REO getting real in 92116

[4plexowner]

Interesting listing – decent location north of Adams for less than $300K – but very tiny and the 1913 build date is probably accurate – listing says ‘As Is’ and ‘future tear down’ which probably means the house is basically a scraper (assume wood issues and outdated electrical and plumbing for starters – wouldn’t be surprised to find foundation issues as well) – the deep, narrow lot limits the options for new construction -‘As Is’ condition of the house most likely eliminates conventional financing as an option

Not a great starter home unless you could do all the work yourself (and thought the work was justified on a ‘future tear down’)

Investment potential: a 2/1 in this location (even a crappy one) probably rents for $1050 pretty easily – 150 times monthly rent would be $157.5K – 100 times rents is $105K – at $279K this property isn’t going to attract investors (although there is probably somebody who thinks they can flip this thing for a profit)

Can someone pull the history on this property please?

[4plexowner]

I just re-read the op – if this thing closed escrow in 2005 then it must be in better condition than I was thinking

I would assume that at the very least a termite certification was obtained and I would hope that for $485K the house didn’t have any major structural issues or seriously outdated electrical / plumbing systems (although these could be bad assumptions given the May ’05 sale date)

Bugs: any thoughts on ‘hiding’ major issues from a loan underwriter? for example: knob and tube wiring system (http://www.oldhouseweb.com/stories/Detailed/14214.shtml), glass screw-in fuses in breaker box, cracked stem walls in foundation, shifted or tilted foundation, etc – obviously these issues detract from the value of the property but a lender may not be aware of them

An honest seller would disclose any known issues and a savvy buyer would insist on inspections – an underwriter would look at these documents and make a decision – but a dishonest seller and a naive buyer is a different story

[4plexowner]

I just re-read the op – if this thing closed escrow in 2005 then it must be in better condition than I was thinking

I would assume that at the very least a termite certification was obtained and I would hope that for $485K the house didn’t have any major structural issues or seriously outdated electrical / plumbing systems (although these could be bad assumptions given the May ’05 sale date)

Bugs: any thoughts on ‘hiding’ major issues from a loan underwriter? for example: knob and tube wiring system (http://www.oldhouseweb.com/stories/Detailed/14214.shtml), glass screw-in fuses in breaker box, cracked stem walls in foundation, shifted or tilted foundation, etc – obviously these issues detract from the value of the property but a lender may not be aware of them

An honest seller would disclose any known issues and a savvy buyer would insist on inspections – an underwriter would look at these documents and make a decision – but a dishonest seller and a naive buyer is a different story

[4plexowner]

I just re-read the op – if this thing closed escrow in 2005 then it must be in better condition than I was thinking

I would assume that at the very least a termite certification was obtained and I would hope that for $485K the house didn’t have any major structural issues or seriously outdated electrical / plumbing systems (although these could be bad assumptions given the May ’05 sale date)

Bugs: any thoughts on ‘hiding’ major issues from a loan underwriter? for example: knob and tube wiring system (http://www.oldhouseweb.com/stories/Detailed/14214.shtml), glass screw-in fuses in breaker box, cracked stem walls in foundation, shifted or tilted foundation, etc – obviously these issues detract from the value of the property but a lender may not be aware of them

An honest seller would disclose any known issues and a savvy buyer would insist on inspections – an underwriter would look at these documents and make a decision – but a dishonest seller and a naive buyer is a different story

[4plexowner]

I just re-read the op – if this thing closed escrow in 2005 then it must be in better condition than I was thinking

I would assume that at the very least a termite certification was obtained and I would hope that for $485K the house didn’t have any major structural issues or seriously outdated electrical / plumbing systems (although these could be bad assumptions given the May ’05 sale date)

Bugs: any thoughts on ‘hiding’ major issues from a loan underwriter? for example: knob and tube wiring system (http://www.oldhouseweb.com/stories/Detailed/14214.shtml), glass screw-in fuses in breaker box, cracked stem walls in foundation, shifted or tilted foundation, etc – obviously these issues detract from the value of the property but a lender may not be aware of them

An honest seller would disclose any known issues and a savvy buyer would insist on inspections – an underwriter would look at these documents and make a decision – but a dishonest seller and a naive buyer is a different story

[4plexowner]

I just re-read the op – if this thing closed escrow in 2005 then it must be in better condition than I was thinking

I would assume that at the very least a termite certification was obtained and I would hope that for $485K the house didn’t have any major structural issues or seriously outdated electrical / plumbing systems (although these could be bad assumptions given the May ’05 sale date)

Bugs: any thoughts on ‘hiding’ major issues from a loan underwriter? for example: knob and tube wiring system (http://www.oldhouseweb.com/stories/Detailed/14214.shtml), glass screw-in fuses in breaker box, cracked stem walls in foundation, shifted or tilted foundation, etc – obviously these issues detract from the value of the property but a lender may not be aware of them

An honest seller would disclose any known issues and a savvy buyer would insist on inspections – an underwriter would look at these documents and make a decision – but a dishonest seller and a naive buyer is a different story

[DCRogers]

Sales history:

07/25/03 $356,000.
12/09/03 $375,500.
05/04/05 $485,000.
On market $279,000.

House is nicely fixed up on the outside, don’t know about the inside. Maybe something severe but hidden like foundation problems if they’re recommending a tear-down. Or, (back to the original argument), maybe banks are getting serious at what it will take to make sales.

That said, it’s on a depth-split lot, so the set-backs required for modern construction would seem to preclude rebuilding anything bigger (as does the tiny 3000sf lot size).

County records says it’s 650SF, MLS says 800SF: maybe someone enclosed a porch in back, or re-measured with a more generous tape-measure.

[DCRogers]

Sales history:

07/25/03 $356,000.
12/09/03 $375,500.
05/04/05 $485,000.
On market $279,000.

House is nicely fixed up on the outside, don’t know about the inside. Maybe something severe but hidden like foundation problems if they’re recommending a tear-down. Or, (back to the original argument), maybe banks are getting serious at what it will take to make sales.

That said, it’s on a depth-split lot, so the set-backs required for modern construction would seem to preclude rebuilding anything bigger (as does the tiny 3000sf lot size).

County records says it’s 650SF, MLS says 800SF: maybe someone enclosed a porch in back, or re-measured with a more generous tape-measure.

[DCRogers]

Sales history:

07/25/03 $356,000.
12/09/03 $375,500.
05/04/05 $485,000.
On market $279,000.

House is nicely fixed up on the outside, don’t know about the inside. Maybe something severe but hidden like foundation problems if they’re recommending a tear-down. Or, (back to the original argument), maybe banks are getting serious at what it will take to make sales.

That said, it’s on a depth-split lot, so the set-backs required for modern construction would seem to preclude rebuilding anything bigger (as does the tiny 3000sf lot size).

County records says it’s 650SF, MLS says 800SF: maybe someone enclosed a porch in back, or re-measured with a more generous tape-measure.

[DCRogers]

Sales history:

07/25/03 $356,000.
12/09/03 $375,500.
05/04/05 $485,000.
On market $279,000.

House is nicely fixed up on the outside, don’t know about the inside. Maybe something severe but hidden like foundation problems if they’re recommending a tear-down. Or, (back to the original argument), maybe banks are getting serious at what it will take to make sales.

That said, it’s on a depth-split lot, so the set-backs required for modern construction would seem to preclude rebuilding anything bigger (as does the tiny 3000sf lot size).

County records says it’s 650SF, MLS says 800SF: maybe someone enclosed a porch in back, or re-measured with a more generous tape-measure.

[DCRogers]

Sales history:

07/25/03 $356,000.
12/09/03 $375,500.
05/04/05 $485,000.
On market $279,000.

House is nicely fixed up on the outside, don’t know about the inside. Maybe something severe but hidden like foundation problems if they’re recommending a tear-down. Or, (back to the original argument), maybe banks are getting serious at what it will take to make sales.

That said, it’s on a depth-split lot, so the set-backs required for modern construction would seem to preclude rebuilding anything bigger (as does the tiny 3000sf lot size).

County records says it’s 650SF, MLS says 800SF: maybe someone enclosed a porch in back, or re-measured with a more generous tape-measure.

[Bugs]

I’m on the clock this morning – gotta try to squeeze a 2hr surf session in before noon. I’ll give this property the once-over later on.

[Bugs]

I’m on the clock this morning – gotta try to squeeze a 2hr surf session in before noon. I’ll give this property the once-over later on.

[Bugs]

I’m on the clock this morning – gotta try to squeeze a 2hr surf session in before noon. I’ll give this property the once-over later on.

[Bugs]

I’m on the clock this morning – gotta try to squeeze a 2hr surf session in before noon. I’ll give this property the once-over later on.

[Author]

Posts