House buying question

[eljefino]

Co-worker just went through this and got burned. (Rollinsford NH area if you're curious.)

Sold his old house. Crooked realtor only showed his house to one buyer (presumably a friend), who then stalled on the inspections and made him make all these repairs. (By "made him" he must have looked like a softie-- I'd have kicked the buyers to the curb.) Then the buyers finally agreed to sign and he had like 10 days to find an apartment, dump his stuff into storage or give it away. He was apartment hunting and had to keep paying $30-$50 for a "background check" which he believes was just a scam to the landlord. Finally found a 2 br apartment from an old guy who doesn't go through a property management company.

No houses closer to work in his price range. His gain in equity got eaten by the repairs and the commission.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: Studebaker
Have a professional appraise your home and price it slightly below appraisal. Appraiser, not a Realtor.
Have a professional home inspection done, and fix things on the list.
Offer a home warranty.
When it sells, rent.


Worse advice on this thread. Appraisers don't really know what the value of a home is. Guess what happens every time one comes out to the house? We give them a copy of the Purchase and Sale. Then they come up with comps to justify the sale price. They always know what the price is in advance. They're well known for hitting the numbers and they still do even after the rules have changed since the housing crisis. Realtors go out and look at a house without any idea what price they will actually get on the property. Having a home inspection done in advance is often mentioned but no one really does it. Due to disclosure laws, you then have to disclose everything to the buyer if they ask. Home warranties aren't common either, there are many that aren't legit but there's a few companies that are good.

 

[veryHeavy]

Keep the current house and save ~10,000 in settlement costs.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: veryHeavy
Keep the current house and save ~10,000 in settlement costs.


I could, but at some point my son won't be welcome any more. Another ten years and he will have significant mobility issues. He should be out of college by then, which should mean "out of my house", but if he can't visit... that would bother us. As it was, my FIL could not visit, as we could not wheel him around in the house. [Unfortunately he died this week, so no longer an immediate issue.] Muscular dystrophy sucks.

Also, due to space issues, we technically outgrew the house. My son and daughter room together. Not a huge deal, but many people seem to think so. Once teen hormones hit I'm sure they will think it a big deal too.

We made the mistake of buying a "starter" home. Bad decision. I should have been on BITOG back then. Was doing too much with too little guidance.

More information which I didn't want to state, but it explains why I'm cavalier about spending money when I don't need to. "Want" can be a powerful motivator.

 

[Mr Nice]

How much would it cost to bulldoze starter house and rebuild to your needs ?

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
How much would it cost to bulldoze starter house and rebuild to your needs ?


To bulldoze runs into a couple of issues. Current house doesn't meet setback I think. If I redo foundation size I *should* be able to get a variance to allow it to be close to the road, like it is now. If I push it back to meet setback then I need a septic pump, as the house would be lower than the existing septic system. Alternatively: if I build fresh on my unused land, I could continue to live in the old house, but then I'd want to subdivide and sell. But then neither lot would meet min lot size (and I'd need a new well and a new septic); perhaps I could get a variance for that too.

In short, I think bulldozing may cost the same.

 

[eljefino]

You shouldn't have to bulldoze; just keep "one board" and replace the rest one at a time until you have a new house on the same footprint. This saves/ reuses your existing occupancy permit, septic, well, etc. Someone in your town should be able to tell you how it's done.

A disability in your household should let you get all kinds of variances from the town... stuff like wheelchair ramps don't have to meet setback and you could probably pull off radical redesigns like a downstairs bedroom, moving walls around, etc.

 

[Wolf359]

The standard answer applies on doing additions. Most people don't do it because by the time you do the math and factor in all the headaches, cost over runs, change orders etc., it's cheaper to buy another house. Buying another house is like getting rid of an old beater. You can keep an old beater going by replacing the engine and transmission and so forth, but it's typically cheaper to just replace it with something slightly newer. Same issues with a house, by the time you factor in permits, getting bids, living through construction and the bill for all that, it's usually better to just buy another house. Financing also plays a factor, if you're going to do a tear down, that's a construction to permanent loan which typically cost more than a regular loan. Most people don't do custom builds unless it's for a very good reason like real estate prices are too high or they really like the location. Nationally the cost of construction doesn't vary that much so my guess is that NH probably has cheaper houses. Your addition is basically new construction which always cost more than an older home.

 

[eljefino]

Well and it depends on what your lot is worth vs your house.

A cheapo postwar ranch in Framingham MA in the 90's was a $100k house on a $200k lot and probably twice that now. That would be worth bulldozing and starting over with a two story on the same foundation if one could get the permission to do so.

Where I live in Maine and probably where OP lives, the land is worth $35-40k so most of the money is in the house.

 

[Oregoonian]

Originally Posted By: Wolf359

Why list the house "high"....if it won't sell. Listing high, is never a good marketing move. It keeps people away who could afford the home if the home was listed close to the true selling price.

I would suggest waiting until you find the home you want...and then immediatly list the home your in. Make the purchase of the home contingent upon the sale of yours. This would seave $$$ (rent) and effort (moving twice).

Fred,
Retired Real Estate Agent


That use to be a standard move back in the old days, but now no one wants to accept an offer that's contingent on the sale of a house. Even if they do, they usually put in a kick out clause which basically requires you to remove your contingency or withdraw from the sale if they get a better offer.

Agree with the idea of listing the home at a reasonable price which the home will sell...BUT DISAGREE on purchasing a home that is contingent upon the sale of purchasers home.

I was a Washington State Realtor for over 13 years (retired now), and sold a number of homes over the years with the above contingency attached. Most of them closed, sometimes with a short extension, which both parties agreed to.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: Oregoonian
I was a Washington State Realtor for over 13 years (retired now), and sold a number of homes over the years with the above contingency attached. Most of them closed, sometimes with a short extension, which both parties agreed to.


I've been a broker for the last 10 years. Always discouraged it and ran into it a few times where the sale was contingent on the seller finding suitable housing. I've been at the other end where my buyer got in through the kick out clause and the person who had to sell their home lost out on the deal. They were usually willing to pay a little more too. So you can also think of it as costing more if you make the purchase contingent on the sale of a home. It was probably more common 10 years ago than now, but now the market here has shifted, it's more of a seller's market than a buyer's market. I think just having a contingency on the sale of home in a seller's market doesn't work.