Back from showing houses

My clients found one “intriguing” , but the other, priced as though there was a house on it, was disappointing. I’d last seen it in 2002, and I remembered it as a decent house on wonderful land. It’s been rented out since then and, thirteen years of neglect later, the house is worth nothing. Termites have invaded the interior, window seals have failed, water stains indicate a roof failure, and so on. The owner made a costly mistake leaving this house to deteriorate because the house is far beyond being salvageable – or, it makes no economic sense to restore it, so the only value left is the land. That would be fine, if it were priced to attract a builder or someone interested in building anew, but for clients like mine, looking for a house, it has no appeal. I think that, for perhaps $25,000 saved on maintenance in the past years, the owner lost $500,000 in value. That was a short-sighted decision.

11 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

11 responses to “Back from showing houses

  1. Big Mike

    Have you had a chance to tour 10 Ester in OG?

  2. OG gal

    where was the neglected house?

  3. real estate junkie

    I saw 10 Ester. Overpriced by a good deal. Should be in the 3.7 range I think.

  4. Anonymous

    Can you give the price range of the mid-country ignored house you commented about?