[UCGal]

[quote=DataAgent]Does the $293M include land acquisition costs? Or does the city already own the land?[/quote]
The article says it would be built where Golden Hall is – adjacent to the current city building. In other words – the city already owns the land.

I think it would be cheaper to buy some existing office buildings and retrofit. I’ve seen some “see-through” Class A buildings that would be prime candidates for satellite offices. The county does well with their main facility, then various regional facilities. The city should emulate that model.

[UCGal]

[quote=DataAgent]Does the $293M include land acquisition costs? Or does the city already own the land?[/quote]
The article says it would be built where Golden Hall is – adjacent to the current city building. In other words – the city already owns the land.

I think it would be cheaper to buy some existing office buildings and retrofit. I’ve seen some “see-through” Class A buildings that would be prime candidates for satellite offices. The county does well with their main facility, then various regional facilities. The city should emulate that model.

[UCGal]

[quote=DataAgent]Does the $293M include land acquisition costs? Or does the city already own the land?[/quote]
The article says it would be built where Golden Hall is – adjacent to the current city building. In other words – the city already owns the land.

I think it would be cheaper to buy some existing office buildings and retrofit. I’ve seen some “see-through” Class A buildings that would be prime candidates for satellite offices. The county does well with their main facility, then various regional facilities. The city should emulate that model.

[UCGal]

[quote=Diego Mamani]This my pet peeve too. I seldom mention it because so many Piggs here mangle the language… The (false) word “alot” is used a lot around here. Other than that, we often read principle in lieu of principal (and vice versa). Another one is “versus,” abbreviated “vs.” that some people erroneously spell as “verses.” Then there’s effect vs. affect, etc. I could go on and on.[/quote]
For your amusement:
http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html

[UCGal]

[quote=Diego Mamani]This my pet peeve too. I seldom mention it because so many Piggs here mangle the language… The (false) word “alot” is used a lot around here. Other than that, we often read principle in lieu of principal (and vice versa). Another one is “versus,” abbreviated “vs.” that some people erroneously spell as “verses.” Then there’s effect vs. affect, etc. I could go on and on.[/quote]
For your amusement:
http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html

[UCGal]

[quote=Diego Mamani]This my pet peeve too. I seldom mention it because so many Piggs here mangle the language… The (false) word “alot” is used a lot around here. Other than that, we often read principle in lieu of principal (and vice versa). Another one is “versus,” abbreviated “vs.” that some people erroneously spell as “verses.” Then there’s effect vs. affect, etc. I could go on and on.[/quote]
For your amusement:
http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html

[UCGal]

[quote=Diego Mamani]This my pet peeve too. I seldom mention it because so many Piggs here mangle the language… The (false) word “alot” is used a lot around here. Other than that, we often read principle in lieu of principal (and vice versa). Another one is “versus,” abbreviated “vs.” that some people erroneously spell as “verses.” Then there’s effect vs. affect, etc. I could go on and on.[/quote]
For your amusement:
http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html

[UCGal]

[quote=Diego Mamani]This my pet peeve too. I seldom mention it because so many Piggs here mangle the language… The (false) word “alot” is used a lot around here. Other than that, we often read principle in lieu of principal (and vice versa). Another one is “versus,” abbreviated “vs.” that some people erroneously spell as “verses.” Then there’s effect vs. affect, etc. I could go on and on.[/quote]
For your amusement:
http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html

[UCGal]

[quote=CricketOnTheHearth]
Where would I look up to see if a Notice of Default has been filed?[/quote]
I did a quick check to see if the owner had gotten an NOD via the following public databases

https://www.sdctreastax.com/ebpp3/%285x2gtq45rtl4ecm3cthnrx55%29/Start.Aspx

Put in the address and zip -that gives you the name of the person receiving the prop tax bills (theoretically the owner.)

Then plug that name into a grant dead search:
http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca.us/services/grantorgrantee/search.aspx

I did not see any NODs. But if the loan is under a different name – say under the wife’s name… it may not show.

[UCGal]

[quote=CricketOnTheHearth]
Where would I look up to see if a Notice of Default has been filed?[/quote]
I did a quick check to see if the owner had gotten an NOD via the following public databases

https://www.sdctreastax.com/ebpp3/%285x2gtq45rtl4ecm3cthnrx55%29/Start.Aspx

Put in the address and zip -that gives you the name of the person receiving the prop tax bills (theoretically the owner.)

Then plug that name into a grant dead search:
http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca.us/services/grantorgrantee/search.aspx

I did not see any NODs. But if the loan is under a different name – say under the wife’s name… it may not show.

[UCGal]

[quote=CricketOnTheHearth]
Where would I look up to see if a Notice of Default has been filed?[/quote]
I did a quick check to see if the owner had gotten an NOD via the following public databases

https://www.sdctreastax.com/ebpp3/%285x2gtq45rtl4ecm3cthnrx55%29/Start.Aspx

Put in the address and zip -that gives you the name of the person receiving the prop tax bills (theoretically the owner.)

Then plug that name into a grant dead search:
http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca.us/services/grantorgrantee/search.aspx

I did not see any NODs. But if the loan is under a different name – say under the wife’s name… it may not show.

[UCGal]

[quote=CricketOnTheHearth]
Where would I look up to see if a Notice of Default has been filed?[/quote]
I did a quick check to see if the owner had gotten an NOD via the following public databases

https://www.sdctreastax.com/ebpp3/%285x2gtq45rtl4ecm3cthnrx55%29/Start.Aspx

Put in the address and zip -that gives you the name of the person receiving the prop tax bills (theoretically the owner.)

Then plug that name into a grant dead search:
http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca.us/services/grantorgrantee/search.aspx

I did not see any NODs. But if the loan is under a different name – say under the wife’s name… it may not show.

[UCGal]

[quote=CricketOnTheHearth]
Where would I look up to see if a Notice of Default has been filed?[/quote]
I did a quick check to see if the owner had gotten an NOD via the following public databases

https://www.sdctreastax.com/ebpp3/%285x2gtq45rtl4ecm3cthnrx55%29/Start.Aspx

Put in the address and zip -that gives you the name of the person receiving the prop tax bills (theoretically the owner.)

Then plug that name into a grant dead search:
http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca.us/services/grantorgrantee/search.aspx

I did not see any NODs. But if the loan is under a different name – say under the wife’s name… it may not show.

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]

I guess my followup question would be

1)If said person just defaults, can the creditor go through the motions of forgiving this loan while at the same time opting out of wrecking the person’s credit at the same time?

2)And the rules around loan forgiveness in lieu of the current climate, I’m wondering if they are drastically different now versus before in which loan forgiveness was a taxable event.

Maybe I’m not being clear enough, but I was wondering if someone would shed some light where I’m going with this….

And the basis for this was….

http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=179414,00.html

Specifically:
“This provision applies to debt forgiven in calendar years 2007 through 2012. Up to $2 million of forgiven debt is eligible for this exclusion ($1 million if married filing separately). The exclusion does not apply if the discharge is due to services performed for the lender or any other reason not directly related to a decline in the home’s value or the taxpayer’s financial condition.
“[/quote]

As I read the link – debt forgiveness could only be non-taxable under the debt relief act IF it’s part of a restructuring or is a foreclosure.

So – if the borrower stops paying, the lendor (friend/family member) would need to draw up new terms (restructure) OR foreclose on them and take ownership of the house. Nothing saying they can’t let the defaulter still live there if they foreclose.

Also, nothing saying the terms of the restructured loan can’t be pretty nice ones…

The article also mentions “commercial” lenders… so I’m not sure of a ‘Bank of Dad’ type loan would fall under the provisions of the Debt Relief Act of 2007.

[UCGal]

[quote=flu]

I guess my followup question would be

1)If said person just defaults, can the creditor go through the motions of forgiving this loan while at the same time opting out of wrecking the person’s credit at the same time?

2)And the rules around loan forgiveness in lieu of the current climate, I’m wondering if they are drastically different now versus before in which loan forgiveness was a taxable event.

Maybe I’m not being clear enough, but I was wondering if someone would shed some light where I’m going with this….

And the basis for this was….

http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=179414,00.html

Specifically:
“This provision applies to debt forgiven in calendar years 2007 through 2012. Up to $2 million of forgiven debt is eligible for this exclusion ($1 million if married filing separately). The exclusion does not apply if the discharge is due to services performed for the lender or any other reason not directly related to a decline in the home’s value or the taxpayer’s financial condition.
“[/quote]

As I read the link – debt forgiveness could only be non-taxable under the debt relief act IF it’s part of a restructuring or is a foreclosure.

So – if the borrower stops paying, the lendor (friend/family member) would need to draw up new terms (restructure) OR foreclose on them and take ownership of the house. Nothing saying they can’t let the defaulter still live there if they foreclose.

Also, nothing saying the terms of the restructured loan can’t be pretty nice ones…

The article also mentions “commercial” lenders… so I’m not sure of a ‘Bank of Dad’ type loan would fall under the provisions of the Debt Relief Act of 2007.

[Author]

Posts