Welcome to the Real Estate Forum


The "ORIGINAL" Real Estate Social Network" SINCE 2005 and your #1 Resource for all things Real Estate


  •  »Over 35,000 Members
  •  » Answer Questions From "REAL" Buyers & Sellers
  •  »Ask Questions & Share Stories With Fellow Real Estate Professionals.
  •  »Read Articles & Blogs written by Real Estate Professionals.

...you have come to the right place!


YES! I want to register an account for free right now!


p.s.: For registered members YOUR FORUM NAME is free of ads

Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    namename328 is offline Renter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1

    Default Why don't banks rent out foreclosed homes instead of paying for preservation?

    When a home is foreclosed and noone pays the bank for it, the bank pays a company to preserve the house untill a buyer is found. They like mow the lawn and drain out the water pipes so the water doesn't expand when it freezes and break the pipes and appliances. Instead of paying for preservation, why don't banks rent the house out untill a buyer is found? Even if the bank rented the house out for $100 a month, they'd be making money instead of losing money paying for preservation.
    If renters break someting, they're liable for it. Yes, It's probably harder to sell a house that people are living in as opposed to a clean one buyers can move right into, but probably most homes are sold while lived in, or the bank can just have it cleaned before they move in.

  2. #2
    markbrian's Avatar
    markbrian is offline Home Owner
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Anderson
    Posts
    595
    Blog Entries
    369

    Default

    Liability, cost, the fact that banks do NOT want to own real estate.
    Mark Brian Silver Star Real Estate
    Upstate South Carolina Real Estate

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •