1522 Lake Street: Before
Purchased for $1,888,000 in October 2005, 1522 Lake Street underwent a major renovation and returned to the market this past July asking $2,100,000. It didn’t sell.
1522 Lake After
A week ago it returned to the MLS asking $1,750,000. From the listing:

…Skylights galore, Marble tiled baths, Box Beamed Ceiling, Period Details, New Andersen Dual Paned Wndws, Top Fixtures + much more! A Bargain at this price as the home is unfinished! Kitchen Cabinets, BA Fixtures, Speakers, Lighting/Trims are needed to finish this Grand Home!

While the listing notes “unfinished,” however, a plugged-in reader reports: “stripped.”
Oh, and did we mention the property also hit the courthouse steps eleven days ago with a minimum bid of $1,301,817? As a plugged-in tipster reports, it sold for $1,305,500. Yes, more than a penny over, but not too much so considering a reported three bidders.
∙ Listing: 1522 Lake Street (3/4) – $1,750,000 [MLS] [Map]
Are The Real San Francisco Foreclosures On Their Way? [SocketSite]
Noe Renovation Goes For A Penny Over Foreclosure Auction Minimum [SocketSite]

46 thoughts on “Latest San Francisco Listing Euphemism: “Unfinished” Versus Stripped”
  1. I assume the things listed ‘to be finished’ include the balcony railings and hand rail for the front steps.
    Tile job on front was ill advised.
    I would want to see before and after shots. Like the crappy flip job spoke of here earlier this week, I would want to make sure these idiots didn’t get too deep into the systems. If a lot of the work was ‘soft’ like new paint and refinished floors, then OK.
    Talk about screwing up what was probably a nice house.

  2. I saw the house. It has been stripped. All the lighting fixtures were taken out…so was the entire kitchen (minus the tiled backsplash and the exhaust fan)…so were all the bathrooms (minus the showers and the expensive marble)…no toilets…no bathtubs…no lights…no stove…etc…
    I heard a lot of gossip about the house, including that it was impossible to get into the auction (don’t understand why there were only three bidders–sounds like there were more people who wanted to bid on the darn thing).
    Realtor stated that all permits were filed but they were never closed.
    House is being sold “As Is.”
    I would have loved to have seen this home pre-renovation. I bet it was prettier. This home is blatantly just not my taste–too much marble–bathrooms were built to be centerpieces of living areas…

  3. I heard that the bidder was an out of town guy (Arizona, I think) who got investor money from San Diego (I think). Apparently, he freaked after he went into the house for the first time.
    It’s a family house and the bedrooms are too small. The bathroom in the attic with no doors is just… WTF where they thinking. Laundry is in the basement/garage accessed through stair opening so narrow you probably can’t walk with a laundry basket and duck the low clearance all at once. I don’t think they get their price in the state it’s in.

  4. “Yes, more than a penny over, but not too much so considering the reported three bidders.”
    translation : two bidders at a penny over asking and one willing to kick in a few thousand more to win.
    Do I understand that someone bought this house for $1.3M and is now trying to make a $450K profit by doing absolutely nothing ?
    And I hope they’re not trying to pass that attic space off as a bedroom.

  5. I saw it. The last people who bought it didn’t have any taste or understanding. It feels like some sort of weird shrine to showering. The current sellers are going to see a nice profit, probably, but they’re lucky. The property probably needs 300 to 400K. It’s a decent deal for 1.5M, I’d say.

  6. Looks like the “weisenheimers” would have guessed right on this one — only sold for a token amount above the note value.
    Would this need an all-cash buyer, since it’s not inhabitable?

  7. Anyone know what the deal is with the prior sales of this place?
    Oct 24, 2005 Sold (Public Records) $1,888,000
    Apr 06, 2005 Sold (Public Records) $2,170,000
    Isn’t marble bad for bathrooms since you have to seal it heavily?

  8. Looks like the “weisenheimers” would have guessed right on this one — only sold for a token amount above the note value.
    Easy to say that when the info is laid out for you. But it’s still a rumor.

  9. Listing sez “This home is a Grand Edwardian ” Should read this WAS a grand Edwardian that has been screwed up. Sad.

  10. Realtor stated that present owners are looking for a cash buyer.
    You’d need at least one toilet, a stove/oven and who knows what other kooky accessories to make it habitable.
    It is still probably a deal for a buyer. It is on the north side of Lake St and, it is a gorgeous block…just a tacky done-up house (bathroom showers really are centerpieces) on a gorgeous block…wish I could see the toilets–they must have been grand as well since they were valuable enough to be ripped out…
    When I was touring, a realtor stated that she thought the stairs going to the third floor (finished attic) did not look like they were up to code.

  11. Not that I’m going to run out and buy it, but there’s something to be said for a house with no light fixtures, sinks, toilets, and appliances. I’d rather pick my own, thank you.

  12. “Not that I’m going to run out and buy it, but there’s something to be said for a house with no light fixtures, sinks, toilets, and appliances. I’d rather pick my own, thank you.”
    At least somebody seems to say this on every thread about a gutted house. These sorts of things are fine if you’re paying all cash. But if you want a mortgage, it doesn’t work. The building has to be inhabitable to be collateralized.

  13. ^Lame^
    annon, You should know by now that these stories only get lamer. Thought I recognized one of the names on the title from a recent foreclosure. That individual (the one with the trust) was also responsible for the loan on 229 Brannan St Unit 3H which was foreclosed on November 9. First rule of ‘investing’: one is good, two is better…

  14. You could have paraphrased in your own language and left the individual’s name out of it.
    I consider part of the time I spend here ‘public interest reporting’ — combing public documents to uncover the individuals responsible for the near collapse of civilization as we know it (or at very least, the financial system). It is by no means certain that we are through the worst of it (though, I would hope so). I’m certainly up for submitting myself to a community consensus on what is in the public interest. Obviously, if someone is simply down on his luck, I don’t want to drag them through the mud. Should it be number of foreclosures (2 is okay, but 3 is over the limt)? Or the a dollar amount (say $500,000)? If an individual (or group) is responsible of more than half a million in bank losses, then the public has a right to know? Folks, let me know what you think.

  15. As far as I’m concerned, if it’s publicly available, it’s publicly available. That includes the county recorder and lawsuits, which is all that EBGuy really seems to be using. I generally prefer, as a courtesy, that people do not repeat non-famous people’s names in blog comments so that those names don’t show up in a Google search, but I don’t have a problem with linking to pre-existing sites.
    Obviously, if we’re talking about fraudsters like the Lembis or that Muhawieh guy, it’s a different story, because those are already easily Googleable names due to the notoriety of the persons. But I don’t see what EBGuy did wrong here — he just posted a link to details of a lawsuit.

  16. Come on. When you start talking about collections agencies versus some guy concerning credit card debt, you could just as well walk outside your apartment, throw a rock, and blog about whoever it hits. By name.

  17. I agree with SFrenegade on this, links to public documents is fine, no need to repost names of non-famous people. So another vote for EBGuy to continue to point us to the details.

  18. I wish to join EBGuy’s fan club as well. I am surprised a real estate “professional” would have a problem with public documents being posted. Has any realtor ever thought that perhaps this type of PUBLIC information could be used to a future buyer’s advantage and helped to create a sale?

  19. not the first time i’ve said this, but i’ve got no problem repeating myself. EBGuy, you rock.
    anonn? weak sauce. there’s a reason public info is public. it’s what we as citizens demand and helps make our system the envy of the world.

  20. All of this information has always been available to anyone who was willing to invest the time to go down to the hall of records. Which until recently meant just the professionals in real estate. The democratization of information created by putting everything on the web has changed the game. I think for the better. But one can certainly expect a bit of whining from the people who used to have exculsive access and no longer have that advantage.

  21. Hahhaha. Whatever. Some of these comments are about the posters who made them and their opinions of me, maybe also realtors, and nothing more. Do you even know what you’re faulting me for? Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me for finding a link to a credit card debt court case naming somebody who we already know is broke a little out of context. Obfuscate? LOL. Why not give everybody the points against the poor guy’s driver’s license? What a bunch of bitter crumbs some of you are.

  22. there once was a lad named ebguy
    through internet searches he did clarify
    the thing that he missed
    was that some would be pissed
    so he put it to vote and did ratify

  23. Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me for finding a link to a credit card debt court case naming somebody who we already know is broke a little out of context.
    Your point is taken, but honestly, I really didn’t know this person’s status until I saw the CC debt. It’s unclear to me (don’t have detailed loan info) how much was lost in this situation. Was there a massive downpayment, or was a second used to finance this boondoggle? It seems that CCs may have been part of the ‘financial backing’.

  24. EBGuy, there was a sold out junior to BofA for $500k from Dec 2005.
    In an urelated note, I’m changing my handle as several others have probably unknowingly used whatever.

  25. BofA apparently did not file a NOD. I think most of the time if juniors want to protect their lien, they will start foreclosure themselves rather than put out more cash to bid at the steps.

  26. It reads like they put around ~500K down to buy it from a different trust in an offmarket deal and then took 500K back out with an equity line from BofA. They then transferred the property to their own trust and ran out of money.
    I went back in the property last week for a second time. It’s a loser, IMO. I liked it at first. But in order to be good you would have to excavate the lower rooms AND build out the upper level properly. On another lot on the north side of Lake it’d be worth it. Some of those lots open up to lovely big back yards with the Presidio behind. This backyard is small. It’s got no chance of becoming a mid 3Ms type of property, no matter what.
    Also, the head height under the beam between the formal living room and dining room area has a clearance of abotu 6’3. Pretty weird. There are numerous other areas with even lower clearance. The front room has a weird side door. The kitchen is repulsive, it wants be opened up and pushed to the back of the house, and on and on. It probably needs 600K to be a 2.5M house. Last I heard there were four offers, tho.

  27. Don’t worry, we’ll make more. The home at 214 Arguello was bought for $1,600,000 about two years ago. Wells “Don’t worry about our portfolio of seconds because we also financed the first” Fargo is on the hook for the $1,200,000 first and the $160k second. Sold at auction for $1,259,306 on Dec. 10.

  28. The property at 3808 Noreiga St. is jointly owned by the original (pre-foreclosure) ‘developer’ of 1522 Lake. The Noreiga St. property received a NOTS on Jan. 19 and appears to be headed for the auction block on Feb. 11.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *