All Forum Posts by: Robin L.

There are companies that advertise that you can list on MLS for you for $100 or so, so I realize there would be some cost to advertise on MLS and print some fliers. I fell I would have to list on MLS to be competitive. We have excellent weather year round and the best time to sell a house here is actually December-April, historically homes go for more in those months.

I'm not at all squeamish about showing my home, but I am guessing that since most people here use an agent to buy I wouldn't really be showing the house anyway, just letting them in and leaving to let the buyers agent guide the tour. 

I am afraid of people low-balling when they see FSBO, and while I think real estate agents should be ethical and show their clients houses that fit their needs regardless of FSBO status, I know not all real estate agents have this kind of moral compass ( another story for another time).

I would absolutely offer a commission to the buyers agent if there was one. I think if the house is priced competitively enough and buyers like it that should be enough for a buyer to tell their agent they want to see it, regardless of FSBO status, but that's just how I operate in looking for homes in the past. The buyer shouldn't care about FSBO status (or they even might think they can get it cheaper) the main reason a buyer would be avoiding FSBO would be if they had a greedy/lazy real estate agent.

I am pretty much assuming that I will be paying a commission of 3% to the buyers agent, so I am really only saving 3% if I got the FSBO, but on a $450k sale is still $13,500, not small potatoes.

Homes sell on average 30-45 days. The 4 homes that are the same floor plan all sold for between $450k and $465K, so very similar. I feel like because the neighborhood is cookie cutter and homes are selling for about thee same price in a relatively short amount of time FSBO should be easier than in other neighborhoods with more variables to consider.

My husband and I are looking to move soon. We were considering the idea of selling our place ourselves. 

Reasons I think we can FSBO:

1.This is the third home we have purchased (and now will be selling) in a 10 year period, so we are familiar with the process. 

2.For our last two places, I read a lot about staging and worked hard to clean, repair and stage well. My husband took the photos (he has a nice camera and has taken photography classes) The realtors were so impressed one shaved 0.5% of her fee off since she didn't need to hire a stager or photographer and another agent asked us to stage and photograph another one of their listings. 

3. Our neighborhood is only 5 years old and there are only a handful of floor plans. There are 4 identical floorpans that have sold in the last 6 months so I've got great comparables. We also had an appraisal done in the last 90 days so we have a pretty good idea of what it will sell for. Since it's so new (our house is 2 years old) there are no problems with the house--it still has that new house smell. 

Reasons I'm afraid to FSBO:

1. You hear horror stories of things going wrong. The Real Estate Profession exist for a reason, they are professionals with a lot of knowledge and in my experience a good one can spot and handle issues before they become big (and costly) problems. There are a lot of I's to dot and T's to cross in a real estate transaction and they do this day in and day out. Real estate agents can take a lot of the stress out. 

2. How much do you really save? Real estate agents say they can get better prices so is it really worth the hassle? Most people around here  use a real estate agent so I don't think I will be able to avoid the buyer's agent fee, but saving 3% would be a huge number as our house appraised for $480,000 and most of the comps are in the $460's 

Thoughts?

I'm running into this same problem. I am trying to get tax delinquent lists in washington counties but some are telling me the list can't be used for commercial purposes, per washington state law. It's confusing as only a few counties have told me this is washington state law, while others have not said anything about commercial uses. I read the law in question and it's a little confusing to me. 

I asked about it and was told there is a law about it--Washington State Legislature RCW 42.56.070(9)

 "Documents and Indexes to be Made Public" which states among other things that 

"This chapter shall not be construed as giving authority to any agency, the office of the secretary of the senate, or the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives to give, sell or provide access to lists of individuals requested for commercial purposes, and agencies, the office of the secretary of the senate, and the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives shall not do so unless specifically authorized or directed by law"

Thoughts?

I have spoken with a dozen other counties in this state that have not required this, so I'm wondering if I'll just skip this county.  I am going to try to make money off this list, so I can't in good conscience sign that statement. I really don't want to operate in a "gray area" as dark as this one... 

So I am trying to get a tax delinquent list from a county in Washington in order to contact raw land owners behind on their property taxes to see if they'd be interested in selling. 

On the document required by the county to get the records, you're required to sign a statement saying you will not use the information for commercial purposes. 

I am hesitant to buy the list and use to solicit land sales as that seems like "commercial purposes." Any thoughts?

 CA laws are SO tenant friendly it's crazy! We experienced this first hand when we were renting and had a run-in with a landlord who tried to raise our rent  too high and too fast-- (we had lived there over 2 years and there were all kinds of protections as far as length of notice for raising rent, etc.) San Diego is not as high as LA but still very expensive market compared to the rest of the US. 

 While it's true that San Diego has a much better investing market than LA, it's a solid 3 hour drive from where I currently live. I really want to invest near where I live, because I want to be very hands on--driving around the neighborhood regularly and slowly building a local team, so San Diego is just too far.  I know "hate" is a strong word, but we hate living in Los Angeles. We would be moving to one of these other cities as a better place to raise our kids, so I wouldn't be out of state investing. We are waiting to start investing until we figure out where we want to move, because we want our investment properties to be close by.  

@Jack T

There are some deals in So Cal, but it's one of the highest cost of living in the US, probably only behind SF and NY. It takes a lot more money to get in as a property here is about 3X or more the cost of similar properties in the middle of the country. I've talked with a few local real estate investors, and they're finding good deals, but they have a strong network in place to find them and are putting down 40% or more, which I just can't afford in this market. They also told me the ROI is not as great in So Cal as other markets. We don't like living in So Cal anyway, and our money will go farther somewhere else.