2 Lauder Lane is up for sale again

Saw this house in 2003, 2004 when it sold in the $4 million range, now it’s asking $8. According to the listing, the  new owners performed  extensive renovations in 2004 and I’m sure they must have since they want to double what they paid. Two acres of great lawn, a fantastic old charmer and Lauder is close to town, so you’ve got location, property and the house all going for you. The town assessor calculates its market value as $3.898 million but what does he know?

We’ll find out, sooner or later.

13 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

13 responses to “2 Lauder Lane is up for sale again

  1. William

    There you go again , giving credit to the town assessor for assumed accuracy in pricing opinions. What ever happened to the opinion that value was what one was willing to pay for it?

    • True, William, but as I wrote last week, I’ve been comparing the 2011 assessment with actual sales prices for a couple of price comparisons I was compiling for clients and was struck how many homes are selling these days for 1.4 the assessment (which is supposed to be 70% of market value, so 1.4 is spot on). Maybe it’s a function that nervous buyers are relying m9ore on the assessment’s opinion of value these days or maybe the 2011 reevaluation was more accurate than usual, but make of it what you will, that’s what’s happening.
      I think – I’m not doing a broad enough analysis to make any sweeping assertions – have to wait for one of the professional number crunchers to takeon that task, but as anecdotal evidence you seek, now you have it.

  2. Row Your Boat

    The assessments are all crap and based on phony Greenwich politics, as usual.

  3. Anonymous

    1.4 works…amazing…

  4. The New Normal

    since it costs nothing to list a house (except for some inconvenience in showing), it’s a nice free option for the seller and hope some uninformed out of town buyer shows up

  5. Anonymous

    I think this is Lauder Way not Lauder Lane

  6. Anonymous

    I agree with william and row. These numbers correlate to what exactly? The shear fact in the high it went for $4 and now selling for $8mil. The answer must be that they borrowed against the house for an insane sum and need to recoup it. The banks gave it away – The real question is, “who is going to pay for the faulty lending or help the owner collect their money from a depreciated asset?” Either way this sucker is going sit during this battle of chicken!

  7. just_looking

    can some quant run the assed numbers v. sales in price bands to see if the higher priced houses are systematically under assessed, in effect lowering their relative taxes?

  8. just_looking

    assessed…not assed

  9. Anonymous

    4 million $$s worth of renovations? Given the assessed price and the 1.4 formula – this brings the house back down to the $4s? Please help, what am I missing?