Sale, Accepted offers

Three more.

12 Mary Lane - who took this picture, and why?

12 Mary Lane – who took this picture, and why?

12 Mary Lane (NoPo Riverside), sold for $755,000.  Started at $859,000 in 2011. I like its ending price better.

2 Stanwich Lane, asked $2.5 originally but dropped to $1.995. Good house, really convenient location, so this one’s easy to understand.

Havemeyer Place

Havemeyer Place

And, finally, 12 Havemeyer Place (that’s the Greenwich Havemeyer, not NoPo Old Greenwich) has seemingly found a buyer. Great redo of an older home, and in what I’d call central Greenwich. Last price asked was $1.797, it started at $2.5 million in 2009 and when it didn’t sell after a year the builder raised the price to $3 million. That’s a tactic that usually doesn’t turn out well, as here.


Filed under Uncategorized

10 responses to “Sale, Accepted offers

  1. Conflict of interest?

    I saw 12 Havemeyer Place back in 2009 – called the listing agent direct after seeing the house online.

    He forgot to mention that he was part owner of the house (along with the builder) – a fact I found out a few weeks later when a Bloomberg article about Greenwich real estate featured the house and mentioned the owner by name.

    • The listing fully discloses that connection so there’s nothing at all wrong with that behavior. But it serves you right for not using a buyer’s agent – you want the facts about a property, go to the right place, and that’s not the seller or his agent, regardless of whether they’re one and the same.

      • Conflict of interest?

        You are 100% correct and it was a lesson learned

      • Walt

        Dude –
        You do realize the comment “You are 100% correct..” was directed at you, right? YES YOU!!!
        You probably never heard that said before. Am I right again? I think so!!
        It means you – yes you – actually wrote something someone agrees with!! 100%!!
        Maybe the world really is ending on Friday? What more proof do we all need?
        Your Pal,

  2. Anonymous

    When a seller is an agent, what’s the big deal? Even if it’s a disclosure issue (which it is), I don’t see what the ultimate problem is other than somehow feeling slighted in some way or a misplaced sense of deception. Really, who gives a ^$@! who owns it? Price is the final arbiter of truth. What’s a buyer’s agent ultimately going to do in that situation, tell the buyer that oh by the way the seller is the owner? Wow, great info, next thing you know you’ll tell me it’s noon when the clock strikes twelve. Ultimately, I would argue that such a situation is one less layer of b.s. you really have to deal with as a buyer, and you can even go one step further and squeeze the seller for an extra 2.5% (or 3%, depending on your locale) price reduction, arguing they’d have to pay it one way or the other.

    I’ve bought a property in a dual agency situation, and frankly it was among the smoothest transactions I’ve ever had. My calls went straight to the owner/agent, nothing lost in translation, no ridiculous back-n-forth or miscommunication.

    What am I missing?

    • Catch a Falling Knife

      you’re right it’s not a big deal, which is why if an agent simply discloses immediately upon introduction there are no perceived conflicts of interest

      I could see how the buyer would seem to feel “duped” finding out from a news article rather than from the horse’s mouth

    • AndyD

      I couldn’t agree more. It is even better that the seller was the agent and a builder, easier to negotiate with and try and save yourself 2.5%.

      A buyers agent is worth $35k to tell you that “critical” piece of information that the listing agent is the owner? that is downright laughable.

      Hire a top notch building inspector and save yourself the $$$ of a buyers agent (assuming you already know the town).

      • Andy, I am awed by your perspicacity; congratulations man, you’ve seen right through the charade and gotten to the heart of the matter. Armed with a GPS, who needs a realtor to find an address? Just swagger up the sidewalk and deal with the owner mano-a-mano, head-to=head, and beat him into reasonableness, you brilliant fellow you.

        Listing agents swoon when they encounter a man like you, Andy, and many’s the call they’ve made to their client with the frightening news: “there’s a big swinging dick in town, and we’d better give him what he wants!” Total capitulation, once they take your measure.

        Here’s a secret: listing agents laugh – literally laugh at buyers who insist on representing themselves, and they regale the rest of us with tales of people like you. But I’m sure that’s just to mask their feelings of deep insecurity at having been beaten at their game by a true professional buyer.

        Once again, well done, man.

        • AndyD

          I think you are missing my point entirely. I 100% understand that people without a buyers agent, perhaps most of them, could benefit from having one. I further understand they deserve everything they get and to be the butt of the real agents parties. i will let your comment that you somehow think i’m one of these people slide because you are in the hospital today (and i wish you a happy, speed recovery in time for the holidays).

          My point is, if you
          A.) have spent a large portion of your life in a town and know its ins and outs well (maybe you are upgrading within town as many of us do or plan to do)
          B.) follow the real estate market closely and track property transactions in the paper versus original listing price/date (e.g. on zillow, not the listings themselves)
          C.) are able to use the internet and very easily find out who lives in the house that is for sale and find out some more information about them (motivated seller or not)
          D.) have the IQ and gumption to be a financial negotiator

          Then what is the value of the buyers agent other than getting you access to the house? i would like to think that most buyers in Gtown have A-D above down pat, maybe i’m wrong.

          Get well soon please!

    • Anonymust

      it should be pretty obvious that the reason the agent didn’t disclose upfront being part owner is bc he wanted to keep the entire commission – which is why (it sounds at least) the first commenter seemed distrustful and thought there was a conflict of interest