San Marcos Sale – Something aint right

[Anonymous]

Oops

[no_such_reality]

Only a first for 568k.

I see three possibilities.

1. The sale price is misreported (FSBO transaction)
2. The 2nd mortgage hasn’t hit the books yet.
3. It’s a new kind of fraud where the seller credits the buyer for 20% down so they can get financing.

[Anonymous]

Can anyone pull the data for the 2nd transaction? That one sold for 710 as well, the week before. I am curious to see if the lender is the same, the buyer the same etc.

[Anonymous]

The lesson on this example, and in life in general, is that many things are not as they appear. Take median price as an example – once you give it some thought, you realize what a poor stand alone statistic it is to gauge home prices, and yet 99% of the people out there use it religiously. Someone looking at the comps in this neighborhood in San Marcos will see two sales at 710 and feel pretty good about spending 650 for the larger, more desirable ones currently listed. And they will never see the likely underlying fraud that took place, assuming we are right. When the monthly stats come out for 92078, they will use 710 as the purchase price and that will affect that overall median for the zip code, furthering the deception.

[Anonymous]

Duplicate

[Anonymous]

Duplicate

[Anonymous]

OK Folks, now for something funny. Reference my original post on this San Marcos property and try to follow. Time to bring in the investigators! This tale goes back two years, to 2006. Original owner lists for low 700s in 2006, lowers price over course of a year down to high 500s. For sale/for rent signs are seen off and on. Suddenly, while listed in the 500s, it sells for 710! The same week, same model up the road closes at 710k also! New owner puts up for rent sign after closing. Fast forward one year – proud new owner who paid 710 is now listing it for 460k!

[Anonymous]

OK Folks, now for something funny. Reference my original post on this San Marcos property and try to follow. Time to bring in the investigators! This tale goes back two years, to 2006. Original owner lists for low 700s in 2006, lowers price over course of a year down to high 500s. For sale/for rent signs are seen off and on. Suddenly, while listed in the 500s, it sells for 710! The same week, same model up the road closes at 710k also! New owner puts up for rent sign after closing. Fast forward one year – proud new owner who paid 710 is now listing it for 460k!

[Anonymous]

OK Folks, now for something funny. Reference my original post on this San Marcos property and try to follow. Time to bring in the investigators! This tale goes back two years, to 2006. Original owner lists for low 700s in 2006, lowers price over course of a year down to high 500s. For sale/for rent signs are seen off and on. Suddenly, while listed in the 500s, it sells for 710! The same week, same model up the road closes at 710k also! New owner puts up for rent sign after closing. Fast forward one year – proud new owner who paid 710 is now listing it for 460k!

[Anonymous]

OK Folks, now for something funny. Reference my original post on this San Marcos property and try to follow. Time to bring in the investigators! This tale goes back two years, to 2006. Original owner lists for low 700s in 2006, lowers price over course of a year down to high 500s. For sale/for rent signs are seen off and on. Suddenly, while listed in the 500s, it sells for 710! The same week, same model up the road closes at 710k also! New owner puts up for rent sign after closing. Fast forward one year – proud new owner who paid 710 is now listing it for 460k!

[Anonymous]

OK Folks, now for something funny. Reference my original post on this San Marcos property and try to follow. Time to bring in the investigators! This tale goes back two years, to 2006. Original owner lists for low 700s in 2006, lowers price over course of a year down to high 500s. For sale/for rent signs are seen off and on. Suddenly, while listed in the 500s, it sells for 710! The same week, same model up the road closes at 710k also! New owner puts up for rent sign after closing. Fast forward one year – proud new owner who paid 710 is now listing it for 460k!

[CA renter]

I wonder if the buyer ever paid anything at all?

It sounds suspiciously like the original seller credited back the $142K (20% of $710K) and maybe split it with the new buyer who paid $568. Now, they rent it out (maybe without making any mortgage payments), collecting the rent money while lenders are swamped with foreclosures & are bogged-down.

It would be very interesting to see their payment history.

[CA renter]

I wonder if the buyer ever paid anything at all?

It sounds suspiciously like the original seller credited back the $142K (20% of $710K) and maybe split it with the new buyer who paid $568. Now, they rent it out (maybe without making any mortgage payments), collecting the rent money while lenders are swamped with foreclosures & are bogged-down.

It would be very interesting to see their payment history.

[CA renter]

I wonder if the buyer ever paid anything at all?

It sounds suspiciously like the original seller credited back the $142K (20% of $710K) and maybe split it with the new buyer who paid $568. Now, they rent it out (maybe without making any mortgage payments), collecting the rent money while lenders are swamped with foreclosures & are bogged-down.

It would be very interesting to see their payment history.

[CA renter]

I wonder if the buyer ever paid anything at all?

It sounds suspiciously like the original seller credited back the $142K (20% of $710K) and maybe split it with the new buyer who paid $568. Now, they rent it out (maybe without making any mortgage payments), collecting the rent money while lenders are swamped with foreclosures & are bogged-down.

It would be very interesting to see their payment history.

[Author]

Posts