Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
bearishgurl
Participant[quote=AN]SD is way overrated. It’s really a $hit hole with nothing but vast seas of TRACT homes.[/quote]
Actually, it isn’t at all. SD County has many more “custom” areas than other cities (esp those in Midwest and Southwest USA). It’s just that most Piggs, if given the choice, seem to gravitate towards SD County tract developments and the *newer* the better (inferior location and accompanying fees be damned).
Many older-tract subdivisions could now be considered mostly “custom” due to mass remodeling over the years.
The “universal preference” for “newer tracts” is partly a function of the confusion of so many tracts to choose from now, IMO, due to gross overbuilding in the last 15 years creating “urban sprawl.” Another reason for the preference is generational. Younger Gen X and Gen Y generally want to reduce property maintenance as much as possible and most didn’t want to learn and/or weren’t taught any “repair” or “heavy cleaning” skills. Thus, they often perceive an older, far more well-located property on a larger lot as too daunting or a “project,” even though there may be many thousands of $$ of “sweat equity” available to the buyer after its purchase. Instead, many would rather pay hundreds in fees every month (or even $1K+) and regularly take their children to a park instead of water, fertilize, mow and have them play in their backyard. In addition, they can’t envision living in a house while it still has (working) older appls, Formica countertops and/or vinyl floors in the bathrooms. For the vast majority of (younger) Gen X/Y homebuyers, the house they buy must already be completely “updated, turnkey” and “move-in ready” upon COE.
Even my own kids are like this, except they WILL live in older dwellings but all are completely opposed to having to take care of landscaping.
This wasn’t always the case with the majority of homebuyers but to each his own.
June 13, 2012 at 12:23 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745602Participant[quote=harvey]. . . Let’s not get distracted trying to prove there is an elephant standing in the room, just because there are a few stubborn folks who choose to be blind.
Instead, let’s talk about how we are going to clean up the shit pile the elephant created, and how we can move the animal outside so it doesn’t happen again.
There are very straightforward and fair solutions to this problem.[/quote]
Yes, pri, let’s DO talk! I have posted the “solution” here time and time again:
1. Contact your representatives in the State Assembly, Senate and Congress by phone, letter or both;
2. Find out what their plans are, if any to introduce a bill to repeal or rewrite the current laws on the books governing collective bargaining and management of public defined-benefit pensions;
3. Find out from their offices what you can do to help, including, but not limited to, attempting to help them rewrite the bill in such a way to get the it introduced and garner support of their brethren;
4. Support local candidates running on “public pension reform” platforms (after determining if they have a viable plan for reform);
5. When supporting your favorite local “pension reform” candidate, do regular precinct walking and work the phone banks for them … better yet, host a fundraiser for them in your home or community meeting place;
6. and above all, keep your pencil sharpened, your walking shoes on and your phone charged up.
You have a lot of work to do. We’re in an election year and times a wastin’ so stop whining on internet blogs and enjoy your new gig on a “hands-on civics lesson…”
Participant[quote=zzz]thanks sdr and SD R, yep i think its a small price to pay as well . bg, thanks for chiming in, but lets not get melodramatic here, i get it.[/quote]
zzz, you might be shocked to learn that I know of two families who have been “renting” ONLY distressed houses in default (some listed as SS’s) for a reduced rate and low/no deposits. The one family headed by a RE agent (lol) has successfully “rented” five homes since 2010 and the other family has “rented” 15 homes since 2006. The “RE agent family” only “rents” luxury homes in excess of 3500 sf. Both families have managed to stay in the same school attendance areas all during their rental occupancies and their kids have never left their schools of attendance except to advance to the next school (ie MS, HS).
Professional “tenants” know the game, play it until the end and leave just after a 3-day notice to pay or quit is taped to their door (to preserve their credit to successfully “rent” again). The “RE-agent family” has a flatbed truck at their disposal whenever they need it and the other family owns two open trailers.
There’s nothing “melodramatic” about my posts. I’ve seen all of this and then some. You, as a potential offeror, “adopt” holdover tenants at your own peril.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]9 offers and counting on this one. BTW, the photos are more surgically enhanced than the house.
http://www.redfin.com/CA/San-Diego/10504-Feller-Cv-92126/home/4587879
….[/quote]
Another wonderful candidate for being built with polybutylene plumbing :=0
“Caveat emptor” on this one.
Participant[quote=zzz]SDR and BG…yes he’s advised as well, but I like to cover my bases, so while I trust him, I always do my homework as well, and know folks here have a lot of experience, so know its good to get the collective thoughts. He presented 2 scenarios, make the tenants out a restriction the deal, or deal with it if we REALLY want the property as expect this house will have multiple offers. The sellers agents are not that responsive, so yes working on getting the lease details. Thanks for the feedback.
And no, I’m not an emotional buyer at all…[/quote]
If the house is really a “pigpen” as you say and the sellers and their agent don’t really care, then they are attempting to “test” the contingencies or lack thereof of the offers they might recieve and see if they can “cherry pick” the ones with no contingencies re: the tenants and present ONLY those offers to the lender(s), regardless of price.
It sounds like a possible SS on this property here is far from being “approved” by its most senior lienholder in default.
Realize that if you close on such a property without demanding eviction of the tenants by the sellers, you may very well have to wait out the balance of a “just manufactured” lease the tenants come up with (at the 11th hr?) which allows them to rent the property below market. During the balance of their “tenancy,” they can easily do MORE damage to the property which could negate the presumed “discount” you think you are receiving by purchasing a “short sale.” And to break their “just manufactured” long-term lease (lol), these tenants could demand far more from you to vacate than the typical $3K “cash for keys” payment. If they are friends or relatives of the seller who began “renting” AFTER the seller stopped making payments, they may very likely have paid NOTHING in security deposits. Even if they DID post a damage/security deposit with the “seller(s),” it has likely been spent instead of deposited into a “trust account” as required by law and so cannot be deposited into escrow for you.
I wouldn’t do it nor would I allow a “client” to do this. As the new buyer of this cesspool, you could very likely end up swinging in the wind with not only a legal bill for eviction, but a WHOPPING bill for fixup and repairs in order to live in it yourself, not to mention having to pay PITI on it during the months you cannot take possession of it (if you purchased it with a mortgage).
Participant[quote=zzz]…So it sounds like based on other comments, should make this a condition of the sale that the SELLER needs to get the tenants out, one way or another ( IE paying them off)[/quote]
zzz, as a potential offeror on a SS, its none of your concern HOW the seller gets their “tenants” out, only that they DO along with their (and possibly the owners’) debris (which could easily weigh more than a ton and cost you a fortune to get rid of) not to mention the work! You shouldn’t give a rat’s a$$ how this happens … only that it DOES and your final walk-thru scheduled as far ahead of funding that you can get them to agree to, but not closer to 3 business days before funding. If not done, call their bluff and WALK!
In your case, the “sellers'” agent could very well be a relative of the seller and also the tenants … thus they’re dragging their feet re: the tenants. This is commonplace in these situations.
Prepare your offer very carefully. If your agent is worth his/her salt, they should already know all of this. And lastly, do not become “emotionally involved” in the property at any time BEFORE you take title free of the tenants and their belongings.
June 11, 2012 at 10:18 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745440Participant[quote=UCGal] . . . Lots of non-public employees retire at or before the age of the OPs neighbor. It’s a choice to be frugal and get out early.[/quote]
Although most tend to be 55-62 when they finally decide to retire, I’m acquainted with several public schoolteachers in this category. Because of their “casual” working conditions (often taking jobs in schools where most of the students are “disadvantaged”), they didn’t have anyone to “impress” during their working lives. They could use and wear hand-me-down clothes and accessories from thrift shops (or gravely ill or deceased friends and relatives) and drive 20-30 year-old vehicles to work. There was never any need to “keep up with their (co-worker) Joneses.” If they remained “stationed” in a “disadvantaged” school for many years, it was more convenient to buy a residence nearby (or move into one of their rental homes). All very quietly bought 3-6 rental homes, duplexes or triplexes (none with HOAs/MR) throughout their careers and spent school vacations in part working on them to ready them for tenants or the next tenant and they were none the wiser, IMO. In addition, they’re not averse to riding the bus or trolley for work or leisure.
I maintain my stance that the folks with the most “net worth” are usually the ones who took a “brown bag” lunch to work for decades and who give a current public “impression” that they are poor widows living in subsidized housing but nothing could be further from the truth :=]
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]…As a first step, ask for a copy of the lease. Have your agent ask the listing agent about the situation with the tenants. Plan your strategy after you find out more information.
I have had short sales where there were tenants in the home and they always were out prior to escrow. I have heard stories about people that were not able to get them out.[/quote]
This is good advice and I agree with everyone here. Realize that these “tenants” may actually be friends or relatives of the owners who have decided to stop paying rent (or are paying a severely-reduced rent) from the point where they discovered the owners were no longer making their mortgage payments. Or there could be a “tacit agreement” outside of their lease or rental agreement (IF they actually have one) that they pay the reduced amount in cash to the owners or continue to squat as long as possible.
It is VERY difficult to get tenants out who are “renting” for free or far below market. The cost of “cash for keys” or eviction will be on the new buyer who closes with tenants still in occupancy. Tenants who are renting a property that is in default know this and there is nothing standing in the way of them “playing the game” to the very end to receive “cash for keys” (similar to what is offered by lenders to overstaying, deadbeat owners).
As CAR posted, accept no excuses. Your offer (or counter offer if you find out the property is tenant-occupied AFTER you place the initial offer) MUST have a contingency that the property be delivered to you vacant and free of the tenants’ (and landlord’s stored) debris (which could cost you thousands to dispose of). Do the final walk thru as least 3 business days before funding and if the premises are not to your satisfaction per your contract, do NOT close.
Deadbeat “short-sellers” either must adhere to the sales contracts they (and their lender[s]) have accepted or be foreclosed upon. They have no other choice so don’t let them get away with this.
Participant[quote=flu]…FYI: there are two different Michelin Pilot Exaltos. There is the Michelin Exaltos A/S, which is an all-season tire. There is the Michelin Exaltos PE2, which is the summer performance tire. Also, for the Exaltos A/S, there is a $20 price difference between getting an H rated or V rated tire…If you can run H rated, that’s great….[/quote]
I know. I have run the V-rated tires before and they are so soft that they don’t last long. I can also use the H-rated tire.
Consider that I drive an average of 5500 miles on ONE summer road trip :=0
ParticipantThe county PA employee mentioned in the UT story was represented at his CSC Rule VII hearing by Bradley K. Moores, Esq.
http://www.gordonrees.com/lawyers/lawyerBiography.cfm?attyID=bmoores
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/193995
Mr Moores seems to have “employment law” experience with some state tribunals and the EEOC but I have no idea why he put his client on the stand to admit to taking a call from his spouse while on duty and then becoming “aroused” and turning on his cell phone to video to view porn on the job. The department’s “star witness” obviously didn’t know any of this and wasn’t very credible to the commissioner. She stated in her report (vis a vis) that she wouldn’t have even upheld the 90-day suspension had it not been for the employee’s own admissions in his testimony that he was viewing porn on the clock!
I’ve read that this particular classification is NOT unionized and I don’t really know if it is or isn’t. However, I can’t imagine a union rep putting their own “client” on the stand to make those admissions in there!
Without listening to the testimony, we have no idea why Moores decided to do this. It is possible he did it in rebuttal because he believed the department’s witness’ testimony might be considered to be too damaging to his client and didn’t want to let it go.
Interesting case, NSR. Thanks for sharing. Don’t really care about the sex – just the principle.
Participant[quote=flu]Well to complete my week of being ultra cheap FLU, I got my Kumho tires dropshipped to the tire installer locally.
The tire installation ended up being $16/tire ($12 for parts/labor, and $4 for disposal fee/tax/etc)… BUT, then after they were mounted and I drove home, I noticed the installer installed them reversed inside out…. To be fair, Kumho tires don’t have an obvious indicator on which side the tire is on the outside. But anyway, went back, and they fixed it and gave me a install credit.
Then when I was filling out the warranty registration, I was looking up the DOT manufacturing number, and it ends up the ones I got were made back in 2010… Great. So I contact tirerack, who basically told me that the tires were stored properly in their warehouse, rotated, correctly, and that all the other kumho tires they had of the exact same type were made roughly with the same date. They offered to give me a $40 credit total. I am a little annoyed, because tires have a shelf life, but then I already had them mounted and didn’t want to go through the hassle again…and realistically I go through tires in about 2 years anyway…So…. I guess I’ll keep them. But probably won’t do the online purchase again for said reason…
Ended up being
Tires $344
Shipping $58
Install $65
Less
-$50 Manufacture rebate (visa gift card)
-$40 Seller credit
-$36 Install credit for the inside-out mistake$341 total, which isn’t bad for Z rated summer performance tires…
Also got my alignment done…for free. I bought a lifetime alignment back in 2007 for $140, and it was my 4th alignment done today. And when I rotate the tires @ the 1 year mark, I’ll do another alignment again…
As far as the Kumho’s go…handling is pretty good. They aren’t like Michelin Pilots or some of the $200+/tire sticky rubber, but they have pretty decent grip…Then again, I haven’t driven in the rain yet and they are brand new (we’ll see how they hold up). Acceptable for a daily car with spirited driving.[/quote]
flu, where did you sign up for the “lifetime” alignment? I just got my 3rd alignment in 5 years and they are up to $85 ea now for my car (Sears). Four Michelin Pilot Exaltos are $561.33 with tax (+ $7.50 ea fees, $2.99 ea valve stems and $16.68 ea for opt “Road Hazard Plus” agreement) at Sears.
Participant[quote=harvey][quote=no_such_reality]It’s coming to an election season, we’re going to be bombarded with ads from the Teachers unon saying basically ‘protect the children’, sadly, I feel like I read an article every week with a teacher preying on children.[/quote]
And that gets to the crux of it.
I understand the point that an arbitrary list of “malfeasance reports” is probably not very meaningful and could be intended just to stir the pot.
The question is whether this information can be used toward any specific policy decision; at the end of the day is this collection of stories useful for voters who want to make an informed decision on a policy change?
Or is this stuff just mud-slinging?
The answer depends upon whether these stories are examples of problems than be corrected with actual policy changes, or whether they are just “stuff that happens everywhere at work.”
For me, I think stories that emphasize the sheer magnitude of these incidents is illustrative and useful information. Particularly:
– The widespread practice of unions using their power to prevent necessary corrective actions in the public-sector workplace
– The lack of criminal investigation and prosecution of crimes committed by law enforcement and public officials
These are real issues, and there are real policy changes that can be made to correct them. But first the public needs to be made aware of the extent of the problem. If this thread can contribute in small way to that purpose, then I say it’s a good thing.
(But I’d rather not hear about some dude with his pants down.)[/quote]
Yes, most of it is “mud slinging.” Public employees seem to be the current target for the MSM’s drivel. In the private sector where there are no unions, an employee who they “suspected” of doing this will just be walked out, given severance in exchange for a release and not even be given a reason for their discharge. That will never come out because 99% of the time, the employee desperately needs the severance and the employer’s perfunctory telephone or letter “recommendation” and so can’t take the matter any further.
The difference is, in the private sector, the employer would believe their “stupidvisor” who is beholden to them and even has possibly been with the firm since it was created. But the “real” reason for discharge will just be the stupidvisor’s envy of the employee or feeling “threatened” by his/her superior knowledge and skills or remembering that that employee made cheerleader over them in HS or the church choir soprano over them last year. ROTHALYAO, all of this has happened!
Those private sector employees who were coerced by their employers NOT to sign union cards when they had the opportunity sold themselves down the river, IMO. They may as well be working in a “right to work” state.
The unions are there, in part, to prevent unfair, malicious and discriminatory treatment in the workplace of its members. If departments and agencies actually have the documentation and witnesses to prove their charges against the employee, they WIN! But if they’re just trying to get rid of someone currently on the bad side of one or more of their lackeys and/or “coddled old-timers,” they LOSE.
Regarding criminal “investigations” and subsequent charges against local public officials and employees, the VAST MAJORITY of them have never been prosecuted (wisely, by the DA) or the defendants have been acquitted by a jury. IMO, these “witch hunts” are the absolute biggest waste of taxpayer money on the planet and the defendants end up having the “last laugh” when they sue the prosecuting agencies and win an award for their attorney’s fees (paid by taxpayers). More often than not, the “trumped-up charges” were originally “instigated” by a “political rival” of the defendant with a chip on their shoulder as heavy as a boulder :=[
Participant[quote=no_such_reality]CD, it’s not really about the stupid employees. It’s about the handing of the employee’s stupidity and the reality of them being just like the scums in the private sector contrary to the meme of the dedicated sacrificing government worker.
It’s about the handling of the situations, lack of accountability, inability to discipline, a level of evidence needed to take disciplinary action and the failure of the government to pursue that evidence even though they have a high level of proof.
It’s about the perception that it has become so rampant that I feel like I’m reading about it on a daily basis.
Most public employees are good people, doing a good job, there is a subset that isn’t. There is a bizarre nothing to see here attitude, circle the wagons, code of silence that they protect the bad apples with the full clot of their unions.
It’s coming to an election season, we’re going to be bombarded with ads from the Teachers unon saying basically ‘protect the children’, sadly, I feel like I read an article every week with a teacher preying on children.[/quote]NSR, there are absolutely NO “Rules of Evidence” in Kangaroo Court. The hearing officer (5 cmsrs, each appointed by a County Supervisor) decides the disciplinary and selection cases upon their “gut feeling,” the exhibits entered by the parties and their perceived “credibility” of the testimony of the witnesses who were brought in to testify. This “witness” in the public administrator case did not “see” anything and therefore was not a “percipient witness,” so was subject to likely impeachment and being made a fool of by the accused’s union rep or attorney while on the stand. These types of witnesses are likely to waffle and go south on their departments on the stand and only serve to embarrass them and show the cmsr just how low the dept will stoop to try to remove someone that one of their stupidvisors “has a bone to pick with” or feels “threatened by.”
If the department decided to spend big bucks on gathering “evidence” from the paper towels, it would have done them no good. The “subject” is not required to give samples of any bodily fluids and in any case, he wouldn’t. He was not being accused of a crime and even if his employer was a law enforcement agency, this is not a criminal action.
June 8, 2012 at 9:46 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745353Participant[quote=AN][quote=briansd1]BG, for the life of me, I can’t see how you could argue that “stupidvisors” should be paid handsome pensions at retirement.
Are municipal employees highly qualified and deserving of good pay, or are they just the types who go through the motions?[/quote]
If the supervisor are stupid enough to deserve the nickname stupidvisor, I can’t imagine how stupid their average underlings are.[/quote]I don’t know about now, but my experience has been that the “underlings” were frequently much smarter than their “supervisor,” who, by hook or crook, managed to get promoted to that title.
I never stated here that I thought all public employees “deserved” their pensions. There undoubtedly were/are? some “workers” who never should have been hired in the first place, much less “promoted.”
All I’ve stated is that the public pension boards are following the law to the “T” in the management of public pension funds. Those on both sides of the aisle responsible for periodically “executing” the collective bargaining procedure are ALSO following the law. It is a HUGE body of state and Federal law, most of which has been on the books for many decades. Good luck dismantling it. The Piggs are barking up the wrong tree, here. They should be writing their legislators and congress members to learn what can be done and what kind of interest there might be among that representative’s brethren to tackle piecemeal repeal step by step (rewrite). Obviously, some of the law doesn’t need reform. Even if the majority in Sacramento or Wash DC are in agreement, completely eliminating collective bargaining and public defined-benefit plans from the books could well take longer than we all have on this earth.
Consider that cities, counties, states and the Federal government all have their own large legal teams on staff. Ask yourselves why they aren’t suing their respective retirement boards for “improper payouts?” Why aren’t they suing the unions for having a closed shop and “taking unfair advantage” of the poor, ignorant (lol) gov’t reps at the bargaining table? Why aren’t they suing to gut pensions they’ve already agreed to but do not now have the budget to fund? If they’re not suing (perhaps because they don’t have a leg to stand on?), then why is the MSM and public now waxing envious, whining and wringing their hands? It’s a waste of time. If you can’t beat ’em, JOIN ’em!
The only thing that’s changed in CA in this regard over all these decades is that property tax revenues to states, counties and municipalities have been greatly reduced for the last few years, causing those entities to actually have to feed their retirement systems on a much smaller budget. In the years during which there was a boatload of revenue coming in, they didn’t feed their retirement systems at all! Instead they “grew” themselves to an unsustainable level and then had to lay off after the RE bust. This “mindset” by our elected PTB of never bothering to save for a “rainy day” (or not save enough) is but one more shining example of incompetency and poor money management at it’s finest. Vote them off the dias! You’ve got a chance this year to get some of these kooks out of power who have outlived their usefulness long ago, due to lack of term limits.
Now there’s something useful the Piggs can lobby their representatives for – TERM LIMITS for EVERY state and local elected position.
And you can lobby your congress member to bring the issue forward of unfunded Federal mandates on CA Counties to their brethren EVERY SINGLE CHANCE they get. Lobby them to meet with Homeland Security officials and Social Security officials on the plethora of ways non-citizens are able to cross the border illegally or overstay their visas and eventually qualify for SSI to sustain them indefinitely here. These immigrants cost the local, state and federal governments a BUNDLE!
See, you CAN be part of the solution! Start writing letters and stop whining.
-
AuthorPosts
