Are there liabilties in buying a property that offers a Tenancy In Common?
July 28, 2008 on 11:35 pm | In Fascinating Information, For Your Purchasing Pleasure, Legal, Market Trends, Uncategorized | 11 CommentsWe were shopping for a new Santa Monica condo for the sellers of 428 Hill St. 13, (www.428hillst.jodisummers.com)
when we came across a property on Franklin Ave. that seemed a particularly good value compared to some of the other properties we had been seeing. The reason it was such a good value was because the property was a “condo-like” unit that is being marketed as having tenant in common ownership.
The buyers were curious, is this a good way to hold title, and what are there liabilities a tenancy in common ownership? …online had all the answers….
The Washington Post Noted:
With a condo, each owner has title to his or her unit and jointly owns common space, such as the entryway and grounds, with others. But when owners hold property as tenants in common (TIC), each owner has an undivided interest in the whole property.
For example, in a four-unit building, you will own a portion — perhaps one-fourth — of the entire property, not a specific unit. Unlike with other forms of joint ownership, tenants in common don’t have to own equal shares, so you could just as easily own one-tenth. The portion you own usually relates to the size and quality of the unit you live in. (It’s best to have this value set by a professional appraiser.) TIC owners can sell their interests whenever they want, without the consent of the other owners.
There are drawbacks to a tenancy in common. You’ll be buying property with people you don’t know. Because you all own the entire building, you will have to agree on how to handle things like improvements and repairs in any of the units.
You can limit the impact of some of these drawbacks by drafting an agreement to deal with these issues. You can make the agreement “condo-like” by setting up a maintenance fund to repair common spaces and allocating responsibility to each owner for the repair and improvement of the unit he or she lives in. You may also agree that if any of you want to sell your share, you must first give the other owners the right of first refusal.
In cities where real estate is expensive, TICs give many buyers an affordable opportunity to enter the real estate market. In fact, that may be your only option in this situation, unless you can afford to buy the whole building. To avoid some of the hassles of TIC ownership, you and the other owners may want to consider converting the building to condos later.
**
Wikipedia.com stated:
Tenancy in common
Tenancy in common is the default form of concurrent estate, in which each owner, referred to as a tenant in common, is regarded by the law as owning separate and distinct shares of the same property. By default, all co-owners own equal shares, but their interests may differ in size.
This form of ownership is most common where the co-owners are not married or have contributed different amounts to the acquisition of the property. The assets of a commercial partnership are normally owned on a tenancy in common basis. Also, if the joint owners had attempted to use a form of joint ownership, such as a joint tenancy with right of survivorship or a tenancy by the entirety, and the effort was for some reason invalid, the joint owners would by default be classed as tenants in common. If conclusive evidence is not available of the desire to create a tenancy with rights of survivorship or a tenancy by the entirety, a court will normally determine that a tenancy in common has in fact been created.
Tenants in common have no right of survivorship, meaning that if one joint owner dies, that owner’s interest in the property will be part of his or her estate and pass by inheritance to that owner’s devisees or heirs, either by will, or by intestate succession. Also, as each joint owner has an interest in the property, they may, in the absence of any restriction agreed to between the joint owners, sell or otherwise deal with the interest in the property (e.g. mortgage it) during their lifetime, like any other personal interest.
Destruction of a tenancy in common
Where any party to a tenancy in common wishes to terminate (usually termed “destroy”) the joint interest, he or she may obtain a partition of the property. This is a division of the land into distinctly owned lots, if such division is legally permitted under zoning and other local land use restrictions. Where such division is not permitted, a forced sale of the property is the only alternative, followed by a division of the proceeds.
If the parties are unable to agree to a partition, any or all of them may seek the ruling of a court to determine how the land should be divided - physically division between the joint owners (partition in kind), leaving each with ownership of a portion of the property representing their share. Courts may also order a partition by sale in which the property is sold and the proceeds are distributed to the owners. Where local law does not permit physical division, the court must order a partition by sale.
Each co-owner is entitled to partition as a matter of right, meaning that the court will order a partition at the request of any of the co-owners. The only exception to this general rule is where the co-owners have agreed, either expressly or impliedly, to waive the right of partition. The right may be waived either permanently, for a specific period of time, or under certain conditions.
**
About.com offered:
Tenants in Common Ownership
Tenants in Common is a way to hold title, to own property, by two or more individuals. Sometimes it is referred to as Tenancy in Common. There is no limit to the number of individuals who can hold title to one piece of real estate. A property held by tenants in common can be owned by two owners or 100+ owners.
Tenants in common can be between two or more persons who are related or who are unrelated. Husbands and wives can hold title as tenants in common. John Smith, Mary Johnson and Tallulah Bankhead can hold title together as tenants in common.
Ownership can be held in equal shares or unequal shares. For example, John could hold 50% ownership, Mary 25% and Tallulah 25%.
Co-tenants have the right to possess the property by one tenant or by all the tenants. Tallulah can live in the property by herself or share the property with John and Mary. Neither tenant can exclude the other.
Upon death, the interest of the deceased co-tenant will pass to the co-tenant’s heirs. If Tallulah died, John would still hold 50%, Mary would own 25%, but Tallulah’s 25% would pass to whomever she designated in her will.
How Are Tenants in Common and Joint Tenants Similar?
They aren’t, really. Tenants in common hold one unity or requirement that is similar to joint tenancy. That unity is the right of possession.
How Can Joint Tenants Become Tenants in Common?
Joint tenancy requires four unities. Unlike tenants in common, joint tenancy involves right of survivorship, meaning the interest held by each tenant will pass to the other upon death. The four unities necessary to create joint tenancy are:
Time. Each owner must receive title at the same time.
Title. Each owner must receive title on the same deed or document evidencing title.
Interest. Each owner receives the same proportionate and equal share of ownership.
Possession. Each owner has the identical right of possession.
If one of the joint tenants sells or conveys the interest created in a joint tenancy to another person, the joint tenancy is broken, and a tenancy in common is created. Joint tenants cannot stop another tenant from breaking the joint tenancy.
Dissolving Tenants in Common
To dissolve the tenancy in common, one or more co-tenants can always buy out the others.
The property can be sold and the proceeds distributed equitably among the owners.
A partition action can filed. This involves going to court and asking to sell the property under court order and distribute the proceeds among the owners. When a co-tenant dies, you may see a partition action filed when an heir may want to sell and the other co-tenants do not.
Other Uses for Tenants in Common
Increasingly, many properties are being sold under a tenants in common arrangement instead of a limited or general partnership. A builder, for example, may sell portions of a new project to a number of investors, who will all share an undivided interest in the property. If you are considering a venture of this nature, it is wise to seek the advice of legal counsel to thoroughly understand your rights and liabilities.
It is wise to seek the advice of a real estate lawyer any time you buy property. The advice contained in this article is not meant to be construed as legal advice and cannot be relied upon as such.
©2007 About.com, Inc., a part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.
——————————————————————————–
Home Buying / Selling Tenants in Common Ownership
Tenants in Common Hold Undivided Interests
By Elizabeth Weintraub, About.com
http://homebuying.about.com/cs/qt.htm
Real Estate Mailbag
What It Means to be ‘Tenants in Common’
By Janet Portman
Saturday, October 13, 2007; Page F12
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/12/AR2007101200037.html
SENSIBLE EXPECTATIONS
July 23, 2008 on 8:48 am | In Fascinating Information, Market Trends, Statistics, Uncategorized | 8 CommentsIn 1950 the average household size was 3.4 persons — today it is 2.59. In 1950, the average new house was less than 1,000 square feet and today it is more than 2,500 square feet.When every child has a master-bedroom suite, does a little boy miss out on learning patience, waiting for his sister to get out of the bathroom?
Instant gratification is also a characteristic of these times.
In 2001, a junior employee of a company run by a friend of mine said he was leaving the firm because he expected to be a millionaire by then. The company was two years old.
Sensible aspirations turned into irrational expectations, a trend that started in the early 1960s when the United States began to prosper…
An excellent perspective.
from:
Restoring the housing market
Perspective: The real estate rule of law
By Bradley Inman, Inman News
read it @ http://www.inman.com/news/2008/07/14/restoring-housing-market
![]()
Los Angeles Housing Market Update – Affordability Remains Stretched, Despite Recent Price Declines
July 21, 2008 on 10:29 pm | In Fascinating Information, For Your Purchasing Pleasure, Loans, Market Trends, Uncategorized, fUNNY...mONEY | 11 CommentsLos Angeles Housing Market Update – Affordability Remains Stretched, Despite Recent Price Declines
(9,382 single-family permits in 2007, 17th largest market in the country)
According to the latest Credit Suisse survey assessment of housing market trends, in the Los Angeles area, bBuyer confidence remains shaky; traffic unchanged from May. Buyer traffic was unchanged in June at relatively weak levels.
“Buyers have no sense of urgency,” according to one agent, as there are buyers out there but they’re unwilling to act since they expect better prices in the coming months.
Others said that the level of potential interest is not terrible; the problem is that these people who would be interested in buying cannot get qualified for a loan. Despite the recent price declines, we believe affordability remains stretched compared with historical levels in Los Angeles and need further price declines before we see a sustained improvement in demand.
Prices fall, but there continues to be a gap between buyer and seller expectations.
Home prices continued to fall in June, however, agents said buyers continue to hold out for better deals, as “sellers’ expectations are still unrealistically high.”
According to agents, most of the transactions took place on REO properties as these are being priced most aggressively. Meanwhile, inventory continued to increase.
Our thoughts: It should remain a buyer’s market through the election.
IRS Increases Mileage Rates through Dec. 31, 2008
July 21, 2008 on 6:46 pm | In Fascinating Information, Federal Government, Market Trends, Of Local Importance, Problem Solving, Uncategorized, WOW | 4 CommentsIRS Increases Mileage Rates through Dec. 31, 2008
The Internal Revenue Service has announced an increase in the optional standard mileage rates for the final six months of 2008. Taxpayers may use the optional standard rates to calculate the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, charitable, medical or moving purposes.
The rate will increase to 58.5 cents a mile for all business miles driven from July 1, 2008, through Dec. 31, 2008. This is an increase of eight (8) cents from the 50.5 cent rate in effect for the first six months of 2008, as set forth in Rev. Proc. 2007-70.
In recognition of recent gasoline price increases, the IRS made this special adjustment for the final months of 2008. The IRS normally updates the mileage rates once a year in the fall for the next calendar year.
“Rising gas prices are having a major impact on individual Americans. Given the increase in prices, the IRS is adjusting the standard mileage rates to better reflect the real cost of operating an automobile,” said IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman. “We want the reimbursement rate to be fair to taxpayers.”
While gasoline is a significant factor in the mileage figure, other items enter into the calculation of mileage rates, such as depreciation and insurance and other fixed and variable costs.
The optional business standard mileage rate is used to compute the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business use in lieu of tracking actual costs. This rate is also used as a benchmark by the federal government and many businesses to reimburse their employees for mileage.
The new six-month rate for computing deductible medical or moving expenses will also increase by eight (8) cents to 27 cents a mile, up from 19 cents for the first six months of 2008. The rate for providing services for charitable organizations is set by statute, not the IRS, and remains at 14 cents a mile.
The new rates are contained in Announcement 2008-63 on the optional standard mileage rates.
Taxpayers always have the option of calculating the actual costs of using their vehicle rather than using the standard mileage rates.
Mileage Rate Changes
Rates 7/1 through 12/31/08
Purpose: Business
58.5
Purpose: Medical/Moving
27
Purpose: Charitable
14
Source: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=184163,00.html
IR-2008-82, June 23, 2008
SANTA MONICA’S MAJESTIC/MAYFAIR THEATRE MULTIUNIT PROJECT IS GREENLIGHTED
July 15, 2008 on 7:33 pm | In Fascinating Information, Historic Properties, Landmarks, Multiunits, Of Local Importance, Problem, Problem Solving, Santa Monica Landmarks, Uncategorized | 24 CommentsSANTA MONICA’S MAJESTIC/MAYFAIR THEATRE MULTIUNIT PROJECT IS GREENLIGHTED
http://www.santamonicalandmarks.com/landmk29.html
Since the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, Santa Monica’s landmark Mayfair Theatre has piqued the interested of many a real estate developer. All along, the building’s owner, Karl Schober and Santa Monica’s Architectural Review Board have been negotiating the future.
“The place was trashed by the earthquake,” said Karl Schober, who owns the building. “The guts of the Theatre collapsed.”
After years of negotiation the ARB and Schober have finally agreed on a design - what remains of the old structure will become the façade of a new 34-unit apartment building with retail on the ground floor, adjacent to the hugely popular Third Street Promenade.
Of the apartments, 60 percent will be one-bedroom units and 40 percent will have two bedrooms. Of the two-bedroom apartments, three will be set aside for very low-income tenants, said architect David Forbes Hibbert.
Legend had it that Santa Monica’s Majestic Theatre, originally built in 1911, was the oldest legitimate Theatre operating in Los Angeles. Designed by Henry Hollwedel the Churrigeuresco-style building at 212-216 Santa Monica Blvd. The Roccoco structure was dessimated in the Northridge earthquake, and has remained under scaffolding for the past 14 years.
When it was known as the Majestic, the Theatre was one of Los Angeles County’s premier opera houses. When the Majestic became the Mayfair Theatre, it was a single-screen Theatre that seated 602.
Details from:
http://www.santamonicalandmarks.com/landmk29.html
http://www.smdp.com/article/articles/3422/1/New-day-for-the-Mayfair/Page1.html
http://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/news/News-2008/March-2008/03_19_08_Rebirth_of_a_Landmark.htm
WHICH PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE CAN FIX HOUSING?
July 8, 2008 on 12:14 pm | In Fascinating Information, Federal Government, Uncategorized | 18 CommentsWhich candidate would do a better job of handling housing prices?
According to a recent AP-Yahoo News poll, 25 percent of those surveyed said Barack Obama and 17 percent thought John McCain. But nearly 30 percent said neither.
Both Obama and McCain envision the Federal Housing Administration providing new, cheaper mortgages to distressed home owners.

Obama wants to create a $10 billion fund to counsel distressed home owners before they slide into foreclosure; help people sell homes they bought but could not afford; and team with state governments, community groups, and lenders to ensure loans can be modified in a timely manner to avoid foreclosure or bankruptcy.

McCain sees a more limited government role. “In some cases, lenders and borrowers alike were caught up in the speculative frenzy that has harmed the housing market,” the Arizona senator said. “It is not the responsibility of the American public to spare them from the consequences of their own bad judgment.”
Although most voters think the next president will have a “great deal” or “some” influence over housing prices, there is unlikely to be a quick fix.
“The odds of that are slim to none,” says Cal Jillson, political science professor at Southern Methodist University. If the next president can make people more optimistic about the future, “the slow rebuilding of confidence will help to increase home values,” he contends.
Source: The Associated Press, Jeannine Aversa
July 8th Deadline to Protest the 60% Rate Increase for Water/Wastewater
July 5, 2008 on 4:30 pm | In Market Trends, Of Local Importance, Problem, The City of Santa Monica says, Uncategorized, Water | 11 CommentsThe original article appeared in the Santa Monica Mirror:
July 8th Deadline to Protest the 60% Rate Increase for Water/Wastewater
Dave Quick, Mirror Contributing Writer
Are our city leaders using the current “drought crisis” to slip through huge water/wastewater increases, far outstripping any actual increased water costs?
With all the buzz about drought I assumed water rate increases were on tap, and sure enough, the City sent all residents a May 20 letter detailing hefty increases of approximately 60 percent over the next four to five years. Using their example, a sample Single Family customer will increase from $119.61 to $193.69. A sample 8 unit building will go from $367.63 ($45.95 per unit) to $611.20 ($76.40 per unit). And you thought health care expenses were spiraling out of control! You can self-diagnose and self-medicate, but you can’t live without water.
Where’s the beef? The City’s letter cites a laundry list (no pun intended) of proposed expenditures with first mention of “funding for local and imported water.” That makes sense – I assume that when I pay my bi-monthly water/wastewater bill most of the cost is water.
Not so. The City’s May 20 letter refers readers to water.smgov.net for more information. So, I downloaded a 24 page Staff Report and waded through the details. What about the rising cost of water? Page Five of the report shows that “Water Purchases” account for only 25 percent of Water Agency costs. (Note that “Employee Salary & Benefits” and “Administrative Indirect Costs” aggregate to 35 percent of Agency costs; forget that dripping faucet – we are awash in salaries and benefits.)
What about rising MWD rates? Page Seven of the report notes that MWD accounts for 85 percent of our city’s water, and MWD rates will increase by 14 percent effective January 1, 2009 (one assumes due to the drought).
Note that in 2001 city water/wastewater implemented annual cost-of-living adjustments so given the revival of inflation, the CPI adjustment alone may be able to offset planned and future MWD increases as a percent of your total water/wastewater bill.
Remaining expenditures to be covered by the 60 percent increase cited in the City’s May 20 letter include: maintenance, capital improvements, financial commitments to L.A.’s Hyperion Plant and bumping up reserve levels by millions. These proposed improvements could just as well be floated as a city bond so everyone has a chance to vote on them, or covered on an intermittent basis as needed by the city’s operating budget until the economy improves.
There appears to be one silver lining in the May 20 letter – a proposed restructuring of charges that eliminates the flat bimonthly “service charges” for water and wastewater making your bill totally reflective of your actual water usage. That seems like a really good idea that will better reward water conservation – but it is also an idea that could be implemented without huge rate increases on one of the necessities of life.
Opposing the rate increase is a real fire drill.
According to the city, under the cumbersome rules of CA Proposition 218, a majority of property owners (over 12,000!) must protest the increase in writing and the deadline is a whisker away – July 8.
Objectors must send or hand-deliver letters of protest to:
City Clerk
, Room 102
Santa Monica, CA, 90401
Residents may also hand deliver written protests to the public hearing at the same location, Room 213 at 5:45pm on Tuesday, July 8. Any protest at the public hearing must be accompanied by a written protest to count and only property owners’ protests (no renters) count. (Note that all this activity inconveniently culminates right after the 4th of July three-day weekend!)
Times are tough. With rising unemployment, the return of inflation, health care costs continuing to romp, a tanked dollar, the stock market in the doldrums, gas approaching $5 per gallon and other mega economic woes these are indeed troubled times for many Santa Monicans and who is say the long term trend is toward improvement?
To be sure we are in a water crisis (although as the people along the Mississippi can currently attest, one very wet rainy spell can turn things around quickly). I am reminded of another crisis, the Northridge Earthquake, which really whammied our neighborhood. Within hours the employees at the Pavilions store at Lincoln and Montana were rolling pallets of bottled water into the parking lot – handing water out free to residents who had lost water service. Pavilions could have profiteered from the crisis but chose instead to lend a generous helping hand to our community in a troubled time. I can only hope that our city leaders take the same high road during the current drought crisis. Now is no time to use the drought as a canard to lay a couple of golden eggs on two city bureaucracies and raise a vital part of your cost of living way beyond any projected rate of inflation.
Information circulated by the Friends of Sunset Park.
JOY TO THE 4TH
July 1, 2008 on 12:11 am | In Landmarks, Of Local Importance, Santa Monica Landmarks, Uncategorized, WOW | 4 Comments
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. —The Declaration of Independence (4 July 1776)
Powered by Ground Zero
with WordPress