SDR – I meant something weird BEFORE it went to the courthouse steps, not after. Sorry if I was not clear. I know there was something shady in the purchases and sales beforehand and no surprise it went to the courthouse steps.
What did surprise me is it selling for 690k b/c I thought the loan was greater than 690k. Thanks for clearing that up. Now it makes sense.
edit:
Because of the nature of the transactions BEFORE the courthouse steps sale, I am suspicious of who bought it, as well. Clearly picked it up on the cheap and sold immediately for a very nice profit.
I thought the first was greater than 690. My mistake. I figured there was a second for 20%. That’s usually the norm, right? So, naturally I find it odd that the second is greater than 20%. Wonder why.
Makes me think since the owners planned on defaulting, they took a greater second to facilitate another “investor” to purchase on the first for less.
Sorry for going on. I was pretty upset when I learned about what happened before the courthouse steps. They intentionally did not pay, after they sold it to each other for a profit.
It was all questionable. Buy from builder in December, sell to girlfriend in February for 100k more, girlfriend defaults and goes back to bank. It was all orchestrated and done very well.
Sure would like to know who the parties of “13104 Chambord trust” are. Probably many people pitching in to buy on the cheap and flip for profit. Nothing wrong, of course w/that. But if the original owners are involved somehow, well, I’m suspicious and leave it at that.
