unpermitted additions

[UCGal]

[quote=4plexowner]refi loan on a condo vs purchase loan on a property where unpermitted additions are enough of an issue to actually state them as an issue in the listing

can you say, “apples and oranges”?[/quote]
That was my thought, too. If it’s bad enough it’s stated in the listing… the unpermited work must be badly done it will get flagged or, possibly, already condemned.

[NotCranky]

Like 4-plex says a decent place with some unpermitted stuff is quite different from a dump with a cracked slab and a pool sliding down into a ravine. Even so, in many cases the seller just prefers an “as is” cash buyer vs possible complications of selling a fixer with unpermitted work.

The appraiser looks at the quality and quantity of the work and compares it to what is the legal square footage and description on the tax rolls. If it all looks like it’s done in a “craftsman like” manner or better it will be a wash in the appraised value not a valuation positive. They will only comp out legally permitted square footage. Sometimes I think this makes perfect sense but then I think there should be a deduction for unpermitted work, additions and illegal granny flats especially, regardless or how good they look.

Buyers should always be aware that they can face consequences from unpermitted work if it is reported to the authorities later. It also has to be disclosed at selling again. Many people feel justified in just staying away from this kind of property, for these reasons and for fear that even if the work looks good it could be shoddy underneath.

Be careful of open code compliance cases. I have had fixer buyers take properties with known or discovered code compliance issues and get financing. In one case the county was recording liens for fines which had been submitted to Revenue and Recovery. It was nearly 10K for a unpermitted shed on an unoccupied REO. The shed had to be torn down.

We made the seller pay for the liens, tear down the shed and close the case, since they had not disclosed it.

[NotCranky]

Like 4-plex says a decent place with some unpermitted stuff is quite different from a dump with a cracked slab and a pool sliding down into a ravine. Even so, in many cases the seller just prefers an “as is” cash buyer vs possible complications of selling a fixer with unpermitted work.

The appraiser looks at the quality and quantity of the work and compares it to what is the legal square footage and description on the tax rolls. If it all looks like it’s done in a “craftsman like” manner or better it will be a wash in the appraised value not a valuation positive. They will only comp out legally permitted square footage. Sometimes I think this makes perfect sense but then I think there should be a deduction for unpermitted work, additions and illegal granny flats especially, regardless or how good they look.

Buyers should always be aware that they can face consequences from unpermitted work if it is reported to the authorities later. It also has to be disclosed at selling again. Many people feel justified in just staying away from this kind of property, for these reasons and for fear that even if the work looks good it could be shoddy underneath.

Be careful of open code compliance cases. I have had fixer buyers take properties with known or discovered code compliance issues and get financing. In one case the county was recording liens for fines which had been submitted to Revenue and Recovery. It was nearly 10K for a unpermitted shed on an unoccupied REO. The shed had to be torn down.

We made the seller pay for the liens, tear down the shed and close the case, since they had not disclosed it.

[NotCranky]

Like 4-plex says a decent place with some unpermitted stuff is quite different from a dump with a cracked slab and a pool sliding down into a ravine. Even so, in many cases the seller just prefers an “as is” cash buyer vs possible complications of selling a fixer with unpermitted work.

The appraiser looks at the quality and quantity of the work and compares it to what is the legal square footage and description on the tax rolls. If it all looks like it’s done in a “craftsman like” manner or better it will be a wash in the appraised value not a valuation positive. They will only comp out legally permitted square footage. Sometimes I think this makes perfect sense but then I think there should be a deduction for unpermitted work, additions and illegal granny flats especially, regardless or how good they look.

Buyers should always be aware that they can face consequences from unpermitted work if it is reported to the authorities later. It also has to be disclosed at selling again. Many people feel justified in just staying away from this kind of property, for these reasons and for fear that even if the work looks good it could be shoddy underneath.

Be careful of open code compliance cases. I have had fixer buyers take properties with known or discovered code compliance issues and get financing. In one case the county was recording liens for fines which had been submitted to Revenue and Recovery. It was nearly 10K for a unpermitted shed on an unoccupied REO. The shed had to be torn down.

We made the seller pay for the liens, tear down the shed and close the case, since they had not disclosed it.

[NotCranky]

Like 4-plex says a decent place with some unpermitted stuff is quite different from a dump with a cracked slab and a pool sliding down into a ravine. Even so, in many cases the seller just prefers an “as is” cash buyer vs possible complications of selling a fixer with unpermitted work.

The appraiser looks at the quality and quantity of the work and compares it to what is the legal square footage and description on the tax rolls. If it all looks like it’s done in a “craftsman like” manner or better it will be a wash in the appraised value not a valuation positive. They will only comp out legally permitted square footage. Sometimes I think this makes perfect sense but then I think there should be a deduction for unpermitted work, additions and illegal granny flats especially, regardless or how good they look.

Buyers should always be aware that they can face consequences from unpermitted work if it is reported to the authorities later. It also has to be disclosed at selling again. Many people feel justified in just staying away from this kind of property, for these reasons and for fear that even if the work looks good it could be shoddy underneath.

Be careful of open code compliance cases. I have had fixer buyers take properties with known or discovered code compliance issues and get financing. In one case the county was recording liens for fines which had been submitted to Revenue and Recovery. It was nearly 10K for a unpermitted shed on an unoccupied REO. The shed had to be torn down.

We made the seller pay for the liens, tear down the shed and close the case, since they had not disclosed it.

[NotCranky]

Like 4-plex says a decent place with some unpermitted stuff is quite different from a dump with a cracked slab and a pool sliding down into a ravine. Even so, in many cases the seller just prefers an “as is” cash buyer vs possible complications of selling a fixer with unpermitted work.

The appraiser looks at the quality and quantity of the work and compares it to what is the legal square footage and description on the tax rolls. If it all looks like it’s done in a “craftsman like” manner or better it will be a wash in the appraised value not a valuation positive. They will only comp out legally permitted square footage. Sometimes I think this makes perfect sense but then I think there should be a deduction for unpermitted work, additions and illegal granny flats especially, regardless or how good they look.

Buyers should always be aware that they can face consequences from unpermitted work if it is reported to the authorities later. It also has to be disclosed at selling again. Many people feel justified in just staying away from this kind of property, for these reasons and for fear that even if the work looks good it could be shoddy underneath.

Be careful of open code compliance cases. I have had fixer buyers take properties with known or discovered code compliance issues and get financing. In one case the county was recording liens for fines which had been submitted to Revenue and Recovery. It was nearly 10K for a unpermitted shed on an unoccupied REO. The shed had to be torn down.

We made the seller pay for the liens, tear down the shed and close the case, since they had not disclosed it.

[temeculaguy]

Ok, question, it is along the lines of some of the answers but it’s a different twist. The house I bought has square footage that doesn’t match the tax roll. It was a tract house and there was an option to add an additional bedroom and bathroom over the garage and a loft upstairs when it was new. The original buyer opted for the additional space, making it 400 sq ft bigger. It’s obvious that it wasn’t done afterwards because it changed the roof and a number of things on the exterior since that area is above the garage. When it was appraised the appraiser obviously didn’t measure because he/she came up with the exact amount of sq ft as the tax roll. Running a zillow of the tract it seems that most of the model matches with the same additional sq ft are not recorded as such, at least 20 are in the same situation.

So here’s the question, does it matter? Should I contact the county and have them change the tax roll, they seem a little busy at the moment with all the value changes. It wont change my taxes because that is based on purchase price and nothing has changed since it was inspected and built, it is more of a typo than anything and in my years of searching and evaluating properties, I’ve found it in other tracts and developments where the tax roll was just wrong. Is there any benefit to rectifying it? Any downside?

[temeculaguy]

Ok, question, it is along the lines of some of the answers but it’s a different twist. The house I bought has square footage that doesn’t match the tax roll. It was a tract house and there was an option to add an additional bedroom and bathroom over the garage and a loft upstairs when it was new. The original buyer opted for the additional space, making it 400 sq ft bigger. It’s obvious that it wasn’t done afterwards because it changed the roof and a number of things on the exterior since that area is above the garage. When it was appraised the appraiser obviously didn’t measure because he/she came up with the exact amount of sq ft as the tax roll. Running a zillow of the tract it seems that most of the model matches with the same additional sq ft are not recorded as such, at least 20 are in the same situation.

So here’s the question, does it matter? Should I contact the county and have them change the tax roll, they seem a little busy at the moment with all the value changes. It wont change my taxes because that is based on purchase price and nothing has changed since it was inspected and built, it is more of a typo than anything and in my years of searching and evaluating properties, I’ve found it in other tracts and developments where the tax roll was just wrong. Is there any benefit to rectifying it? Any downside?

[temeculaguy]

Ok, question, it is along the lines of some of the answers but it’s a different twist. The house I bought has square footage that doesn’t match the tax roll. It was a tract house and there was an option to add an additional bedroom and bathroom over the garage and a loft upstairs when it was new. The original buyer opted for the additional space, making it 400 sq ft bigger. It’s obvious that it wasn’t done afterwards because it changed the roof and a number of things on the exterior since that area is above the garage. When it was appraised the appraiser obviously didn’t measure because he/she came up with the exact amount of sq ft as the tax roll. Running a zillow of the tract it seems that most of the model matches with the same additional sq ft are not recorded as such, at least 20 are in the same situation.

So here’s the question, does it matter? Should I contact the county and have them change the tax roll, they seem a little busy at the moment with all the value changes. It wont change my taxes because that is based on purchase price and nothing has changed since it was inspected and built, it is more of a typo than anything and in my years of searching and evaluating properties, I’ve found it in other tracts and developments where the tax roll was just wrong. Is there any benefit to rectifying it? Any downside?

[temeculaguy]

Ok, question, it is along the lines of some of the answers but it’s a different twist. The house I bought has square footage that doesn’t match the tax roll. It was a tract house and there was an option to add an additional bedroom and bathroom over the garage and a loft upstairs when it was new. The original buyer opted for the additional space, making it 400 sq ft bigger. It’s obvious that it wasn’t done afterwards because it changed the roof and a number of things on the exterior since that area is above the garage. When it was appraised the appraiser obviously didn’t measure because he/she came up with the exact amount of sq ft as the tax roll. Running a zillow of the tract it seems that most of the model matches with the same additional sq ft are not recorded as such, at least 20 are in the same situation.

So here’s the question, does it matter? Should I contact the county and have them change the tax roll, they seem a little busy at the moment with all the value changes. It wont change my taxes because that is based on purchase price and nothing has changed since it was inspected and built, it is more of a typo than anything and in my years of searching and evaluating properties, I’ve found it in other tracts and developments where the tax roll was just wrong. Is there any benefit to rectifying it? Any downside?

[temeculaguy]

Ok, question, it is along the lines of some of the answers but it’s a different twist. The house I bought has square footage that doesn’t match the tax roll. It was a tract house and there was an option to add an additional bedroom and bathroom over the garage and a loft upstairs when it was new. The original buyer opted for the additional space, making it 400 sq ft bigger. It’s obvious that it wasn’t done afterwards because it changed the roof and a number of things on the exterior since that area is above the garage. When it was appraised the appraiser obviously didn’t measure because he/she came up with the exact amount of sq ft as the tax roll. Running a zillow of the tract it seems that most of the model matches with the same additional sq ft are not recorded as such, at least 20 are in the same situation.

So here’s the question, does it matter? Should I contact the county and have them change the tax roll, they seem a little busy at the moment with all the value changes. It wont change my taxes because that is based on purchase price and nothing has changed since it was inspected and built, it is more of a typo than anything and in my years of searching and evaluating properties, I’ve found it in other tracts and developments where the tax roll was just wrong. Is there any benefit to rectifying it? Any downside?

[LuckyInOC]

I’d wait until you want to sell before you updated the tax roll. Just in case our reps in Sac want to tax homes over 2000 sf as a luxury. After that, watch all the unpermitted work start happening…

Lucky In OC

[LuckyInOC]

I’d wait until you want to sell before you updated the tax roll. Just in case our reps in Sac want to tax homes over 2000 sf as a luxury. After that, watch all the unpermitted work start happening…

Lucky In OC

[LuckyInOC]

I’d wait until you want to sell before you updated the tax roll. Just in case our reps in Sac want to tax homes over 2000 sf as a luxury. After that, watch all the unpermitted work start happening…

Lucky In OC

[LuckyInOC]

I’d wait until you want to sell before you updated the tax roll. Just in case our reps in Sac want to tax homes over 2000 sf as a luxury. After that, watch all the unpermitted work start happening…

Lucky In OC

[Author]

Posts