Bank owned property at attractive price
1112 NEWBRIDGE St, East Palo Alto, CA 94303 | MLS# 80944323
1112 NEWBRIDGE St East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Price: $180,106
Beds: 3
Baths: 1.5
Sq. Ft.: 1,400
$/Sq. Ft.: $129
Lot Size: 4,524 Sq. Ft.
Property Type: Detached Single Family
Style: Contemporary
Stories: 1
View: Neighborhood
Year Built: 1955
Community: East of U.S. 101
County: San Mateo
MLS#: 80944323
Source: MLSListings
Status: Active
On Redfin: 49 days
Bank owned property at attractive price. Needs some repair — but the price is right! Property condition may restrict FHA/VA financing options. Termite report & mold inspection & roof bids available. Roof leaks. Mold is present. Check with lender whether they will lend “as is” on this property.
The affordable housing crisis in the Bay Area is now officially solved. If you can’t afford to buy this house, and put in a few dollars to fix it up, what can you afford?
With an easy commute, this house will be able to serve you for a long time to come. 3 bedrooms! 1.5 bath! At a price that’s less than you could find in Texas! Wowsers what a deal!
Besides, what’s a little mold? Can’t a little Tilex fix this?
To you experts out there, what would take to fix this house up? $20? $100? $1000?
November 20th, 2009 at 9:08 am
wow, 3 new posts from burbed today?
The Zestimate for this house is $363,000 – ka-ching, instant equity! I think it would be at least $25k to fix the place up. Depends how much of the drywall has to be ripped out and replaced after the roof is done.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:26 am
Even though this is in EPA, you won’t be able to get it at this price. Interest in EPA is very high by investors. The list price is just the opening bid.
November 20th, 2009 at 9:31 am
It sat on the market for 49 days without selling. It’s pending now at 66 days out – after a price cut to $171k.
You missed your chance, genius.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:06 am
It wasn’t just sitting. Most likely the bank couldn’t get to it. It’s very common.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:30 am
#4 – that doesn’t follow. When a bank is ‘just sitting’ on a property, it probably doesn’t even appear on Redfin. Once it’s on there, and there’s an MLS listing, it’s pretty easy to submit offers/bids if you’re actually interested. It’s on 49 days for bad reasons, not good ones.
So I think you’re full of it. It’s a crap-shack in EPA, and you’re trying to tell us “oh, that’ll command a higher price!”. Oh, please.
This isn’t the RBA. Now you’re reduced to defending prices and properties in EPA to reinforce the idea that all BA housing should stay overpriced? I smell desperation.
If it’s such a great deal, then bid on it. If you were considering buying RBA property, you have so much cash you could put the 20% down on this place as a wild gamble without affecting your balance sheet much. So go for it.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:37 am
True, this isn’t RBA, but if you’re putting something out there for Tennessee pricing, it will attract a lot of interest.
I didn’t say you cannot submit offers. The problem is that the bank is so backlogged they are often not able to process any offer. What might appear like a property sitting on the market has a story behind it. You’re either too removed from the market or too unsophisticated to understand what’s going on.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:59 am
RE, you’re an idiot. (Sorry burbed, but WTF?)
If the bank was sitting on offers, why would they reduce the price?
Hell, you could have paid cash for this POS and rented it out, Mr. Landlord.
November 20th, 2009 at 10:59 am
edit, Mr. Wannabe Landlord.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:10 am
>>If the bank was sitting on offers, why would they reduce the price?
Because the process is screwed up. It’s like those rescued companies paying out fat bonus checks. Doesn’t make any sense.
>>Hell, you could have paid cash for this POS and rented it out, Mr. Landlord.
I’m not in the slumlord business, even though it can be profitable.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:13 am
I’m not in the slumlord business, even though it can be profitable.
Just to elaborate, this is for good reason. I don’t want guys coming from the other side of the freeway to my house.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:15 am
Wow you are unbelievably stupid.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:31 am
I’m not in the slumlord business, even though it can be profitable.
—–
What kind of business you have? McMansion business? That’s you have been planning for last one and half years.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:33 am
You’re either too removed from the market or too unsophisticated to understand what’s going on.
—–
If RealEstater said it, it got to be true. If you prove RealEstater wrong with proper logic, you are “unsophisticated”.
November 20th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Even though this is in EPA, you won’t be able to get it at this price. Interest in EPA is very high by investors. The list price is just the opening bid.
——
We get it RealEstater. The opening bid was $189K in September. Now some “investor” bid
updown the price to $171K. In this bidding war the price goes down. The bank is waiting for next bid. Any guess for the next bidding price from “investor”? $150K?November 20th, 2009 at 11:42 am
What might appear like a property sitting on the market has a story behind it.
——
And RealEstater knows the story. How does he know? The guy coming from the other side of the freeway came to RealEstater’s house and told the story.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Pralay says,
What kind of business you have? McMansion business? That’s you have been planning for last one and half years.
It’s not like I haven’t been giving you guys regular updates. I just bid for a house, and lost out despite paying over asking. There were 15 offers.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
It’s not like I haven’t been giving you guys regular updates. I just bid for a house, and lost out despite paying over asking. There were 15 offers.
—–
And we know that this “regular update” of 15 offers is going to be as truthful as previous updates – like ““cash offers for over $1M“.
November 20th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
It’s not like I haven’t been giving you guys regular updates. I just bid for a house, and lost out despite paying over asking. There were 15 offers.
Consider yourself fortunate you “lost out.” Only a sucker would outbid a crowd for an investment property.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Does it come with his’n'hers Uzis? Razor wire? A pitbull?
Might be a deal for a hardened South Africa expat.
November 20th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Pralay,
Why would I lie about not getting a house? If I wanted to lie, I would simply tell you I bought a house.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Why would I lie about not getting a house? If I wanted to lie, I would simply tell you I bought a house.
—–
Why did Bernard “Honest” Madoff promise only 20% annual return? If he wanted to lie, he would simply tell investors 50% or 100% annual returns.
Based on RealEstater’s logic, Bernard “Honest” Madoff is a honest person.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
All,
Mercury News reports that Silicon Valley home prices is up nearly 7% from last year.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Useless aggregate data, “subject to the mix of properties”.
December 20th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Real Estater wrote:
Even though this is in EPA, you won’t be able to get it at this price. Interest in EPA is very high by investors. The list price is just the opening bid.
bwahaha – you sure do have your finger on the pulse of the market! This property sold on 12/3/09 for $165,000. Hmm, that’s less than the list price and the reduced price, isn’t it?
December 20th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
RealEstater is “right all along”. He cannot be wrong. Let’s re-read what he said:
That’s turned out to be correct. The property didn’t sell for “this price” (ie. listed price of $180,106).
It’s true. An investor bought this property for $165K, right? It proves that investors have interest.
This is right too. It was just opening bid. However, there was no bidder. But it’s not contradictory to the above statement.
December 21st, 2009 at 8:19 am
Looks like somebody needs a check-up because their pulse isn’t very good…
December 21st, 2009 at 9:30 am
Pralay – you are right, as was RE! (Especially since RE seems to lump homeowners who buy to live in a house in with true investors who buy rentals.)
I need to stop being so negative.