Just found this hotpads.com foreclosure map for Los Angeles, via The Big Picture. Not as many on the Westside as in the Valley or South LA, but still above average. Each house symbol on the original map displays information about that foreclosure. (Click image to enlarge, or hotpads.com link for interactive version.)
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
hotpads.com
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Cool, thanks for posting this. You can go to Hotpads and zoom in. You'll see that there are maybe 50% more than show on your screen capture. Also, I don't know how recent the info is (or what time period it covers) but there's one on my old street (1300 block of Pearl in Santa Monica) that went REO a few months ago that doesn't show up on the map. I suspect this is a lower bound.
Isn't this just the same "information" tha realtytrsc has on trulia.com? Lots of NODs, rarely updated...
"there's one on my old street (1300 block of Pearl in Santa Monica) that went REO a few months ago that doesn't show up on the map."
Is that 1320 Pearl? That would be a good subject for a post, it sold for $1.2+M and is now asking 939K.
Westside, take a look at this SM adjacent dud:
2474 S. Centinela #3
10/24/06 listed @ $649K, expired
11/29/06 re-listed as "new" @ $599K, expired
7/29/07 re-listed as "new" @ $595K, expired
9/4/07 re-listed again as "new" @ $569K, expired
3/22/08 and again re-listed as "new" @ $559K.
How many failed attempts does one require to see they have a dud on their hands? Good example of a delusional seller and desperate agent. I guess ignorance is bliss.
8:41 -- interesting about 2474 Centinela #3. Did you see that a ton of other condos on that street are also selling? A dud of a street with a glut of inventory is always a good sign.
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1631798
1320 Pearl is really amusing.
Listing Prices:
Oct 08, 2007 $1,570,000
Feb 07, 2008 $939,000
If it's indeed an REO, which it seems like, that previous owner thought those plans approved by the City of Santa Monica to remodel/add were worth $300K above a bubble price.
Previous sale:
Apr 28, 2006 $1,270,000
"1320 Pearl is really amusing."
You should check out the back yard. It's about 15x20 (tiny) and half of it is taken up by some monstrous rock wall/waterfall. Incredibly hideous.
The owner/former owner of 1320 Pearl also is involved with 1741 Maple which appears set to go REO as well.
Wow, 10:16. 1741 Maple is hilarious too -- also has "plans" for an addition, as if that means something. There was an implication by a commenter on Santa Monica Distressed Monitor that the owner of this place owned a ton of other places too, many of which he/she was also defaulting on.
But $932/sqft is a joke, as were the prices that came before it. Check out the sales history:
Oct 15, 2007 $1,590,000
Nov 16, 2007 $1,430,000
Feb 07, 2008 $1,100,000
Feb 13, 2008 $1,275,000
The owner apparently got cold fee on a lower price and raised it back up again!
Bubble price:
Apr 05, 2006 $1,300,000
Yep, 1320 Pearl. It will be interesting to see if they get $939. We sold a slightly larger home on a better lot in 2004 for about that price. So, unless there's a bidding war for 1320 Pearl, it looks like a 2004 rollback in the heart of Sunset Park.
2474 S Centinela -
bought in '95 for $150k. They can drop it a lot and still be in pretty good shape. They are probably just fishing for suckers and their definition keeps changing.
plans approved by the city of SM? is that really valuable?
Another off the subject question...Is anyone tracking new building permits for SM? Always a good gauge for taking the pulse of the city inventory and how it affects supply and demand...
12:48 -- Santa Monica does take time to approve plans, but no, of course they're not worth anything. It's also a signal that the person selling ran out of money before they could actually build it. Desperate sellers will try anything. It's a silly advertising point -- what's to say that someone else will like your custom addition?
If you have ever worked with the city of SM you know that plans are totally valuable. The problem with selling them is that you have buy into someone else's vision. It's one thing if it's already built, but if you don't like the idea and you have to pay to get it done, then there's really no value to a buyer.
There are some huge problems with the geocoding. I was finding a lot of houses shown well away from there actual location on the map.
there seem to have been a few houses west of 7th and north of montana that closed this year - is that neighborhood doing better than north of montana east of 7th
i think 7th is the dividing line
by the way, 7th is a HORRIBLE street to live on n of montana the traffice just zooms by - i fear for my life crossing that street
Post a Comment