much less than he is asking.

If the tribe will not extend the lease, I would offer majorly less than the asking price, live there for the 5 years, considering it rent, and then know I had to move one at the end of the lease.