A very informative article and interesting to read.

On the flip side, I sold my old house on a contract, with the buyer barely making payments on time and he almost didn't make the balloon payment when he was supposed to. Add in him declaring bankruptcy and it was a nightmare for me. This was 15 years ago, and he got a pretty good deal at 7% which was the going rate for mortgages at the time. I'm glad I had a real estate agent draw up the papers for this. A contract for deed was the only way to sell my house at the time and I doubt I'd do it again.

I feel sorry for the people in West St. Paul who now have a rental ban imposed on them for no reason by the local government and city council there. That's right, you can't rent you "own" house in West St. Paul. Thus I'm sure some honest hard working property owners have had to turn to such private contracts because they have had their constitutionally protected property rights stolen from them, only now to have this option stolen from them by the government as well. It is a very weird troubling time indeed. January 23rd the courts rule on these rental bans, first of their kind in the nation here in Minnesota in a case based on terrible Winona's rental bans. Hopefully the courts end these draconian awful and sometimes life destroying rental bans so that private contracts and contract for deeds aren't needed and people can get back to their lives and being free citizens once again.

When I was taking a first-time homebuyer class, the instructor said that contract-for-deed was just about a guaranteed way to lose your money with nothing to show for it, and should be avoided at all costs. If you're trying to buy a house, PLEASE educate yourself. If you can't buy a house without enormous financial risk, then *don't*! There's nothing wrong with renting.

Let's pass more laws and have more government and bureaucratic oversight. Seems to be working everywhere else.

With no government interference in contract-for-deed sales, it looks like the free-market is at work here. What could possibly be the problem?

This whole article is nothing more than people entering into agreements without knowing what they are agreeing to, then claiming to be victims when things fall apart. They have apparently never hear of that old say "let the buyer beware" but expect the government to bail them out for their oversight.

I know a couple of people who have bought and sold houses on contract for deed, and it has worked out well.

That's not what this article is about, though. These houses couldn't be sold outright, because they don't meet code, couldn't pass an inspection, and no bank would lend the amount of money these sellers are insisting on for such distressed property.

The houses can't be rented either, because they don't meet code, can't pass an inspection, and some of the sellers have such a bad track record they've been banned from the business for repeated, long-term abuse of the market.

This situation is a clear loophole for a ripoff artist. The sellers can sell their house as many times over as they want, in effect renting it, but without the protections the renter or a buyer gets in the process. The sellers can charge and keep down payments, they don't have to do promised repairs; the opportunity is there for a total scam by those who have already shown a likelihood to rip people off. The buyers aren't creditworthy or they wouldn't go for these deals. This is the loan-sharking of the real-estate industry.

You have a right to go into business in America. You have no right to be automatically successful. You have no right to stay in business if you can't make a living following the rules. Ask Tom Petters or Denny Hecker. To say somehow these sellers' property rights are being violated is nonsense. They're running a business, but since they can't do it out in the open, they're doing it in the shadows. They openly take advantage of a loophole. They sell their product for more than the market will bear. They admit they don't follow ethical disclosures. They say, "Let the Buyer Beware," while taking advantage of unequal information. This is fraud and should be prosecuted.

I wonder how these sellers would react if a buyer had the savvy to bring in a buyer's inspector before signing off on the deal. I bet they would get very hostile very quickly. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and these people seem pretty nocturnal to me.

This is just another example of laws that shaft the common person-in this case, the woman. Most people, because of many of our laws and by the interpretations of law by our courts, are increasingly being robbed by the higher ups in this country. And, sadly, most people don't realize this and think everything is fine in America.

That one of the reason why people get a real estate lawyer before doing anything on real estate. I learn that the hard way years ago. Never do anything without a specialist in any area. You plan maybe $1K out but could save you many times over the headaches and monies.