- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 2,880
Hi,
I find in some cities many properties are being used in a non-legal way (i.e. a legal duplex used as 4-unit converted dwelling).
HOWEVER, many of them have been used as such for a VERY long time (20 years, 30 years or more!).
For example, I recently viewed a property with 4 units that has been used as such in the PAST 30 years BUT is only a legal DUPLEX.
My question is do experienced investors see a non-legal use as a BIG issue and therefore avoid purchasing such properties or is it actually considered MINIMAL RISK where the property has been used as such for a VERY long time, say 30 years?
Obviously, in theory the city can come after you and demand that you close the "non legal units". the question is how realistic/risky do you consider it to be?
THANKS,
Neil
I find in some cities many properties are being used in a non-legal way (i.e. a legal duplex used as 4-unit converted dwelling).
HOWEVER, many of them have been used as such for a VERY long time (20 years, 30 years or more!).
For example, I recently viewed a property with 4 units that has been used as such in the PAST 30 years BUT is only a legal DUPLEX.
My question is do experienced investors see a non-legal use as a BIG issue and therefore avoid purchasing such properties or is it actually considered MINIMAL RISK where the property has been used as such for a VERY long time, say 30 years?
Obviously, in theory the city can come after you and demand that you close the "non legal units". the question is how realistic/risky do you consider it to be?
THANKS,
Neil