The real trick is buy raw land and building a house on it.
The problem? Banks never, EVER want to lend money for raw land. They just don't. I had to jump through hoops to get the land I bought - going to a bank specifically designed for it, and even then, they have a lower limit on acreage.
That gets into a whole other can of worms, because then, technically the bank is building a house on your land. As in, they can pause/stop construction by the simple method of cancelling the "drops" and not paying the contractors.
Yes to the first part, maybe to the second. Funding for houses is all about the financial institution looking at the numbers or "can we sell this house for a profit when this schlub defaults on his loan?"
The real trick is buy raw land and building a house on it.
The problem? Banks never, EVER want to lend money for raw land. They just don't. I had to jump through hoops to get the land I bought - going to a bank specifically designed for it, and even then, they have a lower limit on acreage.
Shit is very, very fucked.
Gee, I wonder why bankers don't want White men to own land?
What if you pay cash for land and want a loan to build a house?
That gets into a whole other can of worms, because then, technically the bank is building a house on your land. As in, they can pause/stop construction by the simple method of cancelling the "drops" and not paying the contractors.
So it would be easier to get a loan for land and pay cash for construction?
I think if the "bank" is a credit union in a rural area, the incentives would be aligned.
Yes to the first part, maybe to the second. Funding for houses is all about the financial institution looking at the numbers or "can we sell this house for a profit when this schlub defaults on his loan?"