You snooze you lose: $109,500 house in the Peninsula
2833 FORDHAM ST, East Palo Alto 94303 (East Palo Alto)
$109,500 Beds: 3 bed(s) Baths: 1 bath(s) MLS: 80813385
Bed/Bath: 3 / 1
SqFt: 1,030
Lot: 5,000 sq ft
Yr Built / Age: 1953 / 55 years
List Price: $109,500
Assoc Fee:
Remarks
This property is the perfect find for investors & buyers! This home is priced to sell, but will need a lot of time & work! This diamond in the rough has great potential to become a worthwhile investment! Don’t let yourself miss out on this golden opportunity!!
Like the people who line up outside of the Apple stores to buy iPhones and MacBook Airs, you really do have to get up early sometimes to buy houses in the Bay Area. This freaking amazing deal will probably be gone by the time you read this. And you’ll feel sorry for missing out on the $548,000 equity you missed as this house last sold in 2007 for $657,5000.
Wow. Don’t you feel embarrassed for missing this golden opportunity.
My god. $109k for a house in the peninsula. My god.
July 8th, 2008 at 6:45 am
Whoa Nellie! What a bargain. Now thats how much it SHOULD cost to live in the ghetto… And if you don’t want to live there you can easily be cashflow positive form day one by renting this puppy. Good luck getting the rent payments though, and be sure to pac a 9 when you go over there to fix the toilet
.
July 8th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Hehe – sold in May for $427,800. The bidding must’ve been like a feeding frenzy!
July 8th, 2008 at 8:24 am
That looks like its actually a garage with a shed attached to the back.I like how there’s a broken white picket fence leaning against the front.
July 8th, 2008 at 9:27 am
The seller lowballing method works. In my ‘hood a house was just listed double the size of the one I’m buying, double the lot, with bay views, for half the price. I called the listing agent, and the bidding had already doubled over the listing price with no sign of abating.
July 8th, 2008 at 10:03 am
My husband and I rent in downtown Palo Alto. About every two months I drive him through EPA and try to convince him to buy a place there. He thinks I’m insane. But I’m kind of fascinated by the history of EPA, and how it came to be so poor. At one point in the late 80s/early 90s, it did not have a single bank or grocery store. They had all closed up and left town. And, notably, it was the per capita murder capital of the US in 1992. It will be interesting to see if the tax revenue generated by the Four Seasons and the Ikea bring much change.
July 8th, 2008 at 10:49 am
What housing bubble?? We have hit bottom folks!!
July 8th, 2008 at 11:07 am
I actually think stuff like this is a sign of at least a near term bottom. There are some like this in San Jose too- never desirable properties but obviously worth more than these firesale prices- the banks are saying DUMP IT – this is basically an auction for this house.
Having said this, this probably has foundation damage and in that case, its not worth buying even for 100K. I’ll bet when you walk in the place there are 2′ cracks in the walls.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:14 am
Again,
Anecdotally guessing the bottom isn’t really accurate. The bottom could be next week or in 5 years. The only way to know is to keep checking the local and regional MLS and Dataquick reports. Once you get a solid 6 months of appreciation, that’s more of a better gauge to know when you’re closer to the bottom versus simply guessing.
This is reaaaaaal simple folks…
July 8th, 2008 at 11:15 am
My husband and I rent in downtown Palo Alto. About every two months I drive him through EPA and try to convince him to buy a place there
I’m glad my Wife doesn’t nag me about houses. That’s probably one of the reasons we had this bubble anyway. Nagging spouses who wanna’ nest.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:35 am
My sister owns a rental property there and she tried to convince me to buy one there too. And I told here the same thing; “are you insane”? She has had her fair share of problems with renters but I think she’s got a good one in there now. But I have heard her tell horror stories. I drove her son over to her property one day so he could do some work on the place and man I couldn’t believe what I saw. It’s like it was the same as the mid 90′s. People hanging out in the middle of the day on a work day? And they weren’t home for lunch. Man, these guys have it easy I thought to myself. But there are some bombed out shacks in that town. I told sis if I invest in anything it will be in multi-unit properties(tri/four/six-plex)in a halfway decent hood. The cashflow is better and let’s face it, density is your friend when it comes to slum lord investing.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:56 am
When I lived in Berkeley, I rented with about 7 other people in a massive house. It was owned by a guy who owned around 40 other properties in the area. Our house, along with all his other houses were falling apart. Literally. One house down the street had a back porch held to the side of the house with a rope. Our house leaked like crazy. It hadn’t seen paint in at least 30 years. This went for the rest of the homes.The outsides were basically bare. The plumbing, wiring, and repairs were all suspect. None was up to code.The construction was strange. Used windows and doors were everywhere, often with the old door knob holes on the bottom the the door since the new ones didn’t fit.One day they came to my friend’s house who rented one of this guy’s houses. It was an old craftsman with the original mahogany woodwork interior downstairs. They swiftly slapped a thick coat of crappy flat white paint on all of it. It nearly killed me to see that. His “repairmen” were his brothers, none of whom owned their own house.In fact, it seemed like his whole family were in the poor house. The guy had probably over 20 million bucks worth of housing yet didn’t give any of it to his family. He himself lived like a pauper. The guys also owned over 30 crappy cars and trucks. Only a few ran. The rest sat in the driveways of the houses he owned, rotting into the driveway. It was cheep rent though. But boy was it a strange experience.
The house we rent now is nicer than most of the houses friends I know who own. Everything was brand-new when we moved in, which was puzzling. The floors, carpet, appliances, and paint were all new. We later found out that the previous tenants TRASHED the place, thus requiring a complete renovation. We keep it in good shape and make the repairs ourselves. The landlord loves us and we still pay 2003 era rent. So my advice for some of you “investors” out there is to find good renters, and keep their rent the same as long as they keep the place up.
July 8th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
EPA is rent controlled so you basically have to keep the rent the same. You can’t even raise it much when the tenant leaves.
July 8th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Berkeley has pretty strict rent control too, which might explain the awful condition of bob’s old landlord’s rental “empire.”
Hey, the EPA house was pulled off redfin. Either someone came to his senses or was offered cash on the barrel.
Also, I must note: Another pink house.
July 8th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Not only did this house sell for $427K in May, it sold for 50% more just 15 months earlier. That’s quite a buzz on that 33% haircut. Whoever bought in ’98 (beginning of the bubble) and sold in 2007 (peak of the bubble) was a genius on that timing. Also look what happened in 1995.
Sales History
Date………… Price… Appreciation
Jan 19, 1995 $166,178 –
May 18, 1995 $140,000 -40.9%/yr
Jul 09, 1998 $197,000 11.5%/yr
Feb 23, 2007 $657,500 15.0%/yr
May 16, 2008 $427,800 -29.6%/yr
July 8th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
May 2008 sale is actually bank taking back the home: Foreclosurelink Inc to Aurora Loan Services.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Not only that, owner on the tax rolls (2007-08) lives in Nebraska. Also first tax payment not paid until April 10th, along with second tax payment.
Kind of interesting to have flyover country resident owning someplace in the almost-but-never-will-be-in-the-RBA. Probably thought he was buying in Real Palo Alto.
NOD filed 9/16/2007.
Trustees Sale 2/21/2008.
Looks like somebody bought this place from Aurora on 6/28/2008 (closing). Transfer fee paid: $120.45.
Isn’t the transfer fee 1%? That means the buyer paid $120,450 for this house?
July 8th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Transfer fee is in there twice with 2 different names, maybe they each own half the property? $240K for this house makes more sense.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
120k is still an awful lot for what appears to be a pre-fab carport turned into a house.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
bob the more I look at the PropertyShark report on this house, the more things I find that are wrong with it.
It’s near one set of railroad tracks and next to spur of another one.
It’s very close to 1 foot flooding warning on the FEMA map.
Plenty of hazardous waste in the neighborhood.
In an area with a high fire threat. Oh it just goes on and on.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Yup,
Not to mention the possible hazards associated with crime in that area. I think I’d pass.
July 8th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Nation wide, the vultures are out in force already:
http://biz.yahoo.com/cnnm/080705/063008_vulture_investors_take_flight.html?.&.pf=real-estate
Even the flippers are back.
July 8th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
The flippers will never go away. They’re gaining as much from the downturn as they were during the bubble. The only difference is that it takes cash now; the ones who had to rely on NINJA loans, like that Casey Serin guy, are gone forever.
July 8th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
You’re such a card, RE.
Further declines. That means the bottom hasn’t been realized yet.
You question my calling a 20-30% price decline, and this guy is looking for a 50-67% decline. Hoooookay.
You mean they aren’t open already?
July 8th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Hmmmmm.
Month 1: Facebookers are buying home. Grab it before they do.
Month 2: Foreigners are coming without visa. Grab it before they do.
And now in month 3: Vultures are coming. Grab it before they do.
Who are next? Tuna fish? Caterpillars? Brachiosaur?
July 8th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
By Facebookers you mean the 700 or so employees the company is expected to have this year, or do you mean the 60 or so million users?
I don’t think either really makes that much sense.
July 8th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
34 cities where it’s better to rent…
1) San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, Calif.
2) San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, Calif.
3) Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, Calif.
…
WE’RE #1, WE’RE #1!!!!
July 8th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Really? Stockton is a better bet than San Francisco?
July 8th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
That’s probably one of the reasons we had this bubble anyway. Nagging spouses who wanna’ nest.
Damn, those women NEVER SHUT UP.
July 8th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
That’s probably one of the reasons we had this bubble anyway. Nagging spouses who wanna’ nest.
Damn, those women NEVER SHUT UP.
Sure they do. That’s why the bubble popped. If only they had kept on nagging “I wanna bigger house!”
July 9th, 2008 at 12:05 am
34 cities where it’s better to rent…
1) San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, Calif.
2) San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, Calif.
3) Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, Calif.
4) Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, Conn.
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, Wash.
5) San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, Calif.
6) Honolulu
7) Stockton, Calif.
9) Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, Calif.
10) New York-North New Jersey-Long Island, N.Y.-Pennsylvania*
11) Washington, D.C.-Arlington-Alexandria, Va.- Maryland-West Virginia*
Look at that. We beat Hawaii, the expensive NYC exurbs, New York City itself, and Washington DC. We beat LA. We beat San Diego.
We even beat San Francisco.
We totally rule in price suckage.