This is a *very* long post, but would I appreciate it if the group
regulars would soldier through it, because I need to make a decision
but still have some time for weighing pros and cons.

I accidentally stumbled onto the prettiest, most unbelievably
reasonable 3 room bungalow in an unfashionable and increasingly
crime-ridden section of my region. The elderly bachelor brothers
selling it live next door and have put a new roof on it, surrounded the
entire property with chain-link fence, put in new wall-to-wall
carpeting, and even put teeny-tiny new replacement windows in the
foundation where old (and I suppose) rotted unopening "ventilation"
panes used to be.

The home comes with new appliances included, a poured concrete
basement--even with an old coal bin room newly painted. Although there
are signs of water damage in the main floor ceiling I was able to
detect through the new satin paint, the roof is definitely new.

The home is in a region that experienced a nationally-news-covered
flood @ 35 years ago, so strong it wiped away homes much much larger
than this. I assume the home was either entirely reconstructed on the
original foundation or else rehabilitated in such a way that I noticed
no mold whatsoever *in the subflooring.*

My problem: This is a privately-sold home, and because the brothers are
asking such a low price for it, they have been inundated with offers to
buy it. For some reason I don't understand, they agreed to show it to
me but told me a "neighbor's son" was "ahead of me." They then said in
a very ambiguous way (that I think has something to do with their age)
that even though the kid hasn't come up with a mortgage, they still
won't sell it to me...yet.

Last night the brother handling the sale phoned and said he's "sick and
tired" of the kid and will "keep me informed" about what their lawyer
tells them to do.

I have contacted them at cautious, non-impolite intervals the past two
weeks and pressed them about when they're going to make a decision.
What I'm worried about is their reaction if I request a home inspection
(I'm assuming that as far as my pre-approved mortgage is concerned, the
bank appraiser will pass the home with flying colors).

I have previous disastrous experience buying a home "As Is." The
experience was BIBLICAL, robbed me of the best years of my life, *but*
was responsible for me learning to (among other things) do my own
plumbing, work with cement professionally, and install deadbolts in
steel doors. In other words, I can do a heck of a lot of DIY stuff if
necessary.

But I'm almost 50 and want this 3 room bungalow because I'm a lady
getting tired of buying herself presents at Harbor Freight. (I just
missed out on their special on chain-saw sharpeners!) Since most of
the regulars on this group are guys, and guys are still strong at 50,
I'll put it this way: how many of you would risk 35K on a property such
as I've described if you had one hand tied behind your back?

IIRC, I contacted the local cops to investigate whether this might be a
blighted property (murder scene, drug house, etc.), and the young
policeman told me not only was the neighborhood one of the best in the
little borough but that the Chief at one time lived across the street
from this property.

Apologies again for making this so long, but I've gotten some good
advice here over the years and would appreciate "What's the Worst That
Could Happen?" answers.

Get it inspected, who cares what your neighbors think its your money,
you lost once im suprised anyone with past loss experiance would think
otherwise. Whats the worst that can happen, well you already know.

You already know what can go wrong with a house, so the list is endless and
largely unknown. The problem with NOT having an inspection is that you're
emotionally involved with the place. When buyers get that way, they tend not
to notice things that are blatantly obvious. Don't ask how I know this. :-(

My home inspection took two hours. I'd find it hard to believe the seller
would really take issue with that. If you think it'll spook him, though,
explain this to your lawyer, banker, etc., and see if they can be present at
the inspection so the subsequent paperwork can be done right before the
guy's eyes. This way, he gets instant gratification.

wrote in message
ups.com...

Apologies again for making this so long, but I've gotten some good
advice here over the years and would appreciate "What's the Worst That
Could Happen?" answers.

I happened to read this post out of curiosity. Thought I'd chime in here
with a ridiculously basic thought. I assume you don't know these people
from Adam. Since from the way you've put it, there appear to be mildly
"fishy" elements, do you know for a fact that the "elderly bachelor
brothers" are who they say they are and that they own the house?

just tell the owners that you love the house & want it. but just for piece
of mind & because of past problems want to have someone look over the stuff
you have little knowledge over. they should understand completely & if they
have nothing to hide wouldn't mind one bit.. you are paying for the
inspection not them. if they do have something to hide then you probably
don't want the house anyway.


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
You already know what can go wrong with a house, so the list is endless
and
largely unknown. The problem with NOT having an inspection is that you're
emotionally involved with the place. When buyers get that way, they tend
not
to notice things that are blatantly obvious. Don't ask how I know this.
:-(

My home inspection took two hours. I'd find it hard to believe the seller
would really take issue with that. If you think it'll spook him, though,
explain this to your lawyer, banker, etc., and see if they can be present
at
the inspection so the subsequent paperwork can be done right before the
guy's eyes. This way, he gets instant gratification.

wrote in message
ups.com...

I accidentally stumbled onto the prettiest, most unbelievably
reasonable 3 room bungalow in an unfashionable and increasingly
crime-ridden section of my region.

Remember the 3 most important elements of a real estate purchase: location,
location and location.

Why would you even consider buying in an "increasingly crime ridden" area?
You'll be robbed, burgled, assaulted, raped, harassed, harassed, vandalized,
etc., etc.

Walk away from the properly and save yourself a lot of heartache. It's a bad
deal no matter what the price-- even if they gave it to you, take a pass.

Doc

James wrote:

I happened to read this post out of curiosity. Thought I'd chime in here
with a ridiculously basic thought. I assume you don't know these people
from Adam. Since from the way you've put it, there appear to be mildly
"fishy" elements, do you know for a fact that the "elderly bachelor
brothers" are who they say they are and that they own the house?

Thank you *very* much for bringing the clear title issue to mind. In
fact, I'm going to the county courthouse this morning to investigate.
Our local newspaper offers an incredible, privacy-invading database
where you can enter any address and search to see what a property is
assessed at for taxes, who owns it, etc.

When I first went to see the home, I used this as well as reverse
look-ups to see if the names on all sites were the same. They were,
but that still doesn't mean clear title. So MUCH thanks again.

John H. Holliday wrote:

Remember the 3 most important elements of a real estate purchase: location,
location and location.

Yeah, Doc, true, but I lost 3 kinds of equity big-time when I bought my
very own Addams Family House in 1990: 1) financial, 2) sweat, and 3)
good old-fashioned youth. I dislike the neighborhood but am in reduced
straits in all three ways.

Maybe I should have phrased the question Would You Prefer Independent
Living for Your Elderly Widowed Mom/Sis/Ex or A Federal Housing
Warehouse?

Doug Kanter wrote:
You already know what can go wrong with a house, so the list is endless and
largely unknown. The problem with NOT having an inspection is that you're
emotionally involved with the place. When buyers get that way, they tend not
to notice things that are blatantly obvious. Don't ask how I know this. :-(

My home inspection took two hours. I'd find it hard to believe the seller
would really take issue with that. If you think it'll spook him, though,
explain this to your lawyer, banker, etc., and see if they can be present at
the inspection so the subsequent paperwork can be done right before the
guy's eyes. This way, he gets instant gratification.

Doug, T-H-A-N-K-S for the very needed dash of cold water in the face.
You're right, you're right, you're right.

GOd bless, guys. It's a struggle, but I'm going to demand the
inspection.

wrote:

I accidentally stumbled onto the prettiest, most unbelievably
reasonable 3 room bungalow...

Sounds nice. For $35K? :-) I wonder where it is. I live in Pennsy.

What I'm worried about is their reaction if I request a home inspection
(I'm assuming that as far as my pre-approved mortgage is concerned, the
bank appraiser will pass the home with flying colors).

You might ask the bank to ask for a separate home inspection...

Nick

wrote in message
oups.com...
Doug Kanter wrote:
You already know what can go wrong with a house, so the list is endless
and
largely unknown. The problem with NOT having an inspection is that you're
emotionally involved with the place. When buyers get that way, they tend
not
to notice things that are blatantly obvious. Don't ask how I know this.
:-(

My home inspection took two hours. I'd find it hard to believe the seller
would really take issue with that. If you think it'll spook him, though,
explain this to your lawyer, banker, etc., and see if they can be present
at
the inspection so the subsequent paperwork can be done right before the
guy's eyes. This way, he gets instant gratification.

Doug, T-H-A-N-K-S for the very needed dash of cold water in the face.
You're right, you're right, you're right.

GOd bless, guys. It's a struggle, but I'm going to demand the
inspection.


I never understand why some sellers have a problem with an inspection, even
when the house really is in great shape. And, while shopping for my
mortgage, every lender said an inspection was an absolute requirement. No
inspection, no loan.

wrote in message
oups.com...
James wrote:

I happened to read this post out of curiosity. Thought I'd chime in here
with a ridiculously basic thought. I assume you don't know these people
from Adam. Since from the way you've put it, there appear to be mildly
"fishy" elements, do you know for a fact that the "elderly bachelor
brothers" are who they say they are and that they own the house?

Thank you *very* much for bringing the clear title issue to mind. In
fact, I'm going to the county courthouse this morning to investigate.
Our local newspaper offers an incredible, privacy-invading database
where you can enter any address and search to see what a property is
assessed at for taxes, who owns it, etc.

When I first went to see the home, I used this as well as reverse
look-ups to see if the names on all sites were the same. They were,
but that still doesn't mean clear title. So MUCH thanks again.


Here (Rochester NY), my lawyer charged a flat $400.00 to handle all my home
purchase paperwork. I don't know what others charge, here or elsewhere, but
it seems worthwhile. Are you considering making the purchase without legal
representation?

wrote in message
oups.com...
John H. Holliday wrote:

Remember the 3 most important elements of a real estate purchase:
location,
location and location.

Yeah, Doc, true, but I lost 3 kinds of equity big-time when I bought my
very own Addams Family House in 1990: 1) financial, 2) sweat, and 3)
good old-fashioned youth. I dislike the neighborhood but am in reduced
straits in all three ways.

Maybe I should have phrased the question Would You Prefer Independent
Living for Your Elderly Widowed Mom/Sis/Ex or A Federal Housing
Warehouse?


I vote for independent living, really good locks on the doors, glass block
cellar windows, and a nice pump shotgun in the house. In addition to all
that, our sleep patterns get weird as we get older. I *believe* intruders
may be deterred by the pattern of lights going on and off with little or no
discernible pattern. :-)

It almost sounds like you want a place to be independant living but
something with much repairs and hassle

Instead of a single family home, you may want to look into a condo or
townhouse.
(You may loose a little space, but the maintance cost should balance
out with any association)

In article . com, wrote:
This is a *very* long post, but would I appreciate it if the group
regulars would soldier through it, because I need to make a decision
but still have some time for weighing pros and cons.

I accidentally stumbled onto the prettiest, most unbelievably
reasonable 3 room bungalow in an unfashionable and increasingly
crime-ridden section of my region.

"Increasingly crime-ridden." IOW -- bad as it is *now*, it's getting worse.
Why would you want to live there?

Walk away. No, scratch that. Don't walk. Run.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

wrote in message
oups.com...
It almost sounds like you want a place to be independant living but
something with much repairs and hassle

Instead of a single family home, you may want to look into a condo or
townhouse.
(You may loose a little space, but the maintance cost should balance
out with any association)


She said she was pretty handy. I think that if you've done some home repairs
successfully yourself, it puts you in a better position to hire people for
future work. At least you know what you're talking about, and you can
inquire about specific details and methods.

"Increasingly crime-ridden." IOW -- bad as it is *now*, it's getting
worse.
Why would you want to live there? "

That was my thought too. Here you have a single woman in her 50's and
she's thinking of moving to this kind of area? If it was a poor area
on it's way back, then I'd consider buying it, maybe for a rental.

A lot of other things here are a little fishy too. Like the asking
price being real cheap. Why would someone with buyers allegedly
waiting in line want to sell it below fair value? And one thing is for
sure. I would walk on any property where I was not allowed to do an
inspection. Selling it "as is" is fine, but that has nothing to do
with allowing a professional inspection so you can find out what
condition it's really in. If she wants to go ahead with this, and is
worried about the sellers reaction if she says she wants an inspection,
I wouldn't mention an inspection to the sellers. Just draw up a
contract for sale with a good inspection clause in it and present it to
them. See what happens.

Thank you *very* much for bringing the clear title issue to mind. In
fact, I'm going to the county courthouse this morning to investigate.
Our local newspaper offers an incredible, privacy-invading database
where you can enter any address and search to see what a property is
assessed at for taxes, who owns it, etc.

Oh, that's bull****. Those databases have been around for years and as
freely accessible books for decades before that. There's nothing 'privacy
invading' about it. That some folks don't /know/ it's that freely available
is a different matter.

When I first went to see the home, I used this as well as reverse
look-ups to see if the names on all sites were the same. They were,
but that still doesn't mean clear title. So MUCH thanks again.

When you settle on a house that's what title insurance is for. You
generally can't buy real estate without a title search. Well, one can
always do something stupid but most banks won't go along with it. Anyone
can do a title search, just follow the paperwork trail at the county records
office. But title insurance guards against you getting stuck with the bill
in the event something turns out wrong.

IIRC, I contacted the local cops to investigate whether this might be a
blighted property (murder scene, drug house, etc.), and the young
policeman told me not only was the neighborhood one of the best in the
little borough but that the Chief at one time lived across the street
from this property.

it's a cheap house in a crappy neighborhood, right? Well, it's always a
gamble. The fact that the Chief lived there in the past doesn't say much,
other than "he got the hell out when the gettin' was good". It's all
relative, if you're the brave sort that can deal with the various 'issues'
the neighborhood presents then $35k might be a deal, assuming of course
that's a reasonable figure for the immediate area. Talk with other
residents, go by the area on a Saturday afternoon to find them. If they're
not friendly to the idea, well, then do you want them as neighbors?

"wkearney99" wrote in message
...

Talk with other
residents, go by the area on a Saturday afternoon to find them. If
they're
not friendly to the idea, well, then do you want them as neighbors?


Sale prices of comparable homes in the vicinity - a realtor can provide that
info easily. The OP could get approximations of this info by visiting real
estate web sites, to see what comparable homes are listing for in the area.

www.century21.com
www.remax.com
www.americaschoice.com

wrote in message
oups.com...
John H. Holliday wrote:

Remember the 3 most important elements of a real estate purchase:
location,
location and location.

Yeah, Doc, true, but I lost 3 kinds of equity big-time when I bought my
very own Addams Family House in 1990: 1) financial, 2) sweat, and 3)
good old-fashioned youth. I dislike the neighborhood but am in reduced
straits in all three ways.

Maybe I should have phrased the question Would You Prefer Independent
Living for Your Elderly Widowed Mom/Sis/Ex or A Federal Housing
Warehouse?


Most any living arrangement is preferable to living in a crime ridden
area.Take it from an ex cop who's interviewed far too many crime victims...

Doc

Maybe I should have phrased the question Would You Prefer Independent
Living for Your Elderly Widowed Mom/Sis/Ex or A Federal Housing
Warehouse?


Maybe you should look up "false dichotomy", and consider the
implications as relevent to the current discussion.

wrote in message
ups.com...
This is a *very* long post, but would I appreciate it if the group


snipped

What I'm worried about is their reaction if I request a home inspection
(I'm assuming that as far as my pre-approved mortgage is concerned, the
bank appraiser will pass the home with flying colors).

I'll put it this way: how many of you would risk 35K on a property such
as I've described if you had one hand tied behind your back?



Most sellers who have sold a home utilizing the home inspection process are
somewhat cynical because most buyers expect the seller to correct everything
the inspector finds. They use the inspection report to renegotiate the
price. If on the other hand you explain to the sellers that you lender
requires or you need it for your piece of mind and you will use it only to
proceed or cancel the contract if more X amount of items or $ are discovered
they should be fine with that.

Your lender will require a full title report before proceeding. Any
research you do along those lines is a waste of your time unless you are
plopping down a large earnest money deposit. You are paying for the title
report and should receive a copy of it.

Your lender will also require an appraisal of the property. You are
entitled to a copy of that since you are paying for it.

The tax rolls will provide you with a sanity check about the value of
property in the area.

Only you can judge the area and the quality of life you might have there.


Colbyt

In article . com,
wrote:

What I'm worried about is their reaction if I request a home inspection
(I'm assuming that as far as my pre-approved mortgage is concerned, the
bank appraiser will pass the home with flying colors).

The house we're in right now was bought contingent on an inspection
that turned up two cracks in the furnace heat exchanger. There was
haggling as a result, but we ended up seeing $1800 off the sale price.

Given the history of flood, I would not buy without an inspection. If
the seller balk, I would walk. There are always other homes in nice
neighborhoods, and it sounds like your chances of actually getting this
place are iffy.

--
Life. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. -- Dr. Who

Wow, I'm impressed and persuaded by the articulate and thoughtful
responses I got from posters and want to thank you all again.

Something I learned this morning is the amount of "private eye" work
you can accomplish by doing a utilities-history check of the property
and going to the zoning or code enforcement office and asking if permit
applications by the home seller are public domain.

This morning, after making the post, I learned that the property (in an
area severely flooded thirty-five years ago) per the sanitation
authority, was considered a "double block!" It's a BUNGALOW, so I
started asking questions about whether what I thought was a bungalow
began its life as a double block but ended up as a one-story three-room
home because it was the only salvageable part of a formerly huge house.


While the municipal code inspector read me the reports of permit
applications over the years, he was of the opinion that all was not
right with any home sale that did not provide legal documentation of
having been subdivided, no matter whether the bungalow was the remnant
of an ancient flooded double-block or not.

So I identified (without the cost of an attorney, whose services will
be needless if I don't end up buying the home) two potentially
big-ticket issues, the lack of a subdivided lot, and the fact that this
home, no matter how often it has been painted, more than likely is
infected by thirty-five year-old mold because of having been in the
flood plain AND never having its interior cladding torn down.

I am very glad I made the post and grateful for the helpful people who
responded, particularly Doug Kanter and Doc Holliday.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Wow, I'm impressed and persuaded by the articulate and thoughtful
responses I got from posters and want to thank you all again.

Something I learned this morning is the amount of "private eye" work
you can accomplish by doing a utilities-history check of the property
and going to the zoning or code enforcement office and asking if permit
applications by the home seller are public domain.

This morning, after making the post, I learned that the property (in an
area severely flooded thirty-five years ago) per the sanitation
authority, was considered a "double block!" It's a BUNGALOW, so I
started asking questions about whether what I thought was a bungalow
began its life as a double block but ended up as a one-story three-room
home because it was the only salvageable part of a formerly huge house.


While the municipal code inspector read me the reports of permit
applications over the years, he was of the opinion that all was not
right with any home sale that did not provide legal documentation of
having been subdivided, no matter whether the bungalow was the remnant
of an ancient flooded double-block or not.

So I identified (without the cost of an attorney, whose services will
be needless if I don't end up buying the home) two potentially
big-ticket issues, the lack of a subdivided lot, and the fact that this
home, no matter how often it has been painted, more than likely is
infected by thirty-five year-old mold because of having been in the
flood plain AND never having its interior cladding torn down.

I am very glad I made the post and grateful for the helpful people who
responded, particularly Doug Kanter and Doc Holliday.


Flood and weather disasters seem to hit areas on a 30-40 year intervals
anyway and this year has been a doosey. This spot is probably due. Glad to
see you found the real reasons to stay away.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
You already know what can go wrong with a house, so the list is endless
and
largely unknown. The problem with NOT having an inspection is that you're
emotionally involved with the place. When buyers get that way, they tend
not
to notice things that are blatantly obvious. Don't ask how I know this.
:-(

My home inspection took two hours.

OMG, I take almost that amout of time for doing a HVAC inspection on a
resale. What does the guy do, fly through the house?




I'd find it hard to believe the seller
would really take issue with that. If you think it'll spook him, though,
explain this to your lawyer, banker, etc., and see if they can be present
at
the inspection so the subsequent paperwork can be done right before the
guy's eyes. This way, he gets instant gratification.

"wkearney99" wrote in message
...
Thank you *very* much for bringing the clear title issue to mind. In
fact, I'm going to the county courthouse this morning to investigate.
Our local newspaper offers an incredible, privacy-invading database
where you can enter any address and search to see what a property is
assessed at for taxes, who owns it, etc.

Oh, that's bull****. Those databases have been around for years and as
freely accessible books for decades before that. There's nothing
'privacy
invading' about it. That some folks don't /know/ it's that freely
available
is a different matter.

When I first went to see the home, I used this as well as reverse
look-ups to see if the names on all sites were the same. They were,
but that still doesn't mean clear title. So MUCH thanks again.

When you settle on a house that's what title insurance is for. You
generally can't buy real estate without a title search. Well, one can
always do something stupid but most banks won't go along with it. Anyone
can do a title search, just follow the paperwork trail at the county
records
office. But title insurance guards against you getting stuck with the
bill
in the event something turns out wrong.


I didn't have title insurance on my former house. We bought it and ended up
refinancing it 4-5 times in 15 years. When we went to sell it the title
search turned up a note from 2 owners before us(~18-20 years before). The
closing attorney said to forget about it. We did.

"HeatMan" wrote in
:


"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
You already know what can go wrong with a house, so the list is
endless
and
largely unknown. The problem with NOT having an inspection is that
you're emotionally involved with the place. When buyers get that way,
they tend
not
to notice things that are blatantly obvious. Don't ask how I know
this.
:-(

My home inspection took two hours.

OMG, I take almost that amout of time for doing a HVAC inspection on a
resale. What does the guy do, fly through the house?




I'd find it hard to believe the seller
would really take issue with that. If you think it'll spook him,
though, explain this to your lawyer, banker, etc., and see if they
can be present
at
the inspection so the subsequent paperwork can be done right before
the guy's eyes. This way, he gets instant gratification.






In many places a "General Purpose" home inspector isn't allowed to do
very much to an HVAC system. (Gotta respect the unions)

They can check for obvious leaks and do pull a few panels to check fans
etc. If you want the core or burn chamber checked, that's another
inspector.

Brad

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 11:28:54 GMT, "James" wrote:

:
wrote in message
oups.com...
:
: Apologies again for making this so long, but I've gotten some good
: advice here over the years and would appreciate "What's the Worst That
: Could Happen?" answers.
:
:I happened to read this post out of curiosity. Thought I'd chime in here
:with a ridiculously basic thought. I assume you don't know these people
:from Adam. Since from the way you've put it, there appear to be mildly
:"fishy" elements, do you know for a fact that the "elderly bachelor
:brothers" are who they say they are and that they own the house?
:
Having bought a fixerupper (that I'd rented for 17 years) I'll chime in.
At least when I bought (and I think this is standard), the purchase
involves an escrow officer and what's called "title insurance." You pay
for title insurance, which assures you (up to a cash limit, hopefully
approximating what you pay for the house) that the house is indeed owned
by the people who appear to be selling it to you and that you are the
title holder after the transaction. This process tends to eliminate the
danger of a bogus transaction.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Wow, I'm impressed and persuaded by the articulate and thoughtful
responses I got from posters and want to thank you all again.

Something I learned this morning is the amount of "private eye" work
you can accomplish by doing a utilities-history check of the property
and going to the zoning or code enforcement office and asking if permit
applications by the home seller are public domain.

This morning, after making the post, I learned that the property (in an
area severely flooded thirty-five years ago) per the sanitation
authority, was considered a "double block!" It's a BUNGALOW, so I
started asking questions about whether what I thought was a bungalow
began its life as a double block but ended up as a one-story three-room
home because it was the only salvageable part of a formerly huge house.


While the municipal code inspector read me the reports of permit
applications over the years, he was of the opinion that all was not
right with any home sale that did not provide legal documentation of
having been subdivided, no matter whether the bungalow was the remnant
of an ancient flooded double-block or not.

So I identified (without the cost of an attorney, whose services will
be needless if I don't end up buying the home) two potentially
big-ticket issues, the lack of a subdivided lot, and the fact that this
home, no matter how often it has been painted, more than likely is
infected by thirty-five year-old mold because of having been in the
flood plain AND never having its interior cladding torn down.

I am very glad I made the post and grateful for the helpful people who
responded, particularly Doug Kanter and Doc Holliday.


You're welcome.

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
news
"Increasingly crime-ridden." IOW -- bad as it is *now*, it's getting
worse.

Translation: "a lot of jigs and spics in the area and they're breeding more"