Ontario Tax Sale Property Forum

*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 

News:

Tax List Property Listings Forum


  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Calendar
  • Login
  • Register
  • Ontario Tax Sale Property Forum »
  • Tax Sale Forum »
  • Questions and Answers »
  • conflicting info??
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: conflicting info??  (Read 160319 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Zander

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #15 on: July 04, 2008, 02:23:31 AM »
I'd say your bid was in the right area as well.  I was around the same.  
Winning bid was 310 followed by 302! about 14 bids in the 200-220 range and a couple stragglers above that.. Whoever bid the 310 is in for a nasty surprise when they realize the extent of the renos required..

Pfm's pretty much on target with the value .  Property is among the smaller ones in the area so I figgured the value at 380-390k as well.  MPAC was in the 340's..  

Minimum of 60k required in renovations, $310k, +time and other costs... Crazy.  There was a "whoa" in the room when the council read the bid! hehe

So did anyone know the story behind the property? (aside that it being vacant for the last 10+ years?)  

« Last Edit: July 04, 2008, 07:18:56 PM by Zander »
Logged

justlooking

  • Bronze
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: 1
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??/42 Allandsale
« Reply #16 on: July 04, 2008, 02:52:51 AM »
Yeh! That's Exactly what I was thinking. The guy who bid 297 ?? For himself?  I found that last sale similar semi in good shape sold for 380. I cant do work myslef and I'm not a contractor so must stay conservative. Second one I lost out n\on. What's up with the large bids anyway?
Logged

justlooking

  • Bronze
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: 1
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #17 on: July 04, 2008, 02:54:55 AM »
Sasha, the assessed value was 342000. Still waiting to find out what the high bd was for.
Logged

Sasha

  • Platinum
  • *****
  • Posts: 133
  • Karma: 6
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #18 on: July 04, 2008, 07:36:41 AM »
310 with an assessed value of 342 in a market downturn??  Similar thing occurred in the 1990's and lasted a few years, we may see many foreclosures and tax sales if the downturn continues
 Guy had to have been a contractor, they're the ones that go for these, doesn't cost them as much to do the reno's.  Wouldn't want to be the sucker that buys that house after the reno's, they'll probably scimp on quite a few things if they hope to make a profit.
In my area, been seeing a lot of homes listed by real estate agents at assessed value and a few below assessed value (local economy), starting to see a few T.O homes on MLS listed for not much above assessment (realestate market 'correction' and homes going for less than list price or previous sales).  Many homes didn't have an assessment in the past couple of years, MPAC skipped a couple of years, but they'll get assessed soon.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2008, 07:54:03 AM by Sasha »
Logged

Pfm1011

  • Senior
  • *******
  • Posts: 949
  • Karma: 63
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??Slimebag
« Reply #19 on: July 04, 2008, 10:53:21 AM »
"Maybe I can save someone the headaches of tying up your money, and the fees associated.....a "flipper" developer I know has already submitted a bid with the first two starting digits of "37" on Allanbrooke, so unless you start with "38" it's not worth tying your cash up. However a search didn't turn up any extra liens, although if the city cuts the grass, there will be that one added.

There is a perfect example of why you take everything you read on here with a grain of salt,   Never Forget  ....we are all competitors.

Always make your own decisions.   Of course that was one of the lamer attempts at scamming I have seen ...slimebag moron
Logged

Frank

  • Senior
  • *******
  • Posts: 917
  • Karma: 162
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #20 on: July 04, 2008, 12:28:14 PM »
Quote from: Pfm1011 on July 04, 2008, 10:53:21 AM
"Maybe I can save someone the headaches of tying up your money, and the fees associated.....a "flipper" developer I know has already submitted a bid with the first two starting digits of "37" on Allanbrooke, so unless you start with "38" it's not worth tying your cash up. However a search didn't turn up any extra liens, although if the city cuts the grass, there will be that one added.

There is a perfect example of why you take everything you read on here with a grain of salt,   Never Forget  ....we are all competitors.

Always make your own decisions.   Of course that was one of the lamer attempts at scamming I have seen ...slimebag moron

Unbelievably lame..I hope it was from nobodyIKnow
Logged

Sasha

  • Platinum
  • *****
  • Posts: 133
  • Karma: 6
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #21 on: July 04, 2008, 05:55:59 PM »
Quote from: Frank on July 04, 2008, 12:28:14 PM
Quote from: Pfm1011 on July 04, 2008, 10:53:21 AM
"Maybe I can save someone the headaches of tying up your money, and the fees associated.....a "flipper" developer I know has already submitted a bid with the first two starting digits of "37" on Allanbrooke, so unless you start with "38" it's not worth tying your cash up. However a search didn't turn up any extra liens, although if the city cuts the grass, there will be that one added.

There is a perfect example of why you take everything you read on here with a grain of salt,   Never Forget  ....we are all competitors.

Always make your own decisions.   Of course that was one of the lamer attempts at scamming I have seen ...slimebag moron

Unbelievably lame..I hope it was from nobodyIKnow

If someone had bid that high, they'd have won for sure.  What reason would someone have to get people to bid high?  When I said that I bid just above 1/2 of assessed value, unless its in bad shape or in an area with a poor local economy, then I bid just above minimum, just being honest and looked at past winning bids on ontariotaxsales.ca website.  Many win with bids just above minimum in areas where people aren't interested in buying.
Perhaps someone we know lives in the area and is thinks a sale at a low price will bring down the value of his property.  Don't worry, tax sales, 'distress sales' such as divorce, immediate relocation and sherrif sales etc... have no effect on MPAC assessment.  In my town, MPAC gives out a brochure outlining whats used in assessment such as recent sale prices of nearby areas (within a block or two), lot size/type, home size, quality of construction materials, additions, fireplace, pool, basement - finished, depreciation (yes the actual house does depreciate, prefab homes depreciate faster, land values go up and current market trends set values) and the single most important factor is location, location, location etc...

Sasha
Logged

Zander

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #22 on: July 04, 2008, 07:14:23 PM »


Quote from: Frank on July 04, 2008, 12:28:14 PM
Quote from: Pfm1011 on July 04, 2008, 10:53:21 AM
"Maybe I can save someone the headaches of tying up your money, and the fees associated.....a "flipper" developer I know has already submitted a bid with the first two starting digits of "37" on Allanbrooke, so unless you start with "38" it's not worth tying your cash up. However a search didn't turn up any extra liens, although if the city cuts the grass, there will be that one added.

There is a perfect example of why you take everything you read on here with a grain of salt,   Never Forget  ....we are all competitors.

Always make your own decisions.   Of course that was one of the lamer attempts at scamming I have seen ...slimebag moron

Unbelievably lame..I hope it was from nobodyIKnow


I would say his interest was solely to convince others not to bid.  His only problem was that the bid he told us about (37) was ridiculous to begin with which showed he obviously didn't know the value of the property enough to realize it himself... 

I assume he's probably the guy who bid 52k hoping nobody else would show.

Alternatively he could be the guy that bid 56k, had it rejected for only submitting 10% down and spent the next minute or two in front of council discussing why his bid had been invalidated while knowing full well that he had already been outbid by at lease 50 other people anyway!






« Last Edit: July 04, 2008, 07:16:00 PM by Zander »
Logged

justlooking

  • Bronze
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: 1
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??310 for Allandale
« Reply #23 on: July 04, 2008, 08:30:32 PM »
Makes you wonder, doesn't it. Just like the Oshawa sale. That guy's bid was 10 grand over recent sales. I dont get it.
I would have liked that house in the Kingsway though.  Oh well! Keep posted for Toronto sale in the fall. (Don,t ask how I know)
Logged

justlooking

  • Bronze
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: 1
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??/Story on Allendale
« Reply #24 on: July 04, 2008, 08:44:32 PM »
I could not find out the whole story, but did find a good contact and was told vacant for last 15 years. You can see from the title search that the property was inherited, apparently one daughter. I am told that some neighbours had contacted the family trying to purchase but to no avail. Wonder what the state of mind. Its a sorry situation to just let a property  go for 49K in taxes when assessed at 342k
Logged

imz

  • Bronze
  • **
  • Posts: 11
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #25 on: July 04, 2008, 09:19:23 PM »
well...  i must say.. i initiated this thread more as a general question on the process, (because i'm completely new to this).
Nowhere in my original question did i mention the allanbrooke property, but somehow this became a became a discussion on that property.

having said that, it was the allanbrooke property that i was curious about and wondered if there was a potential for a good deal there.
I was there for the entire time yesterday to see how things would go.
there were 75  bids in total.  (about 4-5 were rejected)

Top bids were:
310K
302K
297,450
251K
250K
241K
236,650

hats off to the person who bid 251K.  IMHO that was the most intelligent bid and offered the best risk/reward opportunity and should have won the property.
(i did NOT bid by the way)
the top 3 bids are out of whack, again just IMHO.  take $300K and add about 70-80 for renos and you can find something comparable on MLS without incurring all that unknown risk.

thanks to the folks who replied to my question...

to the dude who said someone would bid 380K ... stop wasting our time... no one was gonna believe you anyway... and that's just an being a donkey.
these boards are designed for the intelligent exchange of information -- go find yourself a mindless chat room to waste your time with
Logged

Sasha

  • Platinum
  • *****
  • Posts: 133
  • Karma: 6
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #26 on: July 05, 2008, 03:44:01 AM »
The very first tax sale that I obtained information on was in Bradford and the sale was subsequently cancelled.  I received a tender package from the city including a survey and information on doing a title search.  The person on the telephone at the township offered his opinion, the taxes owed ++ were around 39K, the assessment value of the property was around 150K and the treasurer whom I spoke with told me, if it was him, he'd bid at least 100K.  I drove by the property and onto a private driveway, door wide open, windows smashed and junk, old tires, car parts etc...  A detached barn with more junk.  Both home and barn made of wood siding and rotting.  I thought it required to be demolished, land value only, yet the treasurer was advising to bid 100K and the assessment included the house and barn.  Is the city supposed to make recommendations on bidding?  I followed up since I had spoken to the neighbors, they helped, he got in touch with the guy and he eventually paid his taxes.  I was later contacted to see if I was still interested in buying the property, since the owner paid his taxes and just wanted to get rid of it, said he'd sell it for 100K.  I no thanked him and told him to ask a contractor that was into TLC (Time, Cost, Labor) type work.  I assumed the same thing would occur with the Allanbrooke property, though Allenbrooke is in much better shape, at least from the outside and in a very established neighborhood.  If Allanbrooke doesn't require any TLC, but a little cosmetic work, the winner may still make a profit.  Who would bid that high unless they had seen the property and knew what shape it was in inside, a neighbor, a foe pretending to be a friend?  I can't see myself bidding that high without knowing the condition of the property, its too risky.  Any property that I've ever purchased on MLS, has been conditional on inspection and I use that information to negotiate a better price.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2008, 03:59:25 AM by Sasha »
Logged

Zander

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #27 on: July 05, 2008, 06:29:15 AM »
You really have to wonder sometimes.  Allenbrook was vacant for at least 10 years and in need of TLC.  There was a hole in so no doubt racoons had found their way in. Plumbing, electrical,etc.. lots of work to do...

The story surprised me.
Quote from: justlooking on July 04, 2008, 08:44:32 PM
I could not find out the whole story, but did find a good contact and was told vacant for last 15 years. You can see from the title search that the property was inherited, apparently one daughter. I am told that some neighbours had contacted the family trying to purchase but to no avail. Wonder what the state of mind. Its a sorry situation to just let a property  go for 49K in taxes when assessed at 342k

I was really interested in the story as well after finding many years of taxes owing, no mortgages or liens.  I thought it was a couple that probably went back to Italy years ago.  I mean who simply gives a 100% owned house to the city?

Turns out the daughter found out she was adopted, went a little crazy and decided she was no longer family.  In essence, she walked away from the house.

I didn't talk to the neighbours, but I do know that nobody could buy from the family -family didn't own the house.  This house must have become an urban legend to the whole family...  Imagine random people calling you every year inquiring if they can buy a house that you don't own.

 

Logged

Sasha

  • Platinum
  • *****
  • Posts: 133
  • Karma: 6
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #28 on: July 05, 2008, 10:45:36 AM »
Hey, don't believe everything people tell you.  What happens if a sole heir is deceased and there are no children, next of kin, no will?  You know, the childless widow that leaves everything to her cats.
No surprise that there was no mortgage, as already mentioned, if there was a mortgage, the bank would have paid the taxes and then sold the home as foreclosure.
A home down the street from me assessed at 87K, bought 6 years ago for 70K (I live in the boonies, on a locum, though have a home in T.O) sold for 50K, it was on the market for 3 years, no one wanted it, basement had flooded, plumbing leaking behind wall and roof leaking, serious damage and mold problems - health hazard in my opinion.  I wonder if the property had gone on tax sale and was a closed door, no peeking, tax sale, that it may have gone for more.   If the excess proceeds go back to owner, then it may have been worth it for the owner to not pay and let the property go on tax sale.
Anyone take a close look at 73 Allanbrooke listed on MLS at 585K and check what the assessment is for 73 in comparison to mkt. value?
« Last Edit: July 05, 2008, 11:05:34 AM by Sasha »
Logged

Pfm1011

  • Senior
  • *******
  • Posts: 949
  • Karma: 63
    • View Profile
Re: conflicting info??
« Reply #29 on: July 05, 2008, 01:41:29 PM »
73 Allanbrooke    1423 M2  huge lot on outside of bend in rd Plus a house LISTED on MLS means it hasnt sold

42 Allanbrooke    271  m2

At 71 Allanbrooke the houses become detached , You cannot compare the two,  Its a "wrong side of the tracks" comparison
Compare 50 sold  at 419 last August close  or 49 at 385 with Nov 07 close    so these were last spring and summer sales  and Im guessing they didnt come with raccoons

36 Closed in January at 485   but had previously 265 in 2002 so should have been around 400 so looks like a severe overpay or the house was renovated up to Taj Mahal standard which I doubt

Allow toronto market isnt hot anymore and I can only see the buyer will be lucky to get out with a breakeven

The only people I could see spending this is the adjacent owner as they have lived there for 12 years putting up with this Sh*thole and would pay a premium to get it
 ( if they had planned it out better they could have changed the locks, made necessary repairs to maintain health standards  ,  paid the taxes and prayed the owner didnt show up for a few more years ;D  If the daughter story is true, Im guessing she has passed on )

"but your honour, when she stormed out she said "you can have the F*cking place"  or alternately "she asked me to take care of it for her, these are just liens for the repairs"

Of course I dont understand why the neighbours didnt at least cut the grass themselves just so they dont have to stare at it as it was dragging their houses down and would take a whole 5 minutes to cut the lawn




« Last Edit: July 05, 2008, 02:00:45 PM by Pfm1011 »
Logged

  • Print
Pages: 1 [2] 3
« previous next »
  • Ontario Tax Sale Property Forum »
  • Tax Sale Forum »
  • Questions and Answers »
  • conflicting info??
 

  • Powered by SMF 2.0.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
  • XHTML
  • RSS
  • WAP2

Page created in 0.046 seconds with 19 queries.