Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
bearishgurl
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=spdrun]
personally i would never be mean verbally in any way to anyone. too easy for it to be perceived as a criminal threat.
You can do what Britt McHenry did to the desk-chick of the company that towed her car in Virginia. And by towed, I mean likely stole, since the particular firm has quite a reputation.
Be very personally insulting while only threatening to own the people in court, no physical threats. I don’t condone what she said, but I can understand why she was extremely pissed off.[/quote]
Don’t treaten to take legal action or threaten anythinh unless you have the wherewithal to follow through.
The property manager’s henpecked husband hand delivered me a letter saying that I’m not to contact the owner or tenants per federal statute 18 section 2661A which has to with with harassing people.
That’s totally bullshit because I didn’t harass anybody. I called the owner to make her aware is the leak and the tenants are more or less my friends.
These people are legal bullies. And I’m intent on making them. They want legal so they will get legal. I got my lawyer to have their tenants immediately cease any water usage. So now they have to accommodate the tenants in a hotel.[/quote]
FIH, in your circumstance, I would have handled everyone in the exact same manner that you did. I actually would “prefer” my opponent “lawyer up” ASAP as I would MUCH prefer dealing with their lawyer than their own crazymaking “victimhood” tactics.
What you are currently experiencing is one of many reasons why I would never invest in condos …. especially a unit with another unit above it or below it.
I know you’ll get it sorted out but meanwhile your upstairs occupants’ leak can still cause a lot of damage to your unit AFTER they vacate the premises. It’s a HUGE inconvenience. Good luck to you.
Participant[quote=SK in CV]BG, this sounds like horrible divorce representation. Under the scenario you described, absent a specific waiver of reimbursement, the value of the home contributed to the community would be reimbursable to the contributing spouse, irrespective of how the home was transferred to the community.
These kinds of problems would be easily avoidable in the case of a Roth (or other self-directed retirement plan). Even employer sponsored plan equity is separate property, to the extent it was earned prior to marriage.[/quote]SK, I see where a statement in my post could have been miscontrued:
[quote=bearishgurl]. . . They end up recovering very little equity from the forced sale of their former parent(s) home because it is now mortgaged (in some cases repeatedly) and half of it now belongs to their spouse, who lived with them in the home while married and also signed the note(s) on the mortgage(s) they took out together. . .[/quote]
SK, I DO realize that in CA the non-heir spouse on title receives a portion of the heir-spouse’s ownership of their inherited property’s equity in a divorce based primarily upon how long ago they inherited it prior to quitclaiming it to both spouses.
The individuals I referred to here were ALL represented by counsel during the settlement of their divorces (I only learned about their problems with losing their properties to SS or FC AFTER they were already divorced). In two of the cases, I worked on the divorce myself and submitted that work to their attorney for filing and service.
Example of what I have found to be a common scenario in SD: Married in 1975 (first marriage for both). Couple are renters until 1979, when one spouse “inherits” the family home of ~1300 sf after last parent died. Heir contracted to purchase brother’s half for $17K at 10% per annum in installments over 4 years (a “bargain” at the time). By 1986, heir-spouse owns home free and clear and has three growing kids and feel that they are growing out of their house so they seek to mortgage their home to obtain funds for a remodel. The owner (heir-spouse) is told they don’t have enough income by themselves to qualify for the ~$60K mortgage they are seeking (mtg interest rates were much higher back then). So they cooperate with mtg broker and “quitclaim” their “inherited” property to themselves and their spouse (who is working FT) in order to qualify for the loan. Heir’s spouse signs the note and TD along with heir and after receiving the proceeds, they commence work on a ~500 sf addition to better accommodate their family. The work is finished less than a year later and the couple end up refinancing “cash out” four more times (in ’89, ’92, ’93 and 2003) to enhance their lifestyle (the “heir spouse” is still bringing in little to no income). With their kids grown and gone, the couple ends up separating in 2008 and divorcing in 2009. Here, the non-heir spouse’s portion of the home equity was complicated by them being able to prove (with old paystubs) that they helped the heir-spouse buy out their brother’s equity in those four years long ago at a time when both spouses were still working. Upon settlement, a portion of the non-heir spouse’s “payoff money” to heir’s brother was attributed to “rent” because they had to live somewhere during those four years. Here, the non-heir spouse ended up receiving an award of 48% of the equity of the family home (now in the “community”) which was calculated as follows: 29 years ownership by heir. 22 years ownership by heir’s spouse + 2 years ownership added (for helping to pay heir’s brother off for 4 years) totaling 24 years ownership by heir’s spouse. The property sold in 2010 where heir received ~55% and heir’s spouse received ~45% of the ~$25K of sales proceeds from escrow (after liens were satisfied).
This isn’t the story of either female I was referring to but a (rather convoluted) version of what SK is likely referring to here. In most cases, the non-heir spouse (on title) is awarded a lesser percentage of the heir-spouse’s inherited property upon divorce. I think the above story illustrates that truth is often stranger than fiction when “life happens” over the years.
Those two “boomer” females I was referring to here had “inherited” their family home (in 2000 and 1997) during a time when they were both single (divorced). Both remarried soon after inheriting their family home (several months to 3 yrs later). When those marriages ended in divorce, they and their spouses had already borrowed so much of the property’s equity (in two or more cash-out refis and a HELOC) that there was very little equity left to split in one instance. In the other instance, the couple lost their home to FC.
It is especially sad for the 1st heir, who ended up receiving only ~$10K equity from the sale of her childhood home post-divorce which she “inherited” free and clear about 8-9 years earlier (she was still working after her last parent died and was able to buy her sibling out of their half). Both heirs (unwisely) co-mingled their inherited CA property with a new spouse in order to receive cash from its equity for a variety of purposes. The second heir and her spouse simply went though the equity of the inherited home in >3 years and then squatted for a time before the “heir” was finally evicted by her foreclosing lender while she was living alone in it with no income coming in (after her spouse had already left the home).
IMO, this wouldn’t have happened to either heir if they had kept working after remarrying … at least part time, and kept a separate checking account to pay the property taxes, homeowner’s insurance and for all the maintenance, repairs and any remodeling of their “inherited” property from. Even if their spouse did any of this work (non-licensed contractor spouse), he should have been paid for it. If they cut a cashier’s check to their spouse for the fair-market value of the work he performed and kept the carbon copy, even if the husband kept the check without cashing it or later returned the check to the wife uncashed (for illustration purposes only – roles could be reversed), it is proof positive of the heir-wife’s intention was to pay the husband a set amount of money for the work he performed on her property. This could serve to successfully block a later claim of a portion of “ownership” by the non-heir spouse in the case of a divorce.
The above scenarios were all absent a prenup (which way too many people don’t see the need to pursue prior to remarriage … to their eventual peril, imho).
[end hijack]
ParticipantBack to the “marriage” thing, for example, your kid could get married and then “take a withdrawal” out of $10K of their IRA funds for a downpayment on their first home (that you invested for them when they were a minor).
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/using-ira-make-house-down-payment.html
Then take title to that home in “joint tenancy” with their spouse and subsequently get divorced and lose 1/2 their “equity” (assuming there is any equity left to split at that time).
I guess this is the same as gifting your married child $10K (or more) to help with a downpayment on their home and they they subsequently lose it in SS, FC or a forced “divorce sale.”
I’ve just seen a lot of stuff like this this in my day and its not pretty. Not related to IRA’s, the worst things I’ve seen happen were to heirs of free and clear CA homes (with extremely low taxes) who got married and then later had to use their spouse’s income to take out a mortgage on their inherited home which was large enough to improve the home (or invest in spouse’s business, their kids’ college or for a variety of reasons). The mortgage application triggered their lender to require a “quitclaim deed” be executed from the heir-spouse to both spouses as a condition of granting the mortgage, due to the “heir-spouse” having little or no income of their own to qualify for it by themselves and so the heir-spouse cooperates and executes the quit-claim.
Later, the couple gets divorced and the “heir spouse” is unable to buy their spouse out of the property. They end up recovering very little equity from the forced sale of their former parent(s) home because it is now mortgaged (in some cases repeatedly) and half of it now belongs to their spouse, who lived with them in the home while married and also signed the note(s) on the mortgage(s) they took out together. Of course, the heir spouse’s ultra-low assessment is also lost upon sale.
Even though unemployed/underemployed at the time of marriage, the “heir spouse” in many cases would have been far better off to work at least part-time during the marriage and pay ALL the bills related to their “inherited” property (taxes and insurance but not necessarily utilities) and pay for any repairs that it needed out of pocket. They should have never involved their spouse whatsoever in the direct expenses of the home. Instead, they essentially (unwisely) commingled the equity from their inherited homes to receive large amounts of cash from them.
I’m still in touch with most of these people from time to time (all but one were females) and two are them are now 60-65 years old and virtually “homeless” (renting rooms in other’s homes).
That wasn’t what their parent(s) intended in leaving their child(ren) their home.
I think I posted somewhere here a while back that none of us has any idea WHO our kids might marry (and are powerless to stop an adult’s marriage which we may think it wrong for them) or how that marriage will turn out.
I like the idea of leaving in trust money to (currently young) heirs in stages, such as appointing a fiduciary to pay college expenses at 18 years old, payment 2 at 22-25 years old and payment 3 (the largest payment) at 30 years old or older. Even a “staggered-payment trust” as described above can’t control everything but it can teach an immature spendthrift kid how to budget and save, since there are several years between payments and no way to obtain an “advance” in between payments.
I guess an IRA gifted to your kid from investments you made while they were a minor would work out okay IF your kid was well employed directly out of college and all their needs were taken care of. I just feel that the kid would take withdrawals (and the subsequent tax hit where applicable) IF they KNEW about the IRA and felt that they “needed” anything at all (i.e. newer vehicle, overseas trip, or help with downpayment on first home, etc). And they may not tell their parent(s) about it if they do … that is, until they have to file their tax return and are shocked as to how much they owe :-0
ParticipantThe seller pays a prorated amount of both until the 10th and the buyer pays a prorated amount of both from the 11th until the end of the month (HOA dues) or until the end of the tax year (June 30 for CA property taxes). Buyer only pays the prorated seller’s taxes remaining between the closing date and June 30.
Buyer will receive a Supplemental Bill from the assessor for the rest of the taxes they owe between 5-1/2 and 9 months from closing, depending on which month they close. This bill will be based upon a change in ownership and reflect buyer’s taxes from the date of closing MINUS any seller’s taxes they already paid in escrow. If buyer bought the property at less than the seller’s assessed value at the time of closing, their eventual supplemental bill will show a credit, which can be taken in the form of a check or applied to the next fiscal year’s tax bill.
ParticipantIf the accessory dwelling is “legal” (has separate address, own mailbox and own utility meters), then it would enhance the value of the property, even if situated on the same lot as the main house. This “enhancement” to the appraisal would likely be based upon the amount of monthly rent it could fetch. If it’s just an unpermitted MIL unit which uses the same address and utilities from the main house, then the main house description would just include the BR’s/BA’s of the accessory unit in its own description and the accessory dwelling may or may not add value to the property, depending on the size of the lot and how it is used.
ParticipantDon’t do it, flu. An IRA opened for a kid will likely be separate property in marriage IF the kid doesn’t withdraw any or all of it early and “commingle” it but your kid is still young and a lot of things could happen to YOU between now and the time your kid applies for college.
Just being pragmatic here.
Who knows? You might have a lower income for the FAFSA by the time you decide to fill one out. If your kid turns out NOT to be Ivy/Elite material, you may want to fill out the FAFSA for her to see if any aid is available for her for a state school. You won’t have to report all your “locked-up holdings” on a FAFSA as you would other forms for an elite private school.
And do YOU have long-term care insurance?
Just wondering …..
April 20, 2015 at 10:00 PM in reply to: The cost of an Ivy League undergrad degree next year…. #785033Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]One thing about me, I have always felt incredibly insecure about my place in the world at least for the first 40 odd years. . Not sure it worked to my benefit.[/quote]
scaredy, I know some days it doesn’t seem like it, but you ARE making a difference in the world! Watch this inspiring, 23 min TED talk by Bryan Stevenson, which took place in Long Beach, CA in 2012. The live audience was so moved by his talk that he actually (inadvertently) raised ~$1M for his causes AFTER HE LEFT the auditorium (due to a prior engagement):
http://www.ted.com/speakers/bryan_stevenson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Stevenson
He discusses the same issues you brought up in your thread below … as well as other threads:
http://piggington.com/ot_wait_cops_actually_lie
Stevenson was interviewed on 60 Minutes last night.
edit: here’s a u-tube version of his TED talk:
Participant[quote=SK in CV]… One of my siblings has DB pensions that pay he and his wife over $170K a year…[/quote]
SK, I don’t think I would be able to find it now but didn’t you once mention here that one of your brothers (the youngest?) was a SDPD sworn staff and recently retired? Is this the brother you are referring to above? Is the $170K in pensions referring to TWO City workers (your sibling and their spouse) or referring to just ONE pension (your sibling).
I just wanted to illustrate to the Piggs that not only were the negotiated “Class C” retirements very generous to sworn staff, but the option of participating in DROP made it even moreso.
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]Well, then, if I’m understanding your post correctly, SK, four of your siblings (2 seniors and 2 “boomers”) have DB pension plans and all are presently collecting benefits (typical). You are finally working in a job which will provide you with a DB pension. And I will surmise that most of all of your siblings have health benefits (or a healthcare allowance) attached to their DB Plans.
[/quote]
Typically, you’re not understanding my post. Three of the four are boomers. Two are collecting. The oldest (that is still alive) and the youngest. Two are not. My oldest brother died at 65. He had no DB plan. Only one has any healthcare benefits attached to their plans. I do not have a job with a DB pension. I have a job with a 401K with no matching.[/quote]
Thank you for the clarification, SK.
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]…I just talked with two local govm’t workers over the weekend who will retire from SD’s (City’s) DROP program at the age of 55. The City’s DROP was one of the most generous retirement programs in the nation (now taken off the table) and these individuals are currently only 52 and 54 years old! Not only are their houses paid off, but they will each retire with 29 and 30 years service respectively with all of the above and more benefits and perks and are essentially set for life!…[/quote]
btw, folks, these individuals were both females and both sworn staff. I predict they will both retire with $92-97K each in annual pensions their first year of retirement with benefits and perks added on to equal in the low-mid $120K’s annually. And btw, they both reside in Chula Vista …. along with many of their brethren 🙂
That’s how the DROP worked and that’s why it is no longer an option for City employees.
https://www.sdcers.org/Member-Benefits/Retired/Unified-Port-District/DROP.aspx
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=bearishgurl]
SK, are you factoring in military retirees? Military pensions are akin to DB pensions and I included them in my assumptions. Also, I am referring to about 60% seniors (those currently 70 and older) and 40% boomers (those currently 51 to 69 yrs old who are already “retired.”). The bulk of senior households DID and DO HAVE at least one DB pension coming in, incl military retirements. The bulk of those collecting DB pensions also have guaranteed health coverage for life or a guaranteed healthcare allowance for life or both (single or couple).HEALTH CARE BLAH BLAH BLAH
You’re skipping over a boatload of people, here, SK.
All but one of the boomers I know who lost both parents had to split their “inheritance” with 2 or more siblings (and/or the heirs of a deceased sibling). SK, you’re a boomer who grew up in SD, no? How many siblings do/did you have? Are both of your parents still alive?[/quote]
I was referring to private sector employees. But since public sector has never made up more than 10% of the population, it doesn’t change things much. There has never been a time during baby boomer’s working lives when “the vast majority” were covered by DB plans.
I didn’t skip over anyone or anything. I never mentioned anything about health care. Only your assertion that “the vast majority” of retirees have some sort of DB pensions. They don’t.
I had 5 siblings. One is dead, and the other oldest aren’t/weren’t boomers. But that’s the difference between us BG. You think that the entire world is like your world. I don’t, because it isn’t. None of my close friends had more than 2 siblings. One of my siblings has DB pensions that pay he and his wife over $170K a year. Another will have $7K a month when he’s 65 for 5 years of work in the ’70’s. The other two also have DB plans. Until 10 months ago, I’ve never worked for en employer with a DB plan nor even a 401K. Until 6 months ago, I’ve never been eligible to participate in any kind of employer plan.
You know a lot of retired military and retired civil servants. I don’t. I know one retired civil servant. I don’t know a single retired career member of the military. (I did know a guy that was a career Coast Guard. He’s probably retired now. I haven’t seen nor heard from him in 15 years, since he moved to Alaska.) But none of that is important, because what I’ve experienced is nothing more than a single data point among millions. So I look at that data for the millions. And it says that you’re wrong.[/quote]
Well, then, if I’m understanding your post correctly, SK, four of your siblings (2 seniors and 2 “boomers”) have DB pension plans and all are presently collecting benefits (typical). You are finally working in a job which will provide you with a DB pension. And I will surmise that most of all of your siblings have health benefits (or a healthcare allowance) attached to their DB Plans.
The reason I brought up healthcare is because there were at least two posts on this thread which forecasted a “healthcare crises” among the aged as another reason why this cohort (seniors and boomers) are going to run out of money to pay their healthcare costs. Nothing could be further from the truth … at least in this region of the country.
And I don’t think the “entire world is like my world.” I didn’t discuss the “entire world” here. I discussed San Diego County, CA and those areas close to military bases which have a very large population of military retirees and civil-servant retirees from of all levels of government, including Federal (incl thousands of DOD employees), state, county and municipal employers, including teachers and college professors. It also has a large contingent of DOD Contractor retirees (who provided generous DB pensions to retiring workers in past decades) and retired airline, phone and utility employees.
As a Native? San Diegan, SK, you must admit that in past decades, there weren’t very many large employers here in SD who weren’t gov contractors or the government itself. Most of their former workers never left SD County, and, if still alive, still reside here.
There are a LOT of military and Federal DOD retirees in East SD County as well, which is not that close to military bases. I can only attribute that to its lower cost to buy homes and land (compared to SD and close-in suburbs) and so a lot of enlisted families and lower-paid DOD workers bought property there while still working. Possibly those of all income brackets who had horses as well.
Public sector workers may not make up more than 10% of the population in the entire country … I don’t know. But in SD County, it is much more than that … especially when you count in the military active-duty residents, military retirees and public sector retirees, all of whom aren’t going anywhere. They were ALL “government employees” at one time.
While a portion of new retirees of every stripe from other parts of the country may typically relocate upon retirement, they tend to “retire in place” here. Along with the weather, Proposition 13 made/makes this decision a no-brainer.
Participant[quote=AN][quote=The-Shoveler] If your going to sell and be done with a property I think that is fine. But IMO it is very unlikely we would see the kind of decline that would make it worth it to sell and try to buy again just for the profit.
That was a once in a life time (thank goodness).
anyway IMO.[/quote]It all depends on how high it does and how quick it gets there. My crystal ball is broken, which is why I’m leaving all potential response on the table. If we see 2005-6 inflation (3-5%) adjusted price soon, then hell yeah I’ll sell, I might even sell my primary. Key word is it has to be inflation adjusted from 2005-6 price, not the 2005-6 nominal price. Which mean, your average 1/1 condo in MM would be $350-400k, your average 2/2 condo in MM would be $500-550k, your small 3/2-4/2 in MM would be $850-900k, the larger house in MM would be $1.05-1.1M, etc.[/quote]
Um … AN, I don’t see any of the above happening in the forseeable or unforseeable future. So, you probably should plan on keeping any real property you happen to own in MM for the rest of your life and let your “heirs” figure out what to do with it.
Participant[quote=dumbrenter]I’m gonna hit that number in 2 months… about a year late, thanks to an investment decision that cut my IRA in half. This is with $0 in real estate as my name indicates. With some help from capital gains, stock options and in being a good w-2 slave.
It is simple math, but if you are age 25 and in the tech business, it is very easy to hit a 7-digit net worth before your 40th birthday in addition to raising a family; in San Diego; on a single income. But that requires you to have a savings goal which is at least 40% of your income… i.e. no expensive vacations, no ‘nice’ cars in return for ability to retire early. And you can still have a good life.
But I can already feel that this is still middle class number… getting to an 8 digit net worth might feel good.[/quote]
Congrats, dumbrenter! I guess you haven’t been so “dumb” renting all these years! Owning their personal residence isn’t ideal for everyone, due to property taxes, maintenance costs, higher utilities and the illiquid nature of home equity. Also, some homeowners have too low of an income to take advantage of a tax write-off of all or part of their annual mortgage interest (MID). A soon-to-be-retiree also has to gauge the correct time to sell their primary residence for the maximum price if they want to relocate and the amount they can recover from that sale at any given time is contingent upon many variables of which they have no control over. In short, homeowners can’t always relocate for retirement purposes at precisely the time they want to.
It sounds like you have handled your household income very wisely thus far, dumbrenter. How far away are your kid(s) from attending college?
April 20, 2015 at 3:01 PM in reply to: The cost of an Ivy League undergrad degree next year…. #785012Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]. . . since harvey mudd is 50k a year tuition, kid ahs to make 100k to get that million dolalr return over 20 years.
i think a kid is way more likely to get a better return on investment from a mere 8k investment as an engineering student at a cal state school.
obviously theres more to the equation than just ROI, but still…
point is…
ivies dont get the return on investment these schools do, on average…[/quote]
Agree with your points here, scaredy. Even if your Cal State graduate doesn’t make $100K consistently every year for the 20 years after they graduate, they’ll still graduate debt free (or with a very small debt). Even if a Cal State graduate averages just $50K year in salary for the 20 years post-graduation, they have more than an acceptable ROI on their college costs.
I’m sure there are Ivy and “elite school” graduates out there who have more than $75K of student debt who are choosing NOT to work and get it paid off. That’s a HUGE WASTE of such an expensive degree, IMO (even if they had a “benefactor” who paid all their college costs)! Barring a major injury/illness post graduation, I honestly don’t understand why a student would borrow that much for college, graduate with a bachelor degree or higher and then “choose” not to work (or choose gross under-employment just because they refuse to relocate), thereby making it impossible for them to pay off their student loans … while the interest on them continually accrues. This is a totally mind boggling concept to me … just REALLY.POOR.CHOICES.
-
AuthorPosts
