Cities in general are statistically far less safe than the suburbs and either way there are only a few pockets scattered around the country that I would consider genuinely unsafe to live in.
Like I commented on her video: Google says 70% of all businesses in the US are sole proprietorships. You can't tell me that none of these business owners qualify for or have any sort of mortgage. Being a sole proprietor is not an automatic disqualification.
Like I commented on her video: Google says 70% of all businesses in the US are sole proprietorships. You can't tell me that none of these business owners qualify for or have any sort of mortgage. Being a sole proprietor is not an automatic disqualification.
Like I commented on her video: Google says 70% of all businesses in the US are sole proprietorships. You can't tell me that none of these business owners qualify for or have any sort of mortgage. Being a sole proprietor is not an automatic disqualification.
For comparison, that's a meaningless stat unless you quantify how many of those actually need to rent a large space in a major metro area similar to Philadelphia. Sole proprietorship is basically everyone who works for themselves, without using separating business and personal assets and liabilities. The bulk of that 70% are probably home-based and consist of a desk, a computer, and maybe some equipment in the garage or business vehicle. Heck, if the neighborhood kid shovels snow for pizza money every year, even that is a sole proprietorship. When I was doing consulting work, I was a sole proprietorship....other than a drawer full of records, I didn't need to buy any business assets at all.
If you are struggling or marginal and a sole proprietor you won't as for a start any sensible bank puts you in a higher risk category. This is an example of where Fran's recent content would make that all the harder.
If you are struggling or marginal and a sole proprietor you won't as for a start any sensible bank puts you in a higher risk category. This is an example of where Fran's recent content would make that all the harder.
Like I commented on her video: Google says 70% of all businesses in the US are sole proprietorships. You can't tell me that none of these business owners qualify for or have any sort of mortgage. Being a sole proprietor is not an automatic disqualification.
For comparison, that's a meaningless stat unless you quantify how many of those actually need to rent a large space in a major metro area similar to Philadelphia. Sole proprietorship is basically everyone who works for themselves, without using separating business and personal assets and liabilities. The bulk of that 70% are probably home-based and consist of a desk, a computer, and maybe some equipment in the garage or business vehicle. Heck, if the neighborhood kid shovels snow for pizza money every year, even that is a sole proprietorship. When I was doing consulting work, I was a sole proprietorship....other than a drawer full of records, I didn't need to buy any business assets at all.
The problem is not being a sole proprietor. Probably the problem is not having a regular consistent and reliable stream of income from that business.
Probably the problem is not having a regular consistent and reliable stream of income from that business.
If you are struggling or marginal and a sole proprietor you won't as for a start any sensible bank puts you in a higher risk category. This is an example of where Fran's recent content would make that all the harder.
But what if you had say a 50% deposit? Wouldn't that be a slam dunk for any sensible bank?
If you are struggling or marginal and a sole proprietor you won't as for a start any sensible bank puts you in a higher risk category. This is an example of where Fran's recent content would make that all the harder.
But what if you had say a 50% deposit? Wouldn't that be a slam dunk for any sensible bank?
I was thinking the exact same thing. You would think putting 50% down would pretty much guarantee the loan as you can use that 50% as collateral against the other half. But maybe the banks still worry about how you are going to make payments on the other half.
If you are struggling or marginal and a sole proprietor you won't as for a start any sensible bank puts you in a higher risk category. This is an example of where Fran's recent content would make that all the harder.
But what if you had say a 50% deposit? Wouldn't that be a slam dunk for any sensible bank?
The problem is not being a sole proprietor. Probably the problem is not having a regular consistent and reliable stream of income from that business.
If you are struggling or marginal and a sole proprietor you won't as for a start any sensible bank puts you in a higher risk category. This is an example of where Fran's recent content would make that all the harder.
But what if you had say a 50% deposit? Wouldn't that be a slam dunk for any sensible bank?
I was thinking the exact same thing. You would think putting 50% down would pretty much guarantee the loan as you can use that 50% as collateral against the other half. But maybe the banks still worry about how you are going to make payments on the other half.
I was thinking the exact same thing. You would think putting 50% down would pretty much guarantee the loan as you can use that 50% as collateral against the other half. But maybe the banks still worry about how you are going to make payments on the other half.
QuoteI was thinking the exact same thing. You would think putting 50% down would pretty much guarantee the loan as you can use that 50% as collateral against the other half. But maybe the banks still worry about how you are going to make payments on the other half.But...
This person can take out a second mortgage, taking loans/credit on that original 50% down, then fuck off into overspending with no plan to repay any of it.
I have been a sole trader and or an unemployable bum for about 20 years so I have had plenty of exposure to banks and how they treat sole traders.
QuoteI was thinking the exact same thing. You would think putting 50% down would pretty much guarantee the loan as you can use that 50% as collateral against the other half. But maybe the banks still worry about how you are going to make payments on the other half.But...
This person can take out a second mortgage with another lender, taking loans/credit on that original 50% down, then fuck off into overspending with no way to repay any of it. The second lender may be able to put a lien against the property.
The problem is not being a sole proprietor. Probably the problem is not having a regular consistent and reliable stream of income from that business.
And not having found the right broker who can help. There are almost 5000 banks in the US, and this is a list of banks in Pennsylvania:
https://www.usbanklocations.com/pennsylvania-bank-list.htm
Like I commented on her video: Google says 70% of all businesses in the US are sole proprietorships. You can't tell me that none of these business owners qualify for or have any sort of mortgage. Being a sole proprietor is not an automatic disqualification.
For comparison, that's a meaningless stat unless you quantify how many of those actually need to rent a large space in a major metro area similar to Philadelphia. Sole proprietorship is basically everyone who works for themselves, without using separating business and personal assets and liabilities. The bulk of that 70% are probably home-based and consist of a desk, a computer, and maybe some equipment in the garage or business vehicle. Heck, if the neighborhood kid shovels snow for pizza money every year, even that is a sole proprietorship. When I was doing consulting work, I was a sole proprietorship....other than a drawer full of records, I didn't need to buy any business assets at all.
That's not Carl's point. Fran has made the assertion that she flat out does not qualify for a home loan because she is a sole proprietor.
I agree with Carl, I can't see how that fact alone can be possibly true. There must be a way to get a loan given enough deposit and income.
Fran is not looking for a commercial business space, or a business loan, she's looking for essentially a home loan (or large apartment space) for a space she can live in. The fact that she operates a sole proprietorship from the space is inconsequential.
Even if you have plenty of income.
The banks do not like self employed people who get income in tiny amounts but from many sources. Even if they have plenty of total income to service the loan.
They prefer a self employed person who gets paid all their money from doing one or two tasks.
This makes no sense to me, but that's the way they think.
Maybe they are required to investigate and document all the sources of income and can't be bothered looking over 100 separate sources.
Or maybe they don't like 100 little sources coming and going from week to week.
Yeah, it's probably less about the person proving they had plenty of income in the past, and more about the bank knowing their sources of income are static and never changing.
i dunno.
When the bank loans you the money, they own the property. 50% down is a no brainer. Default on payment, they get the property, they keep your 50% down. And they have to pay only for evicting you and cleaning up the property.