This is the copy from an email I received from TCI on 8/20/04.
"While not mentioned by name, some of my activities have been commented
upon in "NC AG Troubles" and another thread posted below that. Due to
ethical considerations on commenting about pending litigation and
investigations, I am unable to fully respond and address both the
misconceptions and valid concerns expressed in some of the communications
posted.
I would welcome a call from Mr. Locke to discuss the legal principles
involved, what is clearly recognized as legitimate activity on one's own
account, and how many practitioners of one or another of the discussed
methods take themselves into trouble.
Both the Real Estate Commission and the Attorney General's Office have no
problem with legitimate business persons engaged in the purchase, rental or
sale of their own real estate.
B. M. Brogden, Jr. Chief Deputy Legal Counsel NC Real Estate Commission"
I emailed Mr. Brogden and requested his phone number so that we could
discuss Subject To investing in North Carolina. He graciously responded with
his phone number.
I called Mr. Brogden in the afternoon of August 24, 2004.
Here is a synopsis of our conversation and was reviewed by Mr. Brogden:
North Carolina has no problem with Subject To investing as long as the
following guidelines are adhered to:
The problem with the use of a "Land Trust" as a means of concealing a
violation of the "due-on-sale" (DOS) clause is that even where the
designated trustee is a real person or entity, the identity of the actual
beneficiary is concealed or obscured.
This can constitute a deceptive, misleading or unfair trade practice in
violation of Chapter 75, N.C.G.S, and, in the opinion of the Commission
legal staff, is a circumstance tending to show the person actually
controlling the trust is attempting to act as a real estate broker without a
license.
Much the same is true for agreements, such as installment land sale
contracts or lease/option or lease/purchase arrangements that are not
properly recorded in a timely manner in the chain of title. No reasonable
person or prudent investor would fail to immediately and properly record a
document transferring an interest in title due to the risk of loss
associated with the failure to timely and properly record.
A person or firm truly dealing on their own account would typically
obtain a deed, option or contract, properly notarized and recorded, in order
to protect their investment. Failure to do so is very convincing evidence
that there is no real investment and that such person or firm is no more
than an agent without a license.
The Subject To transaction is a matter of public record. The deed between
the seller and buyer must be recorded in a person's name or corporate
entity.
As most of you are aware, I have not been a proponent of Land Trusts,
however I have not advised anyone not to use them if they felt they needed
to do so. Subject To investors who are under scrutiny from the Attorney
Generals office, as far as I gleaned are those who used Land Trusts or did
not adhere to the following excerpts from:
Deceptive Acts or Practices
Article from Attorney General's Office
Consumer Protection Section
North Carolina law provides that unfair methods of competition and unfair
or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are
unlawful and are subject to a civil injunction by the Attorney General. So
that you will have a better understanding of how this law applies the
following is a brief, and by no means conclusive, checklist you should keep
in mind.
Intent to deceive, or the seller's good faith or honest belief is not
relevant or material to a determination of illegality.
Opinions which are misleading or deceptive are unlawful.
Any false inducement is a violation if it is likely to mislead a
substantial segment of the purchasing public, or that portion of the public
to whom the representations is directed.
Failure to disclose a material fact is unlawful.
Advertisements or representations which have a tendency or capacity to
mislead are unlawful.
Misrepresenting the nature of or the extent of a guarantee or warranty is
unlawful.
Any person who engages in a transaction which in whole or in part is in
violation of an already declared statute may have in fact engaged in an
unfair or deceptive act or practice.
Finally, in judging the likelihood that an act or practice is likely to
deceive, the measure is whether it is likely to deceive the unlearned and
gullible. In determining this, courts generally are concerned with the
impression a statement or representation is likely to create upon
prospective purchaser, which arises not only from the sum total of what is
said but also of all that is reasonably implied.
If you as an investor make a full disclosure to your seller and buyer in
your paperwork and I am not referring to CYA letters, but paperwork that
adheres to the state statutes, this will go along way in resolving you of
any wrong doing should a complaint be filed against you.
We also covered "equity skimming" whereas an investor collects the
payments from the buyer and does not make the payments on the existing loan.
This is an excellent reason to use a licensed and bonded Loan Servicing
Company to collect the payments from your buyer and the LSC makes the
payments to the lender.
Sometimes it is too convenient when someone gets into financial problems
to "borrow" from the buyers payment, thinking they can make up the payment
at a later time. This is a federal offense, however a great concern of the
Attorney General's office.
Of course, last but not least, the DOS (acceleration clause). As most
everyone is aware this is an option the lender has and is not in the realm
of criminal activity, but would leave open certain civil court liabilities.
However, I have found no case law that would suggest the lender calling the
loan due pressing any other issue.
This I consider part of the risk versus reward in doing Subject To deals.
My personal belief is if the loan is kept current, the lender is not out
looking to call loans due. They have enough concerns with the high rate of
foreclosures in the United States today.
North Carolina has no problem with anyone purchasing or selling property
in their state and feels strongly that the Constitution allows its citizens
to do so. This was emphasized by Mr. Brogden.
I feel this is an important first step in understanding the concerns from
both sides concerning the creative investing industry. I would personally
like to thank Mr. Brogden for taking the time from his busy schedule to talk
with this investor and stating the views of his office.
I also said he should be glad he doesn't handle the complaints regarding
used car dealers.
John "Cash" Locke
Hi, my name is John 'Cash' Locke and for over 8 years I have been quietly
buying and selling houses for fun and big profits. Now you can use the Same
Magical Words I Used to Buy Over 500 Houses And Start Building Your Real
Estate Empire Faster Than You Ever Dreamed Possible! WebSite:
http://www.cashnowusa.com