Should a probate cleanout crew charge as a service business or run at cost as an acquisition tool

Question

A cleanout crew working probate estates sits at an interesting intersection, because the same job can be priced two very different ways depending on who the customer actually is. As a standalone service, cleanouts are a real business. Estates commonly need decades of contents removed before a house can be listed or sold, out of state families often cannot do it themselves, and a full cleanout, especially with a hoarding situation, can reasonably run 2,500 to 9,000 dollars. Attorneys refer this work, executors approve it as an estate expense, and probate produces a steady stream of it independent of any one investor's activity. As part of an acquisition, an investor buying the house outright often treats the cleanout as a cost of doing the deal rather than a line item, because being the buyer who says take it as is, leave everything behind is one of the strongest offers available to an heir who lives a thousand miles away and does not want to manage a cleanout at all. In that context, charging separately for the cleanout undercuts the thing that made the acquisition attractive in the first place, and running the crew closer to cost becomes part of how that buyer wins the deal. The reason both views can be correct at once is that they describe different customers. In the service model, the estate itself is paying for the work. In the acquisition model, the investor is effectively paying themselves, and the value shows up in a lower purchase price rather than a paid invoice. The same 1,600 square foot job can price out very differently, closer to full retail as a billed service and closer to labor plus dump fees as an internal acquisition cost, depending entirely on which hat is being worn. It is also worth flagging that when estate funds are the ones paying a vendor, approval of that expense can involve the court or the personal representative depending on the state, which belongs with the estate's attorney rather than the crew.

Rena Guide · Accepted Answer

A couple of terms here that are worth pinning down, since the answer depends on them.

A cleanout is exactly what it sounds like, removing the contents of a property so it can be sold or rented. In a probate context it matters more than usual, because heirs are often in another state and physically can't do it, and the estate can't close until the property is dealt with. That's why "as-is, leave everything" is a strong offer to an heir. It removes a task they were dreading.

An acquisition cost is money you spend to get a property that isn't part of the renovation itself. If you take a house with the contents in it, the cost of removing them belongs in your numbers before you decide what you can pay. @angela_burke's own figures show why the framing changes the answer: $4,200 billed out versus roughly $1,900 in labor and dump fees. As a service that's revenue. As an acquisition cost it's $1,900 of buying power you can hand to the seller in the form of not asking them to clean.

On @ryanmck27's point, being paid by an estate while also wanting to buy the property is a conflict, and how it has to be disclosed or whether it's permitted at all depends on your state's rules and on whether you hold a license. That one needs a lawyer in your state before you take a job like it, not after.

The question that decides it for most people is whether you want a business with customers or a channel that feeds acquisitions. Those grow differently and need different people.

ryanmck27 · Answer

Getting licensed right now and the thing I'd worry about is which side of the table you're on when the estate is paying you and you also want to buy the house. That smells like it needs disclosure, and disclosure requirements vary by state and get stricter once you're licensed. I'd ask a lawyer in your state before running both hats on the same property rather than after.

tonyv88 · Answer

Keep them as separate companies with separate customers. Property managers who run maintenance as both a profit center and an owner retention perk find that it makes every conversation muddy, because owners cannot tell whether a recommendation is a repair or a sale. Same problem here. An heir who has paid you $4,200 and then hears you would like to buy the house will replay that invoice in their head.

hannah_west29 · Answer

The $2,300 gap between billed and cost is the whole argument, and it is smaller than it looks. A crew run as a service also carries scheduling, insurance and the dead time between jobs, so the real margin on a $4,200 job is not $2,300. Call it $1,100 to $1,400 after overhead, then compare that against how much extra buying power the line "we'll take it with everything in it" earns at the negotiating table. On probate sourced acquisitions the as-is framing tends to move purchase price by a good deal more than $1,400. Is there something in the overhead split that argument misses?

paulgrant17 · Answer

@hannah_west29 nothing, I think, but you've assumed the cleanout crew only exists for probate. If they're doing tenant turnovers and estate sales the rest of the month, the overhead is already paid and the probate job really is close to $2,300.

Should a probate cleanout crew charge as a service business or run at cost as an acquisition tool

5 replies