The seller didn't want money, she wanted to be in Arizona by the 15th

Beginner framing because I got this one wrong in my head for weeks before I understood it.

I kept treating sub-to as a way to buy cheap. It's a way to buy a payment. The house I closed in July had a $241,000 balance at 2.875% with 28 years left, payment $1,596 with taxes and insurance. Value somewhere around $296,000. So there's $55,000 of equity and I paid $6,000 for it plus $2,100 toward her movers.

That sounds like I took advantage of someone. Here's what she was actually choosing between. List it, wait 40 to 70 days in that price band, pay 5 to 6% in commissions, pay concessions, and be in two places at once while her new job started on the 1st. Her math on that was about $30,000 net in October. My math was $8,100 in eleven days in July. She took the eleven days and told me twice it was the easiest decision she'd made that year.

What nearly broke it: her agent. She'd signed a listing agreement three weeks earlier and there was a protection clause. That cost a conversation, a small payment to the brokerage, and a lawyer looking at the agreement, which is the kind of thing you don't guess at.

Rent is $2,150. Payment is $1,596. That gap exists because someone locked a 2.875% rate in 2021, and I get to use it without qualifying for anything.

What I'd keep: I wrote the due-on-sale disclosure in plain words, one page, and had her read it back to me before signing. The lender can demand the whole balance because the house changed hands. My plan if that happens is refinance or sell, and I told her that plan out loud. She stays on the loan and that's a real thing she carries, so she deserved to hear it in language a person uses.