Ingelside - south of Geneva Ave, west of San Jose Ave. An area that I confess I don't get to much, but went to 32 Josiah at the request of a client.
32 Josiah is a Banked owned REO asking only $302,000. Here's a walk thru of this 1 bedroom Single Family Home.
Rough shape, aye? Meanwhile in 2004 it couldn't sell at $450,000, but later that year when they dropped it to $399,000 it sold for $509,000. Ouch. An unfortunate over-bid story for someone.
Now at $302,000 representing a 40% drop if it sells at that price... and indeed it's apparently gone in and out of contract 3 times. Unfortunately to me that means serious flaws are probably being found during inspections, so it could sell for less.
Meanwhile Ingelide only has 6 Single Family homes with 2 or fewer bedrooms and 1 bathroom that have sold in the past 6 months.... only 1 per month, however, there are 8 homes currently in contract. That's smoking hot. 5 are listed for sale including 32 Josiah.
Showing posts with label san francisco reo's. Show all posts
Showing posts with label san francisco reo's. Show all posts
3/17/10
Out from the Shadows: an REO hits the market
1817 California #2E was in the "shadows" for over a year.
Per tax records 1817 California St #2E received a Notice of Default in February 2008 and a Notice of Trustee's sale in May 2008. But not until September 2008 did it get recorded as a Foreclosure. Whether one counts the NOD or the NOT or the REO as "shadow inventory", it's still a long, long time from yesterday when #2E hit the San Francisco MLS. There was an attempt to sell as a Short Sale leading up to the REO recording. That was for $498,000 so we'll see if the new price of $454,900 makes a difference.
The last MLS sale was 2005 when it sold for $650,000. It's a 2 bedroom 1.5 bath and per tax records only 787 SqFt. The 2005 listing claimed it was 1,000 SqFt. That's a huge issue for 2BR's. Under 800 SqFt would feel tiny whereas 1,000 SqFt would be acceptable.
But the kicker here is that a bank held onto this puppy for over a year. And THAT is why some fear shadow inventory. What took them so long, and do they have a lot more of them?????
Per tax records 1817 California St #2E received a Notice of Default in February 2008 and a Notice of Trustee's sale in May 2008. But not until September 2008 did it get recorded as a Foreclosure. Whether one counts the NOD or the NOT or the REO as "shadow inventory", it's still a long, long time from yesterday when #2E hit the San Francisco MLS. There was an attempt to sell as a Short Sale leading up to the REO recording. That was for $498,000 so we'll see if the new price of $454,900 makes a difference.
The last MLS sale was 2005 when it sold for $650,000. It's a 2 bedroom 1.5 bath and per tax records only 787 SqFt. The 2005 listing claimed it was 1,000 SqFt. That's a huge issue for 2BR's. Under 800 SqFt would feel tiny whereas 1,000 SqFt would be acceptable.
But the kicker here is that a bank held onto this puppy for over a year. And THAT is why some fear shadow inventory. What took them so long, and do they have a lot more of them?????
3/4/10
Another Watermark Penthouse REO
The sky is falling - or sky high "Penthouse" condo prices at 501 Beale St, San Francisco's "Watermark".
Time to grab my video camera for another Watermark Penthouse walk thru. 501 Beale St has yet another REO (banked owned foreclosure) Penthouse - this time #PH-1E, and this time asking $1,224,000. As you may recall #PH-1B was "only" asking $893,475 a little over a month ago. That just closed Escrow for about that price.
The trouble with these "penthouses" is they aren't even the top floor. #2E and #2B are above #1E and #1B. Notice just on the video's first frame the upper balcony (probably #PH-2E's) - your neighbor in the "real" penthouse sits on top of you. Despite that, according to tax records #PH-1E sold for $1,523,000 in 2007.
On the other hand, #PH-1E is clearly superior to #PH-1B because it is a corner unit and it's about 350 SqFt larger - at least according to tax records. But I'm still not buying the $1.224M price. A 30% drop from 2007 would be a $1,066,000 price today, and that's much more like it.
Time to grab my video camera for another Watermark Penthouse walk thru. 501 Beale St has yet another REO (banked owned foreclosure) Penthouse - this time #PH-1E, and this time asking $1,224,000. As you may recall #PH-1B was "only" asking $893,475 a little over a month ago. That just closed Escrow for about that price.
The trouble with these "penthouses" is they aren't even the top floor. #2E and #2B are above #1E and #1B. Notice just on the video's first frame the upper balcony (probably #PH-2E's) - your neighbor in the "real" penthouse sits on top of you. Despite that, according to tax records #PH-1E sold for $1,523,000 in 2007.
On the other hand, #PH-1E is clearly superior to #PH-1B because it is a corner unit and it's about 350 SqFt larger - at least according to tax records. But I'm still not buying the $1.224M price. A 30% drop from 2007 would be a $1,066,000 price today, and that's much more like it.
Beacon REO: 250 King St #810
250 King St #810, The Beacon, a banked own "REO" San Francisco condo with a past due offer date. What happened?
Per the San Francisco MLS "All offers due 2/25/10 @ 5pm". Yet the condo is still "Active" on the MLS a week later. I noticed it because even for The Beacon it looks like a "deal".
In 2006 it sold for $675,000 - this for a 1 bed, 1 bath with 822 SqFt. I called that "north end of town pricing" and told my clients when I could not make sense of values. But now? At $408,900 I would have at least expected someone to put in a low bid. So either we have "offer deadline-itis" where everyone stays away because they don't want to compete for fear of over-paying or simply wasting time. Or we have an out of town Listing Agent without direct access to the MLS who can't or won't get the status changed a week after accepting an offer.
But if you're in the market for a 1 Bedroom near AT&T Park, let me know and we'll give them an offer appropriate for a failed offer deadline.
Per the San Francisco MLS "All offers due 2/25/10 @ 5pm". Yet the condo is still "Active" on the MLS a week later. I noticed it because even for The Beacon it looks like a "deal".
In 2006 it sold for $675,000 - this for a 1 bed, 1 bath with 822 SqFt. I called that "north end of town pricing" and told my clients when I could not make sense of values. But now? At $408,900 I would have at least expected someone to put in a low bid. So either we have "offer deadline-itis" where everyone stays away because they don't want to compete for fear of over-paying or simply wasting time. Or we have an out of town Listing Agent without direct access to the MLS who can't or won't get the status changed a week after accepting an offer.
But if you're in the market for a 1 Bedroom near AT&T Park, let me know and we'll give them an offer appropriate for a failed offer deadline.
2/16/10
St. Francis Wood Banked Owned REO
St. Francis Wood, known for it's mansions, large lush green lots and exclusive family neighborhood, now has a Banked owned REO.
161 San Pablo Ave, taken back by Washington Mutual just 2 weeks ago, just got listed on the San Francisco MLS.
161 San Pablo Ave is a 4 bedroom, 3.5 bath 3,740 SqFt home on 4,316 SqFt lot. The home was built in 1956 so it doesn't have the character or charm of the vast majority of homes which were built in the 1920's (with a smattering of teen's and 30's). But this boxy-ish home is large, remodeled and has "panoramic ocean views".
161 San Pablo Ave, taken back by Washington Mutual just 2 weeks ago, just got listed on the San Francisco MLS.
161 San Pablo Ave is a 4 bedroom, 3.5 bath 3,740 SqFt home on 4,316 SqFt lot. The home was built in 1956 so it doesn't have the character or charm of the vast majority of homes which were built in the 1920's (with a smattering of teen's and 30's). But this boxy-ish home is large, remodeled and has "panoramic ocean views".
*Currently asking $1,485,000 - just shy of $400 per SqFt which is off the charts low
*Taken back by the bank for $1,748,904
*Listed at the exact wrong time - Sept 2008 just as the financial crisis was becoming national news - at an outrageous $2,650,000 price.
*Re-listed 3 other times with 2 other agents going through price drops of approx. $100,000 along the way until it's last date and price just 3 weeks ago for $2,174,999.
*Sold in early 2006 for $1,825,000 after 7 months on the market starting in June 2005 at $2,390,000.
So it's been a long ride down to $1,485,000. However, as shocking as it seems for St. Francis Wood to have an REO, this home appears to be 15% to possibly 25% under priced. I'll go see it to confirm my opinion asap, but I'd be shocked if this home doesn't fetch at least $1.7M, and $1.9M seems more like it. The only caveats is that it's an average to undersized lot for the neighborhood - many are 1,000 SqFt larger with a number of double sized lots, and that the 1956 era look (and often quality) isn't what buyers in this hood are looking for. But check back in for a video walk through.
2/9/10
Trouble at San Francisco's Brannan?
219, 229 and 239 Brannan, the three towers known as The Brannan sports some interesting stats of late:
1 bedroom condos at The Brannan appear to be in trouble. Only 1 has sold in the past 6 months, and 1 in the 6 months prior to that. Yet there are 5 For-Sale right now or a 2 1/2 year supply. Part of the problem is that 3 of the 5 are "distress" sales. Both 219 Brannan #1C and 229 Brannan St #3H are REO's (Banked Owned) and 229 Brannan St #7G is listed as a Short Sale and has an recent Notice of Default filed against it - a NOD is a precursor to foreclosure.
2 bedroom condos at The Brannan are doing much better. 10 have sold in the past 12 months (4 in the past 6 months) with 1 in contract now and 5 For-Sale. So essentially a 6 month supply. The one in contract is Banked Owned, and interestingly one of the 2BR's For-Sale is owned by one of the most prolific Listing Agent's in the building. Does that mean something? There's no such thing as "insider trading" in Real Estate... but does he see a future for the building that he doesn't like???
1 bedroom condos at The Brannan appear to be in trouble. Only 1 has sold in the past 6 months, and 1 in the 6 months prior to that. Yet there are 5 For-Sale right now or a 2 1/2 year supply. Part of the problem is that 3 of the 5 are "distress" sales. Both 219 Brannan #1C and 229 Brannan St #3H are REO's (Banked Owned) and 229 Brannan St #7G is listed as a Short Sale and has an recent Notice of Default filed against it - a NOD is a precursor to foreclosure.
2 bedroom condos at The Brannan are doing much better. 10 have sold in the past 12 months (4 in the past 6 months) with 1 in contract now and 5 For-Sale. So essentially a 6 month supply. The one in contract is Banked Owned, and interestingly one of the 2BR's For-Sale is owned by one of the most prolific Listing Agent's in the building. Does that mean something? There's no such thing as "insider trading" in Real Estate... but does he see a future for the building that he doesn't like???
1/22/10
Deal of the Week: 555 4th St 1BR for $405,000
Deal of the Week: Banked Owned REO at The Palms:
555 4th St #625 1BR for $405,000
Per tax records 555 4th St #625 (The Palms) was purchased for $598,000 in 2006. It was then taken back by the Bank for $510,698 this past October. Listed by an out of area agent (don't get me started at that topic) for $450,000 not even 3 weeks later (well, a fast bank turn around at least) it went into contract one month later. But yesterday, it came back onto the MLS for $405,000 representing a 33% loss from it's '06 purchase price. Pretty typical of what I'm seeing at The Palms and just about all of the newer buildings in the area.
6th floor is over the roof tops looking across 4th Street where this unit and this balcony face.
555 4th St #625 1BR for $405,000
Per tax records 555 4th St #625 (The Palms) was purchased for $598,000 in 2006. It was then taken back by the Bank for $510,698 this past October. Listed by an out of area agent (don't get me started at that topic) for $450,000 not even 3 weeks later (well, a fast bank turn around at least) it went into contract one month later. But yesterday, it came back onto the MLS for $405,000 representing a 33% loss from it's '06 purchase price. Pretty typical of what I'm seeing at The Palms and just about all of the newer buildings in the area.
6th floor is over the roof tops looking across 4th Street where this unit and this balcony face.
1/21/10
Penthouse 1B at The Watermark - REO update
San Francisco's "Watermark" at 501 Beale St. Penthouse 1B, a banked owned REO listed at $893,475 just went into contract.
Video walk through.
Update:
I just heard from the Listing Agent that the Bank accepted an offer.No change yet on the MLS. er, now "Pending" as of Jan 22, 2010. Nor No info on who bought it, or the purchase price. (yet - stay tuned)
It's a wonder anyone found this listing and that they got an offer.
Video walk through.
Update:
I just heard from the Listing Agent that the Bank accepted an offer.
- Some fun facts about this listing:
- an out of area Agent based in the East Bay
- They enter this condo into the MLS as a Single Family home
- Only have 1 really bad photo of the exterior
- Listed as not having parking
- No mention of the Condo's best feature - a large balcony off the living room with pano views
It's a wonder anyone found this listing and that they got an offer.
7/18/09
Banked Owned REO properties in San Francisco - update
Banked Owned REO properties in San Francisco - update:
Prices are down in San Francisco... but is the sky falling (yet)?
A quick search of San Francisco REO's in the MLS reviews only 29 Condos, and 31 Single Family Homes are banked owned. Meanwhile there are 578 homes for-sale in San Francisco, and 668 Condos for sale in San Francisco. So roughly 5% of San Francisco properties (excludes TIC's, Lofts, Coops and multi-unit buildings) are banked owned.
Here are your San Francisco Banked Owned REO reports:
* 29 Banked Owned REO condos in San Francisco (report is available for 30 days from July 18th 2009
* 31 Banked Owned REO Single Family Homes in San Francisco (report good for 30 days from July 18, 2009
Prices are down in San Francisco... but is the sky falling (yet)?
A quick search of San Francisco REO's in the MLS reviews only 29 Condos, and 31 Single Family Homes are banked owned. Meanwhile there are 578 homes for-sale in San Francisco, and 668 Condos for sale in San Francisco. So roughly 5% of San Francisco properties (excludes TIC's, Lofts, Coops and multi-unit buildings) are banked owned.
Here are your San Francisco Banked Owned REO reports:
* 29 Banked Owned REO condos in San Francisco (report is available for 30 days from July 18th 2009
* 31 Banked Owned REO Single Family Homes in San Francisco (report good for 30 days from July 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
