Listed with New Light Realty for $150,000 on October 12, according to the MLS the sale of 1358 Shafter closed escrow on November 19 with a reported contract price of $165,000. Today, it’s back on the market with Prudential California Realty and asking $269,950.
It doesn’t appear as though any work was done on the property inbetween, but at the very least a few of the listing photos were cleaned. From the October listing:
A couple of previous sales when the house was likely in better shape: $360,000 in June 2003 and then $630,000 in July 2005. And sorry folks, “Home does not qualify for FHA.”
UPDATE: As a plugged-in reader notes, the gas meter might be new.
∙ Listing: 1358 Shafter Avenue (4/3) – $269,950 [MLS]
My EYES!! There should be a warning before clicking on the MLS photos.
Actually, it’s like a horrific accident – I just couldn’t look away. It’s Satan’s crack house..
Someone had better alert the Historical Preservation Committee. There’s vintage graffiti in the attic!!
This property has a new gas meter. A SHINY NEW METER! No apples arguments here; clearly there’s $100K worth of updates since October.
Great re-litter pics. After flipping through them you can almost smell the place.
This place sold for $630K in 2005? WOW. With no mocking tone whatosever, someone definitely overpaid for this POS. The lender got the shaft(er). Satan’s crack house is right.
The southeast part of SF probably saw the biggest runup of anywhere in the country. I wonder if there’s data for that somewhere, putting neighborhoods of various cities together.
This one is for all those who only say that socketsite only profiles high-end and luxury properties &hellip
Is the trash out front included?
DBI complaint in March:
“The house is inhabitable – structure is leaning towards neighbor. Front is tearing away from building – unsafe.”
http://dbiweb.sfgov.org/dbipts/default.aspx?page=AddressComplaint&ComplaintNo=200996548
^ I assume they meant “uninhabitable.”
that $630K sale in 2006 smells like mortgage fraud.
seller-buyer team secures loan, takes off with cash, and abandons property. crackheads move in and redecorate.
just guessing here, but it would be hard to imagine that someone buys a $630k house and then lets the house fall into this state.
The southeast part of SF probably saw the biggest runup of anywhere in the country.
It’s an awfully big country. I thought all real estate was “local.” How would you have any idea what was happening in every other neighborhood in the United States of America? You couldn’t possibly track that even if you spent all your time doing it.
You can put lipstick (or red paint) on a pig…
It’s an awfully big country. I thought all real estate was “local.” How would you have any idea what was happening in every other neighborhood in the United States of America? You couldn’t possibly track that even if you spent all your time doing it
Well yeah, sure. But if you had cooperating MLS’s submitting data to a compiling site it would be possible.
All real estate is local. If you heard about a larger runup than the 400+ percent in the Shafter property, do let me know. In most of the country throughout this whole shift, and even today, 600K buys you a mansion. Four hundred and 300 percent runups were not uncommon in SF D-10. I don’t know whether there was bigger runups in other cities. I said “probably.” It seems unlikely that such runups occured many other places at all. But I’m wondering. OK? Jeez. Excuuuuuuse me.
I think some of the outerlying areas of LA had similar runups to what anonn is saying for D-10 (some towns in Riverside/San Bernardino County, and some places in LA County like Lancaster/Palmdale, and parts of the Santa Clarita Valley too I think). I wonder if parts of the Sacramento area did too — I certainly couldn’t figure out why Sacramento’s median housing price was so ridiculously high.
It’s possible that parts of the Miami area also saw similar runups, and also Vegas and Phoenix.
If you look at Case-Shiller, it’s pretty clear that “low tier” on Case-Shiller tended to have the highest percentage increases in the recent boom, so not surprising if D-10 was one of the most bubbly.
It seems unlikely that such runups occured many other places at all.
It also seems unlikely that such runups would have occurred here. And yet they did (taking your claim at face value). Go figure.
What Milkshake said.
What is this talk of a 300% runup?
Even if the property did sell for $630k in 2005, that would have been a 75% increase over the 2003 sale. (630-360)/360 = .75
Looking at the title documents, says that didn’t even happen.
Here’s what property shark says about the 7/28/2005 transaction
Amount: $630k
1st Party: Charles, John
2nd Party: Charles, John
So it seems the most we can say is that it appraised for $630k. I guess it’s possible that no appraisal was even done.
I don’t think Vegas did, I know several people who own there. For Sacramento think in terms of the dollar difference at play here too. Could there possibly have been a 450K swing in Sac? I doubt it. My gut is that this phenomenon would have necessarily been kept largely to worse areas of bigger more expensive cities.
Yeah, “runup” isn’t apt for the 400% comment since the last sale was 360. More like a run down. But I’ve looked at this. There are all sorts of houses in D10 that went from the mid 100s, 2s or 3s to the 5s, 6s and even 7s in a short span of years.
Can anyone make out the writing on the bathroom mirror?
^^Nice, catch, eddy… I didn’t notice that the first time I looked. (but btw, I think you mean window, not mirror)
I can’t make it out, but I think it mihgt go something like this: “only if you evict those (or these?)snitch(?) the_____(?) -____(?)”
Anyone else want to give it a shot?
Too funny eddy…
It says “If you sh*t then flush the toilet. Thanks”
I can’t read the first word.
I don’t think Vegas did, I know several people who own there. For Sacramento think in terms of the dollar difference at play here too.
The area you’re referring to accounts for perhaps 1% of the SF Bay Area population! The vast majority of Bay Area residents have no idea exactly how much Hunters Pt Bayview properties did or did not appreciate from 2000-2005. You’d have to talk to hundreds of randomly sampled owners in Vegas and again in Sacto and again in every other city affected by the bubble to have a reasonable basis for your claim.
Goodness, people are so narrow-minded. Whatever they’re observing must be specific to our own Super-Duper-Very-Special city, because it’s Special, and similar things just don’t happen Anywhere Else. That’s how Super Special we are.
My gut is that this phenomenon would have necessarily been kept largely to worse areas of bigger more expensive cities.
Fantastic. My gut tells me that I had a moderate sized lunch today and nothing more.
According to Messrs Case and Schiller the low tier of the SF metro area went from:
68 in 1995 to
276 in 2005 (+300%) to
111 in 2009 (-60%).
Seems reasonably consistent with District 10.
I’m talking about a much smaller time period, say 2003 to 2006 or so, though. It’s pretty remarkable. I don’t deny that it might have happened elsewhere. But again, 600K, then and now, could buy quite a lot in Sac or Vegas. The swing was stark. Why combative buzzwords and a familar refrain are needed to express a contrary opinion is not known. Unless some people just suck at writing. That’s probably it.
Las Vegas:
Per Messrs Case and Schiller,
89 in 1995 with a steady climb to
124 in 2002 and then a leap to
234 in 2005 and now back to
106 in 2009
Trent Zhu All his Bayview listings are
4 bedroom 3 bath house, no matter what size the house.
FAA wrote:
> This property has a new gas meter. A SHINY NEW METER!
> No apples arguments here; clearly there’s $100K worth of
> updates since October.
The new gas meter could have cost $1,000…
I had a couple working class guys living in one of my units for the past couple years who never got gas service from PG&E. I think they just did it to save money since the gas was just for the heater (no Wolf ranges in my rentals) and it does not get that cold in Sacramento when the apartments above you, below you and on both sides of you are heated.
This summer a couple girls moved in to the unit and put the PG&E in their name. A couple weeks ago they called my on site manager to ask how to turn on the heater and he discovered that PG&E had removed the gas meter for that unit. PG&E told me that it would cost $350 to install a new meter (I got them to waive the installation charge after I filed a complaint on the PUC web site). PG&E also told me that I would need a plumber to pressure test the line and I would have to get the city to sign off on the pressure test. My regular plumber was busy on a project so I called around for bids to pressure test the line. The bids to JUST test the line were $340, $550 and $820 PLUS they wanted extra to pull the permit and get the city to sign off on the job.
I ended up driving up to Sacramento myself with my set of Ridgid aluminum pipe wrenches, my gas line pressure gauge (that cost about $10) and an air compressor. It took maybe 10 minutes to unscrew the section of pipe from the wall to the meter, screw on the pressure gauge in to the line and pump it up to 10 psi. I drove down to get the permit myself and my manager said that the city signed off on the line for the new meter the next day.
P.S. The $820 bid to pressure test the gas line was from a company called Same Day Service Plumbing
http://www.samedayserviceplumbing.com/
They would not give a price over the phone and after coming out to talk to my manager they tried to get him to pay a $45 trip charge after he told them that $820 to pressure test a line was not even close to reality.
This is a really great listing for 2 reasons (errr… questions):
1) Does it really matter what the previous owner paid?
2) Following many Socketsite posts where there is a (Insert percentage) decline from one transaction to the next, and implied percentage market decline; if this sells more than the previous sale does this mean the market is up (insert percentage)?
“1) Does it really matter what the previous owner paid?”
Gee, when the market was up by 10-20% per year, every realtor in town was shouting that information from the rooftops. Buy, sell, repeat, retire. It seemed to matter to you guys then, for some inexplicable reason. And in a world of 30% own payments, it might matter to some people. So, the answer to that question is yes.
“if this sells more than the previous sale does this mean the market is up (insert percentage)?”
Do you mean the sales price, as reported by one of the most dishonest organizations on the planet? Where $100K in cash back to the buyer was included in the sales price and the realtor was happy to report the total price as the sale price? Where people pay separately for ‘furnishings’ to hide the actual sale price, and the realtors happily go along? Where years of HOA is included in a condo price and the realtor reports the total price as the sale price? Hard to tell, Paul, hard to tell.
If the market was going up 10-20% per year why would you sell? I don’t understand that logic, since transaction costs were at least 6%. Why would I not hold on forever if 10-20% per year were true? If you want to follow stupid advice, then who do you really have to blame?
I didn’t know this one had HOAs, must be nice ammenties in that community.
Honestly does it really matter what the previous owner paid as to the current market value of the property? My answer is: NO!
Does one price point suggest the status of an entire market? My answer: NO!
Can you get good deals in a good or bad market? My answer: Yes!
What’s a good deal and what’s a bad one? My answer: It’s relative to the market as it is today, right now!
Can you find good deals without a Realtor? My answer: Probably, but then why haven’t you gotten one yet?
Should you hire a good Realtor? My answer: Yes!
Personally I think the buyer at $165k overpaid, so it doesn’t matter what the next guy pays or whether he has a realtor. More important if he has a gun.
Do you mean the sales price, as reported by one of the most dishonest organizations on the planet? Where $100K in cash back to the buyer was included in the sales price and the realtor was happy to report the total price as the sale price? Where people pay separately for ‘furnishings’ to hide the actual sale price, and the realtors happily go along? Where years of HOA is included in a condo price and the realtor reports the total price as the sale price? Hard to tell, Paul, hard to tell.
Isn’t there some depressing economic news to cackle over? Take off the aluminum foil helmet. You’ve got work to do.
I love the tri-color toilet.
That’s probably it.
Yes, that’s probably it.
I’d point out the irony of a guy who claims that all RE is local making blanket statements about every other RE market in the country based on what he’s heard from “several people” who bought in Vegas, but I don’t want to distract from that epic slugfest you’re having defending the solvency of the FHA. You’ve truly outdone yourself on that thread.
I’d point out the irony of a guy who claims that all RE is local making blanket statements about every other RE market in the country based on what he’s heard from “several people” who bought in Vegas, but I don’t want to distract from that epic slugfest you’re having defending the solvency of the FHA. You’ve truly outdone yourself on that thread
Blanket statements supposing all knowing? I plainly said these were musings. You’re just a bitter person. I thought the local phenomenon interesting, made a point about something I think, and mused about where else it might have happened. I took the 600K figure and tried to apply it to what I know about Sac, Vegas, and any other area where I have r.e. knowledge. (And since I’m in the business, I always look at prices in localities — 600K would have bought a lot of NICE house almost everywhere all through the bust. Do you deny that?) But of course, all you wanted to do was bash me. It’s an interesting little story but you don’t want to talk about it. Typical. You’re free to crawl back under your rock and go away, you cowardly nothing.
“For Sacramento think in terms of the dollar difference at play here too. Could there possibly have been a 450K swing in Sac?”
[standard caveats for medians, but they’re at least helpful here]
There was a bit of a swing in Sacramento. Median prices at the beginning of 2002 were around $180K. I see a peak of $440K (http://www.housingtracker.net/asking-prices/sacramento-california) My guess is that lower-end Sacramento probably more than doubled, whereas high-end Sacramento didn’t double.
Vegas was around $350K, back to $140K now. APparently the 25th percentile is down from $275K to below $95K. http://www.housingtracker.net/asking-prices/las-vegas-nevada (Also, check out how high-end in Vegas is not selling at all: http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/Nevada/Las_Vegas-heat_map/)
Housingtracker.net has Phoenix’s 25th percentile at $110K in September after previously being at $260K. Same site has Miami’s 25th percentile the same as Phoenix, roughly.
Anyone know of more 300-400% SFR runups in D10? I’ve never really seen D10-specific stats.
While 1358 Shafter didn’t sell when listed for $269,950, it’s back on the market and asking $289,900. But just for you, maybe they’ll take $269,950.