What fees should I expect when buying and/or selling a house?
Typical costs to buy might include: One piece of advice if you've never bought, fixing problems with a house always seems to cost more than the discount in price due to the problems. Say the house needs a 15K new kitchen it seems like it will be just 7K cheaper than a house with a good kitchen, that kind of thing. Careful with the fixer uppers.  Costs to sell include: Doing your own cleaning, repairs, moving, etc. can save a lot.  You can also choose to work without an agent but I don't know how wise it is, especially for a first time buyer. In my town there are some agents that are buyers only, never seller's agents, which helps keep them unconflicted.  Agent commissions may be lower in some areas or negotiable anywhere. Real estate transfer taxes may be owed by buyer or seller depending on location: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_estate_transfer_tax
Thanks, at the moment I don't plan to do alot of trading just need to sell a few shares at the moment and might sell some more more at another point, but other than that I don't plan on touching the stock and just plan on letting it re-invest itself. Since I don't plan on doing alot of selling I don't know how much I need to worry about fee's as long as they aren't too steep. The answers you'll receive are going to be largely subjective. I can't tell you which option would be best for you, but there are plenty of things to consider.  Do you know how to sell a home? If your market is hot enough, FSBO may make sense as you won't need the marketing power and expertise of an agent. In very hot markets, you'll end up with potential bidding wars if you price your house correctly. But that's where things start getting tricky. Do you know what your house is realistically worth in your market, or are you making assumptions based on Zillow (or similar)? Do you know what paper work is needed to complete a FSBO sale? Are you any good at negotiating? There are certainly plenty of resources out there for FSBO sellers to learn how to do it, but it can be overwhelming.  FSBO isn't really fee free. If the buyer has an agent, they'll want a percentage (3%) for setting up their part of the sale. Without experience in negotiation, you may be leaving a decent amount of money on the table. Also, in negotiations, an experienced agent may nickel & dime you with contingencies all the way up until closing. Then there's anything you might need to pay for marketing materials and time off from work (if needed) to have the house shown. However, if you're in a market where people are literally walking up to your door to ask if you'd consider selling and for how much (which just happened to a friend of mine), then it might actually be a pretty painless process.  Traditional agents charge a fee, but that fee goes towards marketing and their experience in sales and negotiations. They do the work of getting your property in front of the right people and setting up house showings. The work is done on your behalf, and you won't need to alter your personal work schedule anywhere near as much as you would with FSBO. They only get paid if the house sells. Limited service agents are a bit of an unknown to me, but it's more than likely the buyer will have an agent, so assume the higher fee. It also appears that the LSA gets paid at least $500 no matter what happens, so they're certainly not putting in any extra effort to help get your house sold. It appears that you're simply paying to get on their list of homes and get some marketing from them, but that's about it. I'd imagine you could get the same exposure as a well educated FSBO seller. Are there any other losses that can be expected beyond the above? The lender may have to invest some money into the house in order to get it in shape to sell. Also, while the lender possesses the house they are liable to the property taxes and possibly utilities. are there any statutes or pressures to motivate the financial institution to get fair price when the property is sold? The lender is motivated to at least break even when selling the property in order to limit losses on their investment. This means they are very motivated to seek a higher price, but they're also motivated to sell the property quickly in order to limit their losses due to property taxes. Usually the lender takes a loss of the investment if foreclosure occurs; only 10 percent to 20 percent  of auctioned foreclosed houses did yield a surplus. When the lender sells the foreclosed property using a realtor, they're motivated to sell it as quickly as possible so long as they break even. In this case there is little motivation to sell the property for a surplus. If the property is being sold via auction, then time is not a factor and the lender will just sell to the highest bidder. An order is not a transaction.  It is a request to make a transaction.  If the transaction never occurs (e.g. because you cancel the order), then no fees should be charged. will I get the stamp duty back (the 0.5% tax I paid on the shares purchase) when I sell the shares? I'm not a UK tax expert, but accorging to this page is seems like you only pay stamp tax when you buy shares, and don't get it back when you sell (but may be responsible for capital gains taxes).  That makes sense, because there's always a buyer and a seller, so if you got the tax back when you sold, the tax would effectively be transferred from the buyer to the seller, and the government would never collect anything. For example: do I need a realtor, or can I do their job myself? In general in the United States the real estate agent fee is paid by the seller of the property. Their agent will be more than happy keep the entire fee if they don't have to split it with your agent.  If you don't have an agent you will be missing somebody who can help you find the property that meets your needs. They can also help explain what the different parts of the contract mean and give you advice regarding making an offer. Do I need to pay for an inspection, or am I likely to save enough   money from skipping it to cover potential problems that they would   have caught? Inspections are optional. Though the amount you are risking is the entire value of the purchase. If the property has a problem in the foundation, or the septic system, or the plumbing or electrical the cost to fix the issue could render the purchase not worth doing. If you discover the problem a year later and you have to repair the house and have to find temporary housing for a few months, you will regret skipping the inspection. What are some of the ways I can cut expenses on closing costs? Is   there any low-hanging fruit? You need to do your homework. When you are ready to purchase a property take good look at the good faith estimate and look at each item.  Ask them what the expense covers. Push back against those that seem optional or excessive. Keep in mind that moving the closing date from the end of a month to the start of the next month only changes the timing those charges, it doesn't really save you money. Rolling the costs into the loan sound easy but you have to think about. It means that you will be paying interest on those charges for the life of the loan. It is good that you are starting to think about all the costs. If you buy a townhouse, you often are in a condominium arrangement in the US (when you're really in a rowhouse in particular).  So that's a downside right away: you have to have a HOA, or at least some sort of common agreement, though it might not have formal meetings.  Everyone who owns an interest in the entire group of townhouses gets some say in landscaping and such. Beyond that though, townhouses (and similarly, condominiums) are often easier to own (as they don't have as much maintenance that you have to do), but more expensive because you pay someone to do it (the landscaping, the external repairs, etc.).  You likely don't have as much control over what the external looks like (because you have to be in agreement with the other owners), but you also don't have to do the work, unless your agreement is to collectively do the mowing/landscaping, which you should know in advance.   I wouldn't underestimate the value of easier, by the way; it's very valuable to not have to deal with as many repairs and to be able to go a week without thinking about mowing or watering.  In that sense it can be a nice transition into ownership, getting some-but-not-all of the obligations.  But if that's something you really value, doing the landscaping and mowing and whatnot, that's relevant too.  You can always tell your realtor to look for townhouses where the owners do some/all of the landscaping, though that opens up a different can of worms (where you rely on others to do work that they may not do, or do well). They're also somewhat noisier; you may be sharing a wall (but not necessarily, air-gap townhouses do exist) and either way will be closer to your neighbors.  Does noise bother you?  Conversely, are you noisy?  In a college town this is probably something to pay attention to. Price wise, of course stay well within your means; if being close to the city center is important, that may lead you to buy a townhouse in that area.  If being further out isn't a problem, you'll probably have similar choices in terms of price as long as you look in cheaper areas for single family homes. If you don't think you're necessarily going to stay in this area for five years, consider another option: renting. Five years is often quoted as the minimum length of time for buying (over renting), as the costs of the house purchase and the mortgage are significant - and if you're buying a new house every 5 years you're putting several thousand dollars of fees up front each time.  If you don't assume that house prices will increase (as they won't necessarily), then you can consider these costs - say, $5000-$6000 for a $500k house - an extra 1% or so of interest that first year.  If you are there 5 years, then you're paying 0.2% extra (more or less); that's reasonable, but if you're there only 2 years, you're adding 0.5% to your rate, which is pretty significant. You won't necessarily come out ahead here (versus renting). Renting for a year or two gives you enough time to find out if you do like the area, and if you do, you buy then - with more knowledge of the area and a chance to make a purchase at the right time for you. You pay off your loans, or at least a chunk of them, now, save some of the rest, and then rethink in a couple of years.  If you then don't qualify for a doctor's mortgage anymore, you just save up the rest of the 20% before making the purchase. "First off; I don't know of the nature of the interpersonal relationship between you and your roommate, and I don't really care, but I will say that your use of that term was a red flag to me, and it will be so to a bank; buying a home is a big deal that you normally do not undertake with just a ""friend"" or ""roommate"". ""Spouses"", ""business partners"", ""domestic partners"" etc are the types of people that go in together on a home purchase, not ""roommates"". Going ""halvsies"" on a house is not something that's easily contracted; you can't take out two primary mortgages for half the house's value each, because you can't split the house in half, so if one of you defaults that bank takes the house leaving both the other person and their bank in the lurch. Co-signing on one mortgage is possible but then you tie your credit histories together; if one of you can't make their half of the mortgage, both of you can be pursued for the full amount and both of you will see your credit tank. That's not as big a problem for two people joined in some other way (marriage/family ties) but for two ""friends"" there's just way too much risk involved. Second, I don't know what it's like in your market, but when I was buying my first house I learned very quickly that extended haggling is not really tolerated in the housing market. You're not bidding on some trade good the guy bought wholesale for fifty cents and is charging you $10 for; the seller MIGHT be breaking even on this thing. An offer that comes in low is more likely to be rejected outright as frivolous than to be countered. It's a fine line; if you offer a few hundred less than list the seller will think you're nitpicking and stay firm, while if you offer significantly less, the seller may be unable to accept that price because it means he no longer has the cash to close on his new home. REOs and bank-owned properties are often sold at a concrete asking price; the bank will not even respond to anything less, and usually will not even agree to eat closing costs. Even if it's for sale by owner, the owner may be in trouble on their own mortgage, and if they agree to a short sale and the bank gets wind (it's trivial to match a list of distressed mortgaged properties with the MLS listings), the bank can swoop in, foreclose the mortgage, take the property and kill the deal (they're the primary lienholder; you don't ""own"" your house until it's paid for), and then everybody loses. Third, housing prices in this economy, depending on market, are pretty depressed and have been for years; if you're selling right now, you are almost certainly losing thousands of dollars in cash and/or equity. Despite that, sellers, in listing their home, must offer an attractive price for the market, and so they are in the unenviable position of pricing based on what they can afford to lose. That again often means that even a seller who isn't a bank and isn't in mortgage trouble may still be losing thousands on the deal and is firm on the asking price to staunch the bleeding. Your agent can see the signs of a seller backed against a wall, and again in order for your offer to be considered in such a situation it has to be damn close to list. As far as your agent trying to talk you into offering the asking price, there's honestly not much in it for him to tell you to bid higher vs lower. A $10,000 change in price (which can easily make or break a deal) is only worth $300 to him either way. There is, on the other hand, a huge incentive for him to close the deal at any price that's in the ballpark: whether it's $365k or $375k, he's taking home around $11k in commission, so he's going to recommend an offer that will be seriously considered (from the previous points, that's going to be the asking price right now). The agent's exact motivations for advising you to offer list depend on the exact circumstances, typically centering around the time the house has been on the market and the offer history, which he has access to via his fellow agents and the MLS. The house may have just had a price drop that brings it below comparables, meaning the asking price is a great deal and will attract other offers, meaning you need to move fast. The house may have been offered on at a lower price which the seller is considering (not accepted not rejected), meaning an offer at list price will get you the house, again if you move fast. Or, the house may have been on the market for a while without a price drop, meaning the seller can go no lower but is desperate, again meaning an offer at list will get you the house. Here's a tip: virtually all offers include a ""buyer's option"". For a negotiated price (typically very small, like $100), from the moment the offer is accepted until a particular time thereafter (one week, two weeks, etc) you can say no at any time, for any reason. During this time period, you get a home inspection, and have a guy you trust look at the bones of the house, check the basic systems, and look for things that are wrong that will be expensive to fix. Never make an offer without this option written in. If your agent says to forego the option, fire him. If the seller wants you to strike the option clause, refuse, and that should be a HUGE red flag that you should rescind the offer entirely; the seller is likely trying to get rid of a house with serious issues and doesn't want a competent inspector telling you to lace up your running shoes. Another tip: depending on the pricepoint, the seller may be expecting to pay closing costs. Those are traditionally the buyer's responsibility along with the buyer's agent commission, but in the current economy, in the pricepoint for your market that attracts ""first-time homebuyers"", sellers are virtually expected to pay both of those buyer costs, because they're attracting buyers who can just barely scrape the down payment together. $375k in my home region (DFW) is a bit high to expect such a concession for that reason (usually those types of offers come in for homes at around the $100-$150k range here), but in the overall market conditions, you have a good chance of getting the seller to accept that concession if you pay list. But, that is usually an offer made up front, not a weapon kept in reserve, so I would have expected your agent to recommend that combined offer up front; list price and seller pays closing. If you offer at list you don't expect a counter, so you wouldn't keep closing costs as a card to play in that situation." You and your husband are fronting all the money upfront. I'm guessing this will cost you around 67,000 once closing costs and fees are included. So obviously you would be hundred percent owners at the beginning. You'll then pay 31% of the mortgage and have your sister pay the remaining 69%. This puts your total investment at the end at 67k + 74.4k + 31% of interest accrued, and your sisters total investment at 165.6k+69% of interest accrued. If you hold the full length of the mortgage, your sister will have invested much more than you( assuming 30 year fixed rate, and 3.75%, she'd pay 116.6k in interest as opposed to your 49.6k) She will have spent 282.2k and y'all will have spent 191k. However if you sell early, your percentage could be much higher.  These calculations don't take into account the opportunity cost of fronting all the cash. It could be earning you more in the stock market or in a different investment property. Liability also could be an issue in the case of her not being able to pay. The bank can still come after you for the whole amount. Lastly and most importantly, this also doesn't include the fact that she will be living there and y'all will not. What kind of rent would she be paying to live in a similar home? If it is more than 1400, you will basically be subsidizing her living, as well as tying up funds, and increasing your risk exposure. If it is more than 1400, she shouldn't be any percent owner. Both seem to be reasonable. To decide you need to guess if the value of the house will go up or down between now and when you sell. If you think the value will go up - reach a calculation agreement now. If you think the value will go down - wait until the house is actually sold. So ya pays yer money, and ya takes yer chances... I think I understand the two scenarios Unless you are absolutely confident that you understand both scenarios - make sure your lawyer gets involved and explains them to you until you do understand. If that $6k includes points to buy down the rate, it could be a good deal, depending on the total cost of the house and the rates involved. If that's pure administrative and legal fees, that seems pretty high. I've bought a number of houses in my time and I don't think I ever paid over $2000. I refinanced my current house a year or two ago, with the same bank, and total closing costs were $500. That said, I don't know where you live, the cost of the house, etc. Might be that's normal in your area and your circumstances. But I'd shop around before just accepting it. The fees for the services are displayed on the PayPal website at https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_display-fees-outside Is there anything else you were looking for. Somebody will have to file all the required paperwork and fees with the local government, state government and even the federal government. This paperwork is used by these governments to record who owns the property and how it is owned.  Prior to the settlement date they also will need to verify how the property is described and owned so that you are sure that you are being sold the exact property you expect, and that it is delivered to you free and clear of all other debts. If this is done wrong you might discover years later that you paid money for something that you don't really own. In some jurisdictions this has to be done via a law office, in others there is no requirement for a lawyer. Because a mortgage company, bank, or credit union is giving you money for the loan, they may require you to use a settlement attorney. They don't want to discover in 5 years that a simple mistake will cost them hundreds of thousands to fix. The mortgage company is required to give you a more detailed estimate of all the closing costs before you are committed to the loan. The quoted paragraph is not good enough. Even if you can avoid the use of a lawyer these functions still need to be done by somebody, and that will still cost money. Warranties are usually sold at 60-90% margin. They are just about always a bad deal. If you are forced to buy one, negotiate on price, and be wary of realtor or mortgage broker recommendations. "First piece of advice: fire your agent.   A pushy agent is a bad agent.  From what you've told us, he's actually given you poor advice regarding mortgage interest rates.  Rates are already at historic lows.  That and the precarious state of the world economy mean that further rate cuts are more likely in the near term. Second piece of advice: While more information on the real estate market you're in would help,  going in at asking price is rarely a good idea.   Sale prices from ""the last few years"" are not relevant to what you should pay, because the last few years include a financial crisis caused in large part by the bursting of a housing bubble.  They could be even less relevant depending on your location because of a spike in foreclosures in certain areas of the U.S.  There was already a ton of housing inventory before, so an increase due to foreclosures is going to depress prices further.  Now that banks are finally practicing the due diligence they should have been all along, your ability to be pre-approved for large mortgage amount puts you in a strong position.   Use a tool like Zillow or Redfin to see what properties in that area have sold for over the past six months.  You should also be able to see a history of what prices the particular property you're interested in has been offered and/or sold at in the past.  Also check and see how long the particular property you're interested in has been on the market.  If it's been on the market more than 60-90 days, it's priced too high."