- This topic has 45 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
SHILOH.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 11, 2009 at 5:10 PM #455620September 11, 2009 at 5:24 PM #456158
Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantDave: I’ve heard of certain high-end Realtors and construction companies hiring live-ins to maintain residences while unsold, but this situation, if similar or the same, strains credulity.
First off, why on earth would Wells Fargo place a Wells Fargo employee in the residence? Strictly from a liability perspective, its a potential nightmare scenario.
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood. While that remark might sound overtly racist, it’s anything but. The simple fact is that, if Wells Fargo did indeed hire someone as a live-in and to potentially stage the property, they would have hired “to type”, meaning someone who fit the part. They also would have hired someone with the express purpose of helping move the property in conjunction with a Realtor or realty firm, which is contradicted by the bank’s assertion that the property would be held from the market for a period of time at the mutual agreement of the previous owners and the bank.
Lastly, when the bank refers to initiating an investigation, something is clearly up and it ain’t good.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.
September 11, 2009 at 5:24 PM #455819ParticipantDave: I’ve heard of certain high-end Realtors and construction companies hiring live-ins to maintain residences while unsold, but this situation, if similar or the same, strains credulity.
First off, why on earth would Wells Fargo place a Wells Fargo employee in the residence? Strictly from a liability perspective, its a potential nightmare scenario.
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood. While that remark might sound overtly racist, it’s anything but. The simple fact is that, if Wells Fargo did indeed hire someone as a live-in and to potentially stage the property, they would have hired “to type”, meaning someone who fit the part. They also would have hired someone with the express purpose of helping move the property in conjunction with a Realtor or realty firm, which is contradicted by the bank’s assertion that the property would be held from the market for a period of time at the mutual agreement of the previous owners and the bank.
Lastly, when the bank refers to initiating an investigation, something is clearly up and it ain’t good.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.
September 11, 2009 at 5:24 PM #456228ParticipantDave: I’ve heard of certain high-end Realtors and construction companies hiring live-ins to maintain residences while unsold, but this situation, if similar or the same, strains credulity.
First off, why on earth would Wells Fargo place a Wells Fargo employee in the residence? Strictly from a liability perspective, its a potential nightmare scenario.
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood. While that remark might sound overtly racist, it’s anything but. The simple fact is that, if Wells Fargo did indeed hire someone as a live-in and to potentially stage the property, they would have hired “to type”, meaning someone who fit the part. They also would have hired someone with the express purpose of helping move the property in conjunction with a Realtor or realty firm, which is contradicted by the bank’s assertion that the property would be held from the market for a period of time at the mutual agreement of the previous owners and the bank.
Lastly, when the bank refers to initiating an investigation, something is clearly up and it ain’t good.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.
September 11, 2009 at 5:24 PM #456420ParticipantDave: I’ve heard of certain high-end Realtors and construction companies hiring live-ins to maintain residences while unsold, but this situation, if similar or the same, strains credulity.
First off, why on earth would Wells Fargo place a Wells Fargo employee in the residence? Strictly from a liability perspective, its a potential nightmare scenario.
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood. While that remark might sound overtly racist, it’s anything but. The simple fact is that, if Wells Fargo did indeed hire someone as a live-in and to potentially stage the property, they would have hired “to type”, meaning someone who fit the part. They also would have hired someone with the express purpose of helping move the property in conjunction with a Realtor or realty firm, which is contradicted by the bank’s assertion that the property would be held from the market for a period of time at the mutual agreement of the previous owners and the bank.
Lastly, when the bank refers to initiating an investigation, something is clearly up and it ain’t good.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.
September 11, 2009 at 5:24 PM #455624ParticipantDave: I’ve heard of certain high-end Realtors and construction companies hiring live-ins to maintain residences while unsold, but this situation, if similar or the same, strains credulity.
First off, why on earth would Wells Fargo place a Wells Fargo employee in the residence? Strictly from a liability perspective, its a potential nightmare scenario.
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood. While that remark might sound overtly racist, it’s anything but. The simple fact is that, if Wells Fargo did indeed hire someone as a live-in and to potentially stage the property, they would have hired “to type”, meaning someone who fit the part. They also would have hired someone with the express purpose of helping move the property in conjunction with a Realtor or realty firm, which is contradicted by the bank’s assertion that the property would be held from the market for a period of time at the mutual agreement of the previous owners and the bank.
Lastly, when the bank refers to initiating an investigation, something is clearly up and it ain’t good.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.
September 11, 2009 at 5:41 PM #455633davelj
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.[/quote]
Exactly. The biggest problem is that it’s a very small, gated community, so it’s hard to come up with a security-related reason for an employee living there.
If this house were a bit out of the way and an argument could be made that they didn’t want the house sitting empty then… maybe. But even that’s a pretty big maybe.
But this situation? Agreed. It’s likely she’s toast.
September 11, 2009 at 5:41 PM #456426Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.[/quote]
Exactly. The biggest problem is that it’s a very small, gated community, so it’s hard to come up with a security-related reason for an employee living there.
If this house were a bit out of the way and an argument could be made that they didn’t want the house sitting empty then… maybe. But even that’s a pretty big maybe.
But this situation? Agreed. It’s likely she’s toast.
September 11, 2009 at 5:41 PM #456234Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.[/quote]
Exactly. The biggest problem is that it’s a very small, gated community, so it’s hard to come up with a security-related reason for an employee living there.
If this house were a bit out of the way and an argument could be made that they didn’t want the house sitting empty then… maybe. But even that’s a pretty big maybe.
But this situation? Agreed. It’s likely she’s toast.
September 11, 2009 at 5:41 PM #456166Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.[/quote]
Exactly. The biggest problem is that it’s a very small, gated community, so it’s hard to come up with a security-related reason for an employee living there.
If this house were a bit out of the way and an argument could be made that they didn’t want the house sitting empty then… maybe. But even that’s a pretty big maybe.
But this situation? Agreed. It’s likely she’s toast.
September 11, 2009 at 5:41 PM #455827Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Add to this the fact that this is a marquee home in a very, very tony neighborhood.
Nah, this chick is toast. Back to Fairfax, honey, and sans employ.[/quote]
Exactly. The biggest problem is that it’s a very small, gated community, so it’s hard to come up with a security-related reason for an employee living there.
If this house were a bit out of the way and an argument could be made that they didn’t want the house sitting empty then… maybe. But even that’s a pretty big maybe.
But this situation? Agreed. It’s likely she’s toast.
September 14, 2009 at 9:18 PM #457441Sandiagon
ParticipantWells Fargo fires exec over Malibu house scandal.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090915/bs_nm/us_wellsfargo_malibuSeptember 14, 2009 at 9:18 PM #457247ParticipantWells Fargo fires exec over Malibu house scandal.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090915/bs_nm/us_wellsfargo_malibuSeptember 14, 2009 at 9:18 PM #457173ParticipantWells Fargo fires exec over Malibu house scandal.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090915/bs_nm/us_wellsfargo_malibuSeptember 14, 2009 at 9:18 PM #456835ParticipantWells Fargo fires exec over Malibu house scandal.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090915/bs_nm/us_wellsfargo_malibu -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.