- This topic has 1,823 replies, 128 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 7 months ago by sdduuuude.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 10, 2010 at 3:04 PM #500931January 10, 2010 at 3:04 PM #501323UCGalParticipant
Here’s one.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/4785-Mount-Durban-Dr-92117/home/5150584
Not only does it have random garbage and trash in most of the pictures. It’s also listed on the mrmls rather than sandicor, despite being in Clairemont.
Oh – and it was scheduled for forclosure on 1/4, which was cancelled, and was listed as a short sale yesterday, with the remarks indicating BPO package already at the bank.
Seems like between the listing in the wrong mls and the awful pictures to make it seem super dumpy, they are trying hard NOT to sell it – just extend the free rent. But I could be wrong.
January 10, 2010 at 3:04 PM #501418UCGalParticipantHere’s one.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/4785-Mount-Durban-Dr-92117/home/5150584
Not only does it have random garbage and trash in most of the pictures. It’s also listed on the mrmls rather than sandicor, despite being in Clairemont.
Oh – and it was scheduled for forclosure on 1/4, which was cancelled, and was listed as a short sale yesterday, with the remarks indicating BPO package already at the bank.
Seems like between the listing in the wrong mls and the awful pictures to make it seem super dumpy, they are trying hard NOT to sell it – just extend the free rent. But I could be wrong.
January 10, 2010 at 3:04 PM #501663UCGalParticipantHere’s one.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/4785-Mount-Durban-Dr-92117/home/5150584
Not only does it have random garbage and trash in most of the pictures. It’s also listed on the mrmls rather than sandicor, despite being in Clairemont.
Oh – and it was scheduled for forclosure on 1/4, which was cancelled, and was listed as a short sale yesterday, with the remarks indicating BPO package already at the bank.
Seems like between the listing in the wrong mls and the awful pictures to make it seem super dumpy, they are trying hard NOT to sell it – just extend the free rent. But I could be wrong.
January 10, 2010 at 3:05 PM #500785UCGalParticipantWow – the new spam filter really didn’t like my previous post – took 4 attempts to get it through.
January 10, 2010 at 3:05 PM #500936UCGalParticipantWow – the new spam filter really didn’t like my previous post – took 4 attempts to get it through.
January 10, 2010 at 3:05 PM #501328UCGalParticipantWow – the new spam filter really didn’t like my previous post – took 4 attempts to get it through.
January 10, 2010 at 3:05 PM #501423UCGalParticipantWow – the new spam filter really didn’t like my previous post – took 4 attempts to get it through.
January 10, 2010 at 3:05 PM #501668UCGalParticipantWow – the new spam filter really didn’t like my previous post – took 4 attempts to get it through.
January 10, 2010 at 3:26 PM #500800Rich ToscanoKeymasterThe number of attempts to get it through (beyond the first one) has nothing to do with content the post, it has to do with the fact that you didn’t type in the captcha (funny looking letters) correctly. Is it too hard to discern? Tell me what happened, maybe i can address it. This is feedback that should be sent to me at [email protected], not posted about, because it’s only by luck that I saw this.
Rich
January 10, 2010 at 3:26 PM #500951Rich ToscanoKeymasterThe number of attempts to get it through (beyond the first one) has nothing to do with content the post, it has to do with the fact that you didn’t type in the captcha (funny looking letters) correctly. Is it too hard to discern? Tell me what happened, maybe i can address it. This is feedback that should be sent to me at [email protected], not posted about, because it’s only by luck that I saw this.
Rich
January 10, 2010 at 3:26 PM #501343Rich ToscanoKeymasterThe number of attempts to get it through (beyond the first one) has nothing to do with content the post, it has to do with the fact that you didn’t type in the captcha (funny looking letters) correctly. Is it too hard to discern? Tell me what happened, maybe i can address it. This is feedback that should be sent to me at [email protected], not posted about, because it’s only by luck that I saw this.
Rich
January 10, 2010 at 3:26 PM #501438Rich ToscanoKeymasterThe number of attempts to get it through (beyond the first one) has nothing to do with content the post, it has to do with the fact that you didn’t type in the captcha (funny looking letters) correctly. Is it too hard to discern? Tell me what happened, maybe i can address it. This is feedback that should be sent to me at [email protected], not posted about, because it’s only by luck that I saw this.
Rich
January 10, 2010 at 3:26 PM #501683Rich ToscanoKeymasterThe number of attempts to get it through (beyond the first one) has nothing to do with content the post, it has to do with the fact that you didn’t type in the captcha (funny looking letters) correctly. Is it too hard to discern? Tell me what happened, maybe i can address it. This is feedback that should be sent to me at [email protected], not posted about, because it’s only by luck that I saw this.
Rich
January 12, 2010 at 2:35 PM #501524SmellsFeeshyParticipant[quote=UCGal]Here’s one.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/4785-Mount-Durban-Dr-92117/home/5150584
Not only does it have random garbage and trash in most of the pictures. It’s also listed on the mrmls rather than sandicor, despite being in Clairemont.
Oh – and it was scheduled for forclosure on 1/4, which was cancelled, and was listed as a short sale yesterday, with the remarks indicating BPO package already at the bank.
Seems like between the listing in the wrong mls and the awful pictures to make it seem super dumpy, they are trying hard NOT to sell it – just extend the free rent. But I could be wrong.[/quote]
Love the picture of the circuit breakers. Definitely sells the house on that alone.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.