• filter:

The Inherited House Dilemma -- Part 2

  • Text Only
  • Search this Topic »
Voting History
rated:
A few months ago, I posted this thread about inheriting fractional interests from deceased relatives. I'm happy to report that all 3 of us are finally in agreement to sell the house.  This is a huge step forward after many years of inaction.  

Here's what I wrote in the old thread:  Myself and two relatives each inherited a 1/3 interest in a Southern California home worth potentially $600-700k, with no instructions on what to do with said house.  The house is 1950's vintage and in poor shape.  Needs a new roof, electrical and plumbing work, new windows (old wood windows are seized up), and all new HVAC since the system is broken and unrepairable due to being 45 years old.  Also, a lot of plaster and exterior stucco damage from earthquakes.  At the very least, it's going to take $40k to make the house reasonably livable again, and more like $75k to bring it up to modern standards.

The houses immediately next door, and across the street, just sold for $490K and $550K, which puts a damper on my hopes of getting $600K or more.  That's what the rest of the neighborhood seems to be selling for.  What concerns me a little is that both of those other houses had decent roofs and functioning HVAC at the time of sale.  

I'm going to have the house appraised this week.  I have some mutual friends who are great people and very interested in the house.  They suggested buying direct from us, bypassing a real estate agent. My Fatwallet instincts would normally be open to the idea -- given that an agent commission will probably cost us $25K -- but I'm wondering if this is a disastrous approach given the problems with the house?  I also don't want the "savings" to be factored into the price they're willing to pay us. 

What would you do?

Member Summary
Most Recent Posts
I think he inherited the house in 2004.  The heirs would establish a new basis at that time - maybe.  This whole transac... (more)

dcwilbur (Jun. 16, 2017 @ 7:52a) |

Sure, but the house isn't even on the market yet.  He needs a completed sale to even begin calculating any capital gains... (more)

Glitch99 (Jun. 16, 2017 @ 8:20a) |

He of course needed the 2004 appraisal, but I have no idea why he got the 2017 appraisal. A good market analysis by a c... (more)

dcwilbur (Jun. 16, 2017 @ 10:02a) |

Staff Summary
Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

rated:
tell them your relatives want at least 675k, but you reduced your cut so they can buy for 625k

rated:
runningair said:   They suggested buying direct from us, bypassing a real estate agent...I also don't want the "savings" to be factored into the price they're willing to pay us. 

 

That's one of the inherent problems with selling without an agent.  The seller does it to save the commission, but the buyer negotiates based on the fact that there is no commission.

Establish what you are willing to accept, and start talking.  You've got an interested buyer, which is usually the hardest part.  I'd honestly be making some pretty serious concessions to get out of this situation.    

rated:
runningair said:   A few months ago, I posted this thread about inheriting fractional interests from deceased relatives. I'm happy to report that all 3 of us are finally in agreement to sell the house.  This is a huge step forward after many years of inaction.  

Here's what I wrote in the old thread:  Myself and two relatives each inherited a 1/3 interest in a Southern California home worth potentially $600-700k, with no instructions on what to do with said house.  The house is 1950's vintage and in poor shape.  Needs a new roof, electrical and plumbing work, new windows (old wood windows are seized up), and all new HVAC since the system is broken and unrepairable due to being 45 years old.  Also, a lot of plaster and exterior stucco damage from earthquakes.  At the very least, it's going to take $40k to make the house reasonably livable again, and more like $75k to bring it up to modern standards.

The houses immediately next door, and across the street, just sold for $490K and $550K, which puts a damper on my hopes of getting $600K or more.  That's what the rest of the neighborhood seems to be selling for.  What concerns me a little is that both of those other houses had decent roofs and functioning HVAC at the time of sale.  

I'm going to have the house appraised this week.  I have some mutual friends who are great people and very interested in the house.  They suggested buying direct from us, bypassing a real estate agent. My Fatwallet instincts would normally be open to the idea -- given that an agent commission will probably cost us $25K -- but I'm wondering if this is a disastrous approach given the problems with the house?  I also don't want the "savings" to be factored into the price they're willing to pay us. 

What would you do?

  
So only you should benefit from the savings? If anything I'd give them 100% of the savings if they close quickly, as you won't have to deal with the additional carrying costs (property taxes, insurance, mortgage in other people's cases). If you go the realtor route it could sit for literally years as a fix it upper, and you might have to eat the commission and have to fix something as a part of the contract. Sellers that don't budge on the commission are the reason FSBO don't work. 

rated:
Depending on where in CA, it very well could be a sellers market and it won't sit.

FSBO can work, however, in this situation I wouldn't.
1) Your family can get ideas in their head that you're selling to your friends at a discount b/c they're your friends, or worse that you're getting a kick back from them.
2) You obviously don't know the market completely if you're thinking 490-700K. In some areas ( I don't know about yours), being a few blocks one way or another can have a large impact in desirability and sale price. Local realtors will know, if you lived in the house, you would know (probably), but you haven't. Yes its something you can research etc.

I'd personally speak with multiple realtors discussing the expected sale price as is, and if you do some work (not hired through the realtor). Discuss possibly a discounted commission structure for your friends, but only if they're the highest offer after a period of time. I personally think there can be a significant perceived unfairness if you're doing FSBO with friends when multiple people own the property.


you have friends that are approching you before you even have set a price

rated:
If you are skipping a Realtor, sell it as is and have a competent real-estate attorney negotiate the sales price, prepare the sales contract, and oversee the sale and final transfer. $3500 or so depending on time and rates (10 hours @ $350).   If you are selling it to a friend, your friendship may well be stressed, if not trashed, over selling an old, as-is property. There will ALWAYS be MANY more issues to fix than anyone, including an inspector, will discover before the sale.

Fixing it up will involve time, money (do you have $100k cash to invest?) and more opportunities for family squabbles. Likely two or more than you expect on each item.

rated:
I use a company in california that lists homes for 1.25%. DM for info as its not a huge company

rated:
vadeltachi said:   If you are skipping a Realtor, sell it as is and have a competent real-estate attorney negotiate the sales price,
 

  No need to hire anyone to negotiate price, unless you suck at it of course.  What you need a real estate attorney for is to ensure the terms you negotiate are properly articulated in the sale documents, and make sure all the "i"s are dotted and t"s crossed regardless of who actually does it.

rated:
I wouldn't sell directly to them - I would use an agent. Let the free market take care of itself. That way all parties know everything is on the up-and-up.
Even if you save some money by foregoing an agent, you'll have to split that money three ways, then you'll have to pay taxes on it.
Some of the parties might think you're undervaluing the house, your friends might underestimate the damage and fixes needed etc etc
It's not worth it to lose a friend or have family mad at you if anything goes wrong just to save a little bit of money.

rated:
shocks said:   ...then you'll have to pay taxes on it.
From the information in the original thread, it doesn't sound like there is going to be much, if any, appreciation in the value of the property since the OP and his partners inherited it.  Probably little to no tax impact here.  

rated:
I'm betting a realtor would be worth the fees here just in his or her ability to talk the other 2 co-owners into finalizing the deal...

rated:
lostjake said:   
So only you should benefit from the savings? If anything I'd give them 100% of the savings if they close quickly, as you won't have to deal with the additional carrying costs (property taxes, insurance, mortgage in other people's cases). If you go the realtor route it could sit for literally years as a fix it upper, and you might have to eat the commission and have to fix something as a part of the contract. Sellers that don't budge on the commission are the reason FSBO don't work. 

  
I should have worded that better.  I don't want them to reduce their maximum offer by $25K as a result of us saving $25K in real estate commissions.  At the least, I would enlist the services of a real estate attorney to assist us -- and that costs money -- but not $25K. 

rated:
Chrisk327 said:   Depending on where in CA, it very well could be a sellers market and it won't sit.

FSBO can work, however, in this situation I wouldn't.
1) Your family can get ideas in their head that you're selling to your friends at a discount b/c they're your friends, or worse that you're getting a kick back from them.
2) You obviously don't know the market completely if you're thinking 490-700K. In some areas ( I don't know about yours), being a few blocks one way or another can have a large impact in desirability and sale price. Local realtors will know, if you lived in the house, you would know (probably), but you haven't. Yes its something you can research etc.

I'd personally speak with multiple realtors discussing the expected sale price as is, and if you do some work (not hired through the realtor). Discuss possibly a discounted commission structure for your friends, but only if they're the highest offer after a period of time. I personally think there can be a significant perceived unfairness if you're doing FSBO with friends when multiple people own the property.


you have friends that are approching you before you even have set a price

  
You make some good points.  I told these potential buyers that my other two relatives have to be fully onboard with the idea, purchase price and all.  Here's the thing, it's up to me to make something happen here.  My relatives (and I) have done nothing for the past 13 years.  They don't want to deal with it.  I want to get rid of it before the housing market crashes again.  

I sort of cringe at the thought of soliciting realtors.  We have far too many in this area, and they seem prone to shady tactics.  

rated:
dk240t said:   I'm betting a realtor would be worth the fees here just in his or her ability to talk the other 2 co-owners into finalizing the deal...
  
They're finally ready to sell.  I don't think that's an issue any longer. 

rated:
runningair said:   
dk240t said:   I'm betting a realtor would be worth the fees here just in his or her ability to talk the other 2 co-owners into finalizing the deal...
  
They're finally ready to sell.  I don't think that's an issue any longer. 

  
You know better than I do for sure - but ready to sell and actually agreeing to a sale can be 2 different states.

rated:
dk240t said:   
You know better than I do for sure - but ready to sell and actually agreeing to a sale can be 2 different states.

  
Years ago, they contemplated living there, or us renting the place out.  One in particular was holding on for sentimental reasons.  All of those things are history.  

They now seem cognizant of the need to sell before another real estate crash.  Real estate values peaked in 2006 and we failed to sell at that time.  Then the recession hit in 2007-2008.  Home values have improved to about 90% of where they were in 2006 but it's taken many years to do so.  My relatives are finally seeing that we can't wait any longer.  

rated:
runningair said:   My relatives (and I) have done nothing for the past 13 years.
Holy crap! You never said that! You inherited this property 13 years ago? Any occupancy at any time since then? Did you have an appraisal done at the time? Who has been paying the taxes, maintaining the property, etc? How is the property titled?

You might want to get some legal and tax advice to make sure you are doing everything right. A lot can happen in 13 years.  

rated:
Might want to consider some sort of as-is sale if there are issues...

rated:
so houses nearby with serviceable roofs, plumbing, electrical, and HVAC sold for 500ish.
I don't know the sqft of your house, but let's just call it 2500 sqft. I would not be surprised if new roof, plumbing, electrical, and HVAC would run 30-40k, and you've not even started working on the interior. Also, if it's a home from the 50s that's not been maintained, since the wood windows are stuck, I'd be concerned about possible structural issues. Add 5k for windows, and optimistically 0 to repair the structure.

not knowing anything more than what you've said so far. If it were me, I'd offer you 350k, expecting to put 75k in to it, hoping to net 75k profit. That's a far cry from your original 600-700k valuation.

I really wouldn't even know where to start with negotiations without understanding the local market.

Even if you don't want to hire a realtor, I'd interview a few that know the local area. Ask them what a reasonable price point is for it as-is, and what a reasonable price point would be after renovations. Just because you interview some doesn't mean you have to hire one.

rated:
dcwilbur said:   
runningair said:   My relatives (and I) have done nothing for the past 13 years.
Holy crap! You never said that! You inherited this property 13 years ago? Any occupancy at any time since then? Did you have an appraisal done at the time? Who has been paying the taxes, maintaining the property, etc? How is the property titled?

You might want to get some legal and tax advice to make sure you are doing everything right. A lot can happen in 13 years.  

  
Yep, a long time indeed.  

One of the relatives who inherited a 1/3 interest (along with me) is my mother, who also served as executor of the estate way back when.  She unfortunately failed to have the place appraised in 2004.  I've hired an appraiser to come Wednesday to do TWO appraisals, one for 2004, and another for present day values.  The house has been mostly vacant all this time.  Funds we also inherited from the estate have been paying the utility bills and property taxes (about $2500/year for everything) since then. Last I knew, title on the house was in my mother's name, with the name of our deceased relative's trust on the second line.  Whatever she changed on the title was enough to ensure Prop 13 tax rates were inherited.  Was it done properly, I don't know.  Like you said, this is a good reason to consult with an attorney.

To make matters worse, a couple years ago I learned from my mom that my parents' trust was last updated in the 1990's.  That means the subject house is not included.  If my mom were to die without this extra house being sold, or at least included in an updated trust, we're going to find ourselves in deep probate trouble.  

Needless to say, my mother didn't handle her responsibilities as executor too well.  She fully admits it.  


 

rated:
imbatman said:   so houses nearby with serviceable roofs, plumbing, electrical, and HVAC sold for 500ish.
I don't know the sqft of your house, but let's just call it 2500 sqft. I would not be surprised if new roof, plumbing, electrical, and HVAC would run 30-40k, and you've not even started working on the interior. Also, if it's a home from the 50s that's not been maintained, since the wood windows are stuck, I'd be concerned about possible structural issues. Add 5k for windows, and optimistically 0 to repair the structure.

not knowing anything more than what you've said so far. If it were me, I'd offer you 350k, expecting to put 75k in to it, hoping to net 75k profit. That's a far cry from your original 600-700k valuation.

 

  
$600K seemed more reasonable at the time; $700K was just wishful thinking.  I admit it. 

The houses next door, and across the street, which sold for $490K and $550K both had identical floorplans but are smaller than our house.  Ours was built at the same time, but thanks to a remodel 40+ years ago, has an extra bedroom, extra half bath, and a family room.  About 500 square feet more than those other houses.  Aside from our roof and HVAC being bad, all three houses are equally dated.  The other houses have the same electrical issues and same wooden windows.

Depending on the demand for an extra bedroom, $600K might still be attainable in its current condition but $500 to 550K is probably more realistic. 
  

rated:
runningair said:   One of the relatives who inherited a 1/3 interest (along with me) is my mother, who also served as executor of the estate way back when.  She unfortunately failed to have the place appraised in 2004.  I've hired an appraiser to come Wednesday to do TWO appraisals, one for 2004, and another for present day values.  The house has been mostly vacant all this time.  Funds we also inherited from the estate have been paying the utility bills and property taxes (about $2500/year for everything) since then. Last I knew, title on the house was in my mother's name, with the name of our deceased relative's trust on the second line.  Whatever she changed on the title was enough to ensure Prop 13 tax rates were inherited.  Was it done properly, I don't know.  Like you said, this is a good reason to consult with an attorney.

To make matters worse, a couple years ago I learned from my mom that my parents' trust was last updated in the 1990's.  That means the subject house is not included.  If my mom were to die without this extra house being sold, or at least included in an updated trust, we're going to find ourselves in deep probate trouble.

Hmmm - Now this is getting tricky. How about spelling it out with a little more clarity. Is this your grandparents' house? Who is the third heir? Was your mother's name already on the title before the (other) owner died? You see where I'm going here? Depending on ownership at the time of your relative's death, your mother might own the entire house, or maybe she already owned half and then inherited 1/3 of the other half, who knows? All this time, you might have been quibbling over these fractional interests that don't even exist.

rated:
OP where in Southern CA are you located? PM if you don't want to share inthread.

rated:
(Incredulous gasp) -- I am totally floored that some experienced FWF posters suggest involving an agent.  IMHO, an agent would bring nothing to the table, except another Mouth to feed.  Not rocket science to come up with an asking price.  Communicate same to your prospective buyer and proceed to negotiate as necessary.  Advertise if you want to generate more offers.   Hire an attorney to handle your end of closing, couple of hundred $ in my state.  In this case, an agent is just an expensive type of answering service.

rated:
dcwilbur said:   
Hmmm - Now this is getting tricky. How about spelling it out with a little more clarity. Is this your grandparents' house? Who is the third heir? Was your mother's name already on the title before the (other) owner died? You see where I'm going here? Depending on ownership at the time of your relative's death, your mother might own the entire house, or maybe she already owned half and then inherited 1/3 of the other half, who knows? All this time, you might have been quibbling over these fractional interests that don't even exist.

  
Yeah, it was.  I was trying to be a little discrete since I introduced mom to FW probably 15 years ago.  I doubt she visits the site with Cashback being history, though you never know.

Mom's name was not on the title until after the death.  Reason being the house was kept as a last resort for sale, rental, or reverse equity if additional funds were needed to pay for assisted living care.  That need never materialized.  There was no point in making my mom a full or partial owner of the house, as it would have complicated matters.  Mom was given Power of Attorney to sell, rent, mortgage the place if needed.  

After the death, I remember her showing me a copy of the Transfer of Ownership paperwork she submitted at the recorder's office. 

 

rated:
Okay, now I'm a little out of my element, but you do know that a power of attorney ceases to have authority upon the grantor's death, right?  If your mom held power of attorney for your grandparent and transferred title after the grandparent's death, it could be a disputed transaction.  Could be complicated by the fact that you said the property was previously in the name of the grandparent's trust as well.  In any event, if title is now in Mom's name and not in the three names as specified (presumably) in the will, then that gets messy too.  You need to get this whole thing to an attorney to straighten out before you even think about putting the house on the market.   

rated:
I think you'd be hard pressed to find any seller willing to let you pocket the 3% sellers agent commission without any concession back to them. They would be walking away from money they could get by simply using a discount broker that gives a 1.5% rebate.
I recently bought a 500K+ FSBO house with no agent. Owner and I agreed to factor in 2.5% of purchase price to closing costs instead of me going in with a 1.5% rebate discount broker. Anything less that 2% and I would not have done that.
And this was with a <10 year old home that I did not anticipate there being any big issues with. 

rated:
dcwilbur said:   Okay, now I'm a little out of my element, but you do know that a power of attorney ceases to have authority upon the grantor's death, right?  If your mom held power of attorney for your grandparent and transferred title after the grandparent's death, it could be a disputed transaction.  Could be complicated by the fact that you said the property was previously in the name of the grandparent's trust as well.  In any event, if title is now in Mom's name and not in the three names as specified (presumably) in the will, then that gets messy too.  You need to get this whole thing to an attorney to straighten out before you even think about putting the house on the market.   
  The only thing messy is who's entitled to what.  If there are 3 heirs, they all agree to sell, and they each get their 1/3, it's probably best to just keep plowing forward.  No need to open the can of worms over how things were handled in the past, when the end result is going to be the same regardless.

rated:
Glitch99 said:   
dcwilbur said:   Okay, now I'm a little out of my element, but you do know that a power of attorney ceases to have authority upon the grantor's death, right?  If your mom held power of attorney for your grandparent and transferred title after the grandparent's death, it could be a disputed transaction.  Could be complicated by the fact that you said the property was previously in the name of the grandparent's trust as well.  In any event, if title is now in Mom's name and not in the three names as specified (presumably) in the will, then that gets messy too.  You need to get this whole thing to an attorney to straighten out before you even think about putting the house on the market.   
  The only thing messy is who's entitled to what.  If there are 3 heirs, they all agree to sell, and they each get their 1/3, it's probably best to just keep plowing forward.  No need to open the can of worms over how things were handled in the past, when the end result is going to be the same regardless.

Good point, but the mother and the deceased grandparent(s) trust being on the title concern me.  Who is the appropriate individual to convey title on behalf of the deceased?  At a minimum, I would want to have a real estate attorney or title company do some research on the title and give some assurances that a clear title can be conveyed to a potential buyer.  

I had a problem with a similarly encumbered property a few years ago.  Due to the estate's inability to convey title, the deal was delayed about 60 days, and resulting concessions to the buyer in order to get the deal through totaled somewhere in the neighborhood of $40k.  It was a mess that could have been avoided with a little more planning up front. 

rated:
dcwilbur said:   Okay, now I'm a little out of my element, but you do know that a power of attorney ceases to have authority upon the grantor's death, right?  If your mom held power of attorney for your grandparent and transferred title after the grandparent's death, it could be a disputed transaction.  Could be complicated by the fact that you said the property was previously in the name of the grandparent's trust as well.  In any event, if title is now in Mom's name and not in the three names as specified (presumably) in the will, then that gets messy too.  You need to get this whole thing to an attorney to straighten out before you even think about putting the house on the market.   
  
Yes, I'm aware of that.  It wouldn't be a disputed transaction because she transferred the house in her capacity as executor.  Just to be clear, the house was not in the name of the trust until AFTER the death.  It was at that time the title was changed to show my mother's name and the trust name.  

Granted, it's been 13 years but I seem to recall my mother's name was added in conjunction with the trust name so that a live person was once again associated with the property.  Nothing more than that. 

I found a real estate attorney that does everything necessary for FSBO transactions for a flat fee of $2500.  He should be able to sort through any problems.  

 

rated:
I should clarify the attorney's fees and see what you guys think.

He charges a flat $2,500 to handle all the research, paperwork, oversight for a FSBO transaction. If we want him to handle negotiations, he would do that with a $5,000 retainer held in trust and billed against their hourly rates. Unearned fees returned to us at the close of the deal. One obvious downside is if negotiations fail, we're on the hook for his time.

Would an attorney have an advantage in negotiating a sale price? I don't know the answer to that.

rated:
That seems silly. You'd almost certainly do better just reducing the sale price by $5k as your negotiation.

rated:
Rajjeq said:   That seems silly. You'd almost certainly do better just reducing the sale price by $5k as your negotiation.
 
Read it again.  The cost for negotiations is not necessarily $5,000 -- it's dependent on the amount of time involved.  Any amounts not billed would be returned to us.  

We would probably do initial negotiations on our own, see where things stand, then if everything looks good, hand it over to the lawyer to complete.  It goes without saying the three of us would have to agree to this strategy first but that's where my thought process is at this point.   

rated:
I know for me if you and I agreed on a price then you sent your lawyer in to squeeze you for more I'd start going down in my offer price.

rated:
Stubtify said:   I know for me if you and I agreed on a price then you sent your lawyer in to squeeze you for more I'd start going down in my offer price.
  
That's not how I would use the lawyer if it were up to me.  

Let's assume a reasonable sale price is $550K.  I would probably start by using $600K to test their reaction.  If it becomes obvious they were hoping to pay $400K, then nothing is going to happen.  But if $600K doesn't scare them off completely, that's probably where I would turn negotiations over to the lawyer.  

I know from my experience in the business world, the Average Joe looking to take advantage of you is generally intimidated by a lawyer being involved.  Whether that carries over to real estate transactions just the same, I'm not sure. 

rated:
I think 50K above asking price would be cutting off too much potential interest. I was in the market at this price range recently and if I saw a 600K house I was interested in but thought it wasn't worth any more than 550K I most likely would not have even bothered with an offer.
And then you don't want to be one of those houses that sit on the market for months. I think when people see that the first thing people think is "whats wrong with this home?" and they will more likely to be emboldened to drive a harder offer since they will have the perception that there's low demand for your house.

rated:
runningair said:   Let's assume a reasonable sale price is $550K.  I would probably start by using $600K to test their reaction.  If it becomes obvious they were hoping to pay $400K, then nothing is going to happen.  But if $600K doesn't scare them off completely, that's probably where I would turn negotiations over to the lawyer.  
It sounds to me like your aren't really interested in selling this house. Interview a couple of agents and have them each do a market analysis for you. Pick a winner, set a fair price, sell the house, and get on with your life.  

rated:
dcwilbur said:   
runningair said:   Let's assume a reasonable sale price is $550K.  I would probably start by using $600K to test their reaction.  If it becomes obvious they were hoping to pay $400K, then nothing is going to happen.  But if $600K doesn't scare them off completely, that's probably where I would turn negotiations over to the lawyer.  
It sounds to me like your aren't really interested in selling this house. Interview a couple of agents and have them each do a market analysis for you. Pick a winner, set a fair price, sell the house, and get on with your life.  

I agree with this. 

You're in Southern CA. If it is worth $550, list it at 539, have 10 offers, do a multiple counter, best&final and you could sell for $565. The buyer's agents will talk up the sale because they're going to make more if it sells for higher. 

Also if someone's going to buy the place w/o a realtor they're going to give you their price. It won't be a negotiation it will be a take or leave it. Likely a cash offer and they'll discount their offer because of it.  

You're splitting the commission cost in 1/3, so an agent will do the legwork that your other two parties don't want to (or can't do). Focus on negotiating the sales commission with your listing agent and let the house sell itself. 

rated:
dcwilbur said:   
runningair said:   Let's assume a reasonable sale price is $550K.  I would probably start by using $600K to test their reaction.  If it becomes obvious they were hoping to pay $400K, then nothing is going to happen.  But if $600K doesn't scare them off completely, that's probably where I would turn negotiations over to the lawyer.  
It sounds to me like your aren't really interested in selling this house. Interview a couple of agents and have them each do a market analysis for you. Pick a winner, set a fair price, sell the house, and get on with your life.  

  
Where do you get that idea?  As much as I appreciate your feedback, you're reading too much into my comments. 

The current discussion (and my current thought process) centers around us already knowing a potential buyer who has expressed a desire NOT to use a real estate agent.  That's fine provided we could agree on price in such a way that we get to keep some of the cost savings realized by not using a realtor.  Hiring a real estate agent may scare them off.

I see nothing inherently wrong with exploring this approach far enough to see if we're even in the same neighborhood in terms of price.  If we are, great.  If not, then go a more traditional route and find an agent willing to work for less.  

As the appraiser told me this morning, this is a very hot seller's market right now with homes staying on the market for about 2 weeks.  I'm not worried about exploring the FSBO approach first to see whether or not it's viable. 

Skipping 13 Messages...
rated:
Glitch99 said:   Sure, but the house isn't even on the market yet.  He needs a completed sale to even begin calculating any capital gains taxes.He of course needed the 2004 appraisal, but I have no idea why he got the 2017 appraisal. A good market analysis by a couple of different real estate agents would have sufficed for purposes of a sales price. There's a lot in this situation that doesn't make sense though.
  

  • Quick Reply:  Have something quick to contribute? Just reply below and you're done! hide Quick Reply
     
    Click here for full-featured reply.


Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2017