January 2007
Monthly Archive
Mon 29 Jan 2007
We had an experience recently that we felt worthy of sharing with all of you Rhode Island real estate owners and buyers… this has to do with a sale of a home that was made to a buyer last year, who now is trying to sell the house. At the time he purchased the house, he had no buyers agent representing his interest, and relied instead on the sellers agent.
The sellers agent had told him that the house had been inspected just a week before the purchase, and so the buyer could save money by simply getting a copy of that inspection. The sellers agent then provided the copy to the buyer. The agent did not disclose that a serious structural flaw had been noticed, and that they had not included the pages of the inspection report that dealt with this flaw. In fact, the inspector was the husband of the sellers agent, and had simply handed a blank form to his wife to be filled out by her. BAD BAD BAD.
Today, we had the house inspected by another Home Inspector, who revealed the flaw. Our seller now must disclose the flaw, or repair it, at a cost of $42,000!!!
This money could have come off the purchase price, or the flaw could have been repaired prior to the sale if only the buyer had known, and had negotiated the price based on that knowledge.
At this point, the owner has a climbing interest rate with an Adjustable Rate Mortgage, and has seen no appreciation of the value of the house since the purchase. He does not have the money to repair the fault, and will not have the room in the sale to pay for the buyer to deal with it. He is going to lose a bunch of money on the sale, unless things in the regional market change rapidly.
Why? One fundamental reason is that the buyer had no experience with purchasing real estate, and declined to use an agent to represent his needs. Remember, sellers agents Represent the Seller, not the buyer. See our sections on agency and buyers agency for details about this. Another is the lack of an independent home inspection to ensure the condition of the property. See our section on Home Inspections, as well as our section on why a seller might want to get an inspection done as well.
Don’t go wrong with confidence! Get professional representation for your real estate transaction.
Fri 26 Jan 2007
Well… it is tax season again, and captial gains taxes for investments sold will have to be paid. I read a great post about this on Active Rain, and wanted to share it here. On Active Rain, Vickie Kessinger of Rock Hill, SC posted a blog called Capital Gains Taxes: There’s More Than One Rate and here is an excerpt. Vist Active Rain for more.
Money gurus are always preaching long-term investing. Not only will that give you a better shot at earning more, it’ll also get you a lower tax rate when you sell.
But exactly what rate you get depends on several things, including when you bought the asset, when you sold it, your overall income level and sometimes what tax-code changes are made in the meantime.
Currently, capital gains may be taxed at 5 percent, 15 percent, 25 percent or 28 percent or a combination of rates. These tax levels are known as long-term capital gains and apply to assets that you hold for at least 366 days (more than one year). The long-term capital gain tax is, generally, much lower than what you pay on your regular income.
In fact, it is a taxpayer’s income level that generally determines which capital gains rate is owed. If your profit pushes you into a higher bracket, you could possibly be taxed at a combination of rates.
And you could face yet another rate depending upon the type of property you sell.
May is a good month for lower rates
For many years, investors whose overall income put them in the top four income-tax brackets faced a long-term capital gains rate of 20 percent, while lower-income investors paid capital gains taxes of 10 percent.
Wed 24 Jan 2007
Posted by Paul Silver under
For Home SellersNo Comments
The following is excerpted from Harmon Homes, a division of Dominion Enterprises… what it describes is a little thought of but never the less important fact: Listing your home for sale at the right time is a significant factor in aiding the sale. We have included this article here, which is really intended for Realtors, for your reading pleasure and edification. We hope it helps you in your decision to list or not to list your home at this time.
We also want to add that it is a good time to buy as well, since the season has not yet begun, and prices are still relatively low.
February is Prime Time to List Real Estate Properties
Listing Homes Now Will Beat Competitors to the Punch
Camp Hill, PA - January 17, 2007) - With the New Year upon us, there are many things on our minds: parties, the Super Bowl, our struggles to maintain our New Year resolutions. But there’s one thing many people don’t think about this time of year, though they should be: real estate. Wait, real estate?
Yes, real estate. Mid-February, specifically those weeks following the Super Bowl, is the optimum time for sellers to put their homes on the market. That’s the time when buyers are warming up for the spring home-buying season. Plus, listing inventory (the number of homes on the market) is low because of the winter and holiday slowdown. The number of buyers beginning to look at homes is disproportionately larger than the number of homes being advertised for sale, giving sellers a competitive advantage.
(more…)
Tue 23 Jan 2007
Sales are starting to pick up early this year, and while it is most definitely a good time to buy a home, it is also a good time to sell. We are gaining new buyers every day, and the prices of houses are stable, while interest rates remain near to all time lows. What more could you want as a buyer? What more could you want as a seller?
Still, many sellers are expecting that appreciation of their property values is climbing like it was two years ago. This is most assuredly not the case. Stable is one thing, climbing at unheard of speed is altogether another. But because the home buyer population is growing, and interest rates are low, it is still a good time to sell.
Stay tuned for more on this topic coming soon.
Tue 16 Jan 2007
Posted by Paul Silver under
For Home SellersNo Comments
We have heard from other Realtors that home sellers are constantly questioning the commission percentage being asked for when signing a listing agreement. The sellers often ask “why should I pay the same percentage for my $900,000 house that Joe is paying for his $250,000 house. The math looks tough: 6% (an average commission rate) for house A would be $54,000, while for the less expensive house, it would be $15,000. Why should the more expensive home cost more to sell? — That is the gist of the seller question…
The answer is not as straight forward as the question… Think about it: the market for the more expensive property is proportionally smaller, since far fewer buyers can afford such a house as compared to the $250,000 house. This means that to get to those buyers, more effort must be made, and the advertising costs are proportionately higher for the more elite magazines. Also, because the market has fewer buyers, it is likely that the ads will have to run for a more extended period of time, therefore also costing more. There is the expense of professional photography for the more expensive house, and staging costs. Additionally, a successful Realtor will have relatively higher overhead costs, such as this blog, web sites, print marketing materials, mailings, etc. that standard book keeping practices will allocate to the cost of sales for these properties based on marketing dollars. These expenses, and more, are part of the marketing of any house, but they cost more for more expensive properties.
(more…)
— Next Page »
