Without giving too much information Im going to inherit a childhood home in the future, zillow says its 400k really I think its 300k because the basement is unfinished and needs other work. its 3 bedroom 2.5 bath, it still has a mortgage favorable at 100k 3.5% and I was torn on renting it because the market for it is only 2k a month and id have to have a property manager, I dont see it worth the headache. My plan is to atleast hold it until eventually the mortgage is paid.
Thinking about leaving an inherited house vacant?
byu/SubjectBubbly9072 inpersonalfinance
Posted by SubjectBubbly9072
15 Comments
Want to destroy a house? Leave it empty for a few months.
Either have the house occupied, let the rent pay the mortgage and manager, or sell the house off.
This is an extremely bad idea for a multitude of reasons.
1) Many municipalities have ordinances around vacant/abandoned buildings that can lead to hearty fines.
2) Squatters are a thing that could easily take months or even years to legally evict and remove from the property, while causing extensive damage.
3) Unattended buildings have a tendency to develop major issues as no one is there to notice and fix them when they are still minor.
Why would you want to leave it vacant instead of selling it now?
I would not recommend leaving a house empty. Things can happen, leaks, trees fall, burglars, etc, so someone should be around to look after the place. You can also get squatters/druggies in empty places that can totally wreck it. A reputable real estate company can manage it for 10% of the rent and do yearly inspections, interview tenants, do good credit checks, collect rents, keep up the maintenance, so you basically don’t have to do anything.
It’s possible the building’s insurance will be void or canceled if vacant for 30 days.
Sell it leaving it vacant is a bunch of other problems you don’t want
Let us know when you’re on the local news because you are spending thousands dealing with getting squatters out.
I don’t see how getting a property manager is such a huge headache that I’d set 2k a month on fire just to avoid it
Just sell it. Paying $100K to sell it free and clear nets you the same as just selling it now.
So you would give up $24k a year in rent, or the $200k in profit you would get from selling it now – because why? And why is it better to sell it once the mortgage is paid off?
It will cost money to leave it empty. Rent it out at a reasonable rate and you’ll at least cover your bills and be able to claim expenses. The occupant will be mowing and gardening. Much less of a headache.
Origin story of the next adversarial possession
A vacant house is worse than a occupied home. I deal with rentals and motels.
Coming from a property investor, my strong recommendation is that you don’t want leave your property vacant for extended periods.
If squatters find their way in, it’s going to be a nightmare for you. The eviction process can be hellish depending on the state.
From what you are describing I would recommend just selling off the property.
You want to sell it, just sell it. The fact that there’s a mortgage on it really doesn’t matter. 90+% of houses being bought and sold still have a mortgage on them. (I made the number up, but I’ll be very surprised if it isn’t close)
When you sell it, the mortgage gets paid out first leaving you with the balance.
If you’re planning to try to wait out the market, be prepared for a long wait.