A reader asked about a property transaction reported in the GT today showing this place going to RBS for a buck. “Is that a foreclosure?” he asked? Yup.
The unfortunate homeowner originally bought the place (across the street from the water so never worth all that much) for $739,000 in 2000 and must have run into financial trouble in 2006 because he put it up for sale at $1.595 with the notation that “seller eager for expeditious closing”. My advice, which he obviously didn’t get from his broker, is that if you’re in trouble, don’t mess around with a bad price. In any event, it didn’t sell and I’m pretty sure it went over to the bank awhile ago. At least, Weikert was trying to sell it as land for $949 and showed the owner as “retained property” which sounds like a bank/owner to me. That was back in November ’06 so perhaps the foreclosure dragged on but it now officially belongs to the bank. Lucky bank.
6 responses to “40 Byram Shore goes to Royal Bank of Scotland”
How many houses are for sale on Byram Shore?
It feels like a lot, given the # of posts about that street. A foreclosure property will bring down the price for however many there are for sale.
Is 48 Sunshine, which sold to Deutsche Bank for $1, also a foreclosure?
Byram Shore road is funny. Huge premium for the water side, but no one wants to live on the non-water side because it the bad part of town.
You often see property transfers reported as “$1 and other valuable consideration” and, in the past, these were weak attempts to protect the privacy of the parties involved (you could always go to Town Hall and compute the sales price from the conveyance tax reported). But if the buyer is a bank then yes, that’s a property owner giving up title to his bank.
Could these sales to RBS and Deutsche Bank be employers buying an employee’s home if they are being transferrred (back to Scotland or Germany) rather than a foreclosure?
No, they both had los pendens filed against them-hardly what you’d do to a valued employee.