Can someone answer the question why you would want to live in DUMBO? I'm pretty curious to hear legitimate answers

Posted by: goodoleboy at September 17, 2009 5:53 PM in response to Condo of the Day: 30 Main Street, #2C

"We take building violations seriously here and your neighbors will report any illegal conversion or use of cellar space as living space. There are no legal basements in the entire area."

- Would you really want to live near someone like this anyways? Sounds horrible.

Posted by: goodoleboy at August 17, 2009 11:04 PM in response to Renting the Basement?

"We take building violations seriously here and your neighbors will report any illegal conversion or use of cellar space as living space. There are no legal basements in the entire area."

- Would you really want to live near someone like this anyways? Sounds horrible.

Posted by: goodoleboy at August 17, 2009 11:03 PM in response to Renting the Basement?

To all you first-time landlords, $200/mth isn't unreasonable at all. I'm sure you'll figure that out soon. Plenty of first hand experience with folks who have gotten that much off and more. What you first time landlords will eventually find out as well is that a good tenant is worth keeping instead of all the expenses of cleaning, move-ins/outs, etc. even if its less money per month. BTW - what incremental extra expense, that is so significant, does another tenant have? Lastly, I would imagine rents are going to drop or stay flat for awhile now, unless you think the 5000-7000 new apartments coming on-line throughout this year and next won't have an impact.

Posted by: goodoleboy at July 31, 2009 10:58 AM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

the real problem with low-income properties is that it makes it more expensive for everyone... but then again since we are basically becoming a socialist country it won't really matter, because we'll all have the same apartments/wages/etc! what they should do is issue "wage ID's" that you can use to buy stuff and if you don't make enough then you get to pay less than market price, and if you make too much you pay more than market price.

Posted by: goodoleboy at July 17, 2009 1:06 PM in response to Market-Rate Units Available at Red Hook Co-Op Project

BTW - I don't think there is anything wrong with being a day trader. But using status as a HFer to claim superiority in financial/market knowledge is just plain lame. I know a lot of dumbass HFers and some super sharp day traders.

Posted by: goodoleboy at July 1, 2009 12:51 PM in response to Case-Shiller: Beware the Head Fake

okay, i can only handle so much BS from dibs... you are a day trader at best. any person at any respectable HF doesn't have even a fraction of the time you do to post incessant crap. second, anyone with a pulse and a pair of balls could've owned in the past bubble. third, anyone at a respectable HF wouldn't waste their time in real estate due to illiquidity, significant trx costs and marginal returns. and finally, if the market is such a great leading indicator, then what happened to it prior to Spring 2008? OH, it was pricing in growth in 2050 right?

Posted by: goodoleboy at July 1, 2009 12:47 PM in response to Case-Shiller: Beware the Head Fake

You're a fool if you think people with "less than perfect credit and who can't afford 20% down" are the only ones who buy highly levered...

Posted by: goodoleboy at June 29, 2009 9:35 PM in response to F.H.A. Loans Skyrocket in Popularity

Joe,

Thanks for making the rest of us pay more by you paying less.

Posted by: goodoleboy at June 26, 2009 5:10 PM in response to Rising Inventory Bad News for Burg

Ha... what's the saying? DeNial ain't a river in Egypt.

Posted by: goodoleboy at June 8, 2009 12:04 PM in response to Help with crazy appraisals

Why is there not an MLS in NYC?

Posted by: goodoleboy at June 5, 2009 8:51 PM in response to 2233 Caton Avenue Sells Out

FHA 2 family - max amount they'll loan in 5 boroughs is 934k, max amount on 3 family is ~1.12M... and FHA will allow approx. Max 95% Loan to value (LTV) ratio on their multi-family loans.

So for example - if you found a 1M 3 family you wanted. FHA would loan you the lesser of ~1.12M, or 95% of 1M. So they will loan you 950k and you will have to put down the difference. If house were 1.5M 3 Fam, then they would loan you the 1.12M (b/c 95% of 1.5M is 1.425M) and you pay difference.

The thing that sucks about FHA is they charge a form of Private Mortgage Insurance (PMI) on all their loans and then they also charge regular PMI on LTV ratio over 78%. Which on a 1M dollars is something like an extra $400/mth on top of the regular Principal and Interest.

Also note that these Multi-family rates/limits apply only to owner-occupied properties.

If you could put down more than you would save yourself a hell of a lot of... especially because PMI isn't deductible for taxes, (or actually phases out at really low levels of income).

Good luck.

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 30, 2009 1:18 PM in response to Is this mortgage possible?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124336746233955539.html

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 27, 2009 7:05 PM in response to Case-Shiller: Record Drops in NY and Nationwide

"Bank of America has raised $26B since its stress test results. The market has spoken. The stock is up 376% from its low.

PULL YOUR HEADS OUT OF THE SAND PEOPLE. The market has begun to discount the recovery. It's leaving you behind in your dirtnap"

Dave - either you are a realtor or a developer, or just really need to sell. Either way you are WRONG. The decline has just begun. You think NYC is different than the rest of the world? Tell me why? Only thing stopping people from selling their over-leveraged properties is because they having nothing to make up the difference with. Oh, and apparently NYC historically lags US RE market declines by approx. 18+/- months... which... is about this summer/fall.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124342915291758463.html#mod=testMod

BoA should be called "Bank of other countries than America". Oh, 376% up from low and still 400% off of its average price a year + ago! Nice.

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 27, 2009 12:23 PM in response to Case-Shiller: Record Drops in NY and Nationwide

A broker can represent both but is supposed to formally, in writing, disclose his status as buyers, sellers or dual agent.

Posted by: edifice rex at May 21, 2009 10:07 PM

Gee that sounds like a great plan! I'm sure the agent (or uh broker... that sounds SO much more professional... kinda like a Stock Broker...) is going to act with the utmost fiduciary capacity for all parties but themselves. Let's all think about this together....

Agent - Hey Mr/Mrs X I'll be working for you in good faith to help you negotiate with Seller Y

Agent - Hey Seller Y, we're gonna get you SO much money, you'll be glad you choose us.

Agent - OKAY X I think its gonna take a million

X - Gee that's great we thought it was gonna be more. We'll offer a million then.

Agent - Hey Y, these people can afford more than a million, you want me to tell them you have a bid for more?

Y - SURE

Agent - Sorry X there is a bid for more by another buyer. I really like this property though. I think you guys would love it. I bet 1.5M would do it.

X - We love it too sure, we can afford it. Tell them 1.5M.

Agent - Well they came back with 1.5M, but I really think we can get more.

Z's agent - Hi Agent for Y, My client would like to buy Y's house. They offer 1.75M but that's the max.

Agent - I'm sorry, (I don't want to split my commission) but there is already a higher offer out there. Sorry.

Agent - Hi X, I thought they'd accept it but they apparently have a bid for more.

X - Well Gee that's too bad. Thanks ALOT for really helping us. Better luck next time I guess...

Agent - uh, well wait gosh, maybe I can talk some sense into the seller. I REALLY want to help you guys out. You seem like a nice couple and I just want to do the best I can for my clients......

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 23, 2009 2:13 AM in response to Expectations of Realtors?

Hey Crownlfc, Your a tool! Get a real job you loser!

First off, getting a "buyer's agent" in NYC is a complete waste of time and you are basically setting yourself up to either 1. pay way more for a property because the listing agent is pissed they have to split their fee (for doing basically nothing) or 2. you won't get the property because the listing agent (and all agents pretty much) are unethical at best. My suggestion, if you aren't from here and/or are used to (a morally ethical) place that actually have state approved/required legal contracts that are used in a real estate bidding/counter-offering/acceptance process, would be to get a good lawyer! Go see as many places by yourself as you want, or heck get some loser agent to take you (just don't sign anything), then when you find a place have your lawyer draw up an offer, and don't bother telling the agent you've been using (because they can't do anything), and send it to the seller's agent. If they want to deal they'll respond, if not then move on. Whatever anyone tells you, "your" agent will do nothing more for you than negotatiate in "good faith" (which is all verbally and worth as much as the paper its written on) with the seller's agent AND then will have you get a lawyer to fill out the contract that you could've done by yourself. If this sounds ludicrous... that's because it is! And that's also the reason that people with real money (and brains) don't waste their time dealing with a "buyer's agent". Deal directly with the scumbag seller's agent and you'll get deals done faster and for less. If you still feel like you just don't understand things, spend the extra hour talking with your lawyer (who hopefully you found through a recommendation or if not at least knows real estate) and learn how the process works and what you should put in a contract. The only worthwhile thing about not having the state approved contracts is that you don't have some scumbag agent, who wants to get paid by making sure the deal goes through no matter what, filling out the form without the right contingencies (contingent on appraisal, financing, etc.) but instead you have a lawyer who is impartial because they get paid regardless.... But you already knew this because you've been doing your homework online right???

"You want the truth??? You can't handle the truth..."

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 23, 2009 2:00 AM in response to Expectations of Realtors?

I'd suggest moving to a non-communist/socialist country and doing what you want.

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 23, 2009 1:39 AM in response to 2 Family Conundrum

Oh yeah, Its already been said before, but lets think about it?.. You've lent tons of people money AND all of the sudden lots of those people have stopped paying you. Its random, no rhyme or reason, good credit score or bad. So, let me think? Should I just keep rolling the dice and hope Mr. B gonna make it in dis hard time? Or just pull the plug before he and everyone else draws down fully before they go bust?

Before posting STUPID rants about how your awesome property is dragged down by "Bed Stuy", use some commen sense and think about the logic of the bank...

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 22, 2009 11:27 AM in response to Chase Turns Off Our Spigot—For Now at Least

Its only just begun Mr. B. Commercial loan resets, or calls, this summer through 2010, and the like will bring all the over-priced BS in Brooklyn and NYC down. Not to much the true condo inventory of probably close to 15k that will be dumped.

You see I don't actually enjoy this, but for the one simple fact it hopefully puts 99% of the RE agents/brokers out of business. These people are a reason the process will only be more painful in NYC.

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 22, 2009 11:23 AM in response to Chase Turns Off Our Spigot—For Now at Least

Welcome to NYC, where most people involved in RE are pretty much scumbbags.

Never use a broker/agent to rent a place... If you need an unhelpful tour guide, I'll bill you by 100/hour, and it will be cheaper.

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 20, 2009 1:35 PM in response to Verbal Agreements with Landlords

oldtimer et al. How hard is it for a broker to know something about a property they are selling. After all what are they being paid for? To follow you around a house and be annoying? Likely reason they didn't "know" is because they are deceitful and figured telling you something you didn't want to hear (ps 3x) is not good for sales. BK is spot on.

As for your purchasing prowess, oldtimer, hats off to you. However all of your comments reflect a significant amount of ignorance, so I'm taking all of them with a grain of salt. But then again, you probably bought your has for 20K, and out of complete and utter luck it has turned into something worth 1+M. So, the rest of us are looking at spending actual $$$ and if it takes looking at 300 over-priced houses than so be it. Owning a house worth 1+M and having the capacity to buy a 1+M house are 2 totally different things. Everyone should not confuse the two.

As for selling, good luck to all you agents who haven't had to work for the past 7 years selling houses. One thing a real salesman knows is that you never judge a book by its cover and "the customer is always right". I'd show a kid on the corner of a street a house if I was an agent. Who knows maybe his dad is a VC titan, and will buy the house, cause his kid likes it.

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 14, 2009 9:46 PM in response to Price Cut at 355 Degraw Street

Interesting question. Your post probably requires more questions than answers. However, being a first time home-buyer, getting into a rental+owner oc. may not be the best move. There are lots of positives, but also lots of negatives to renting. Not the least of being that while you may be comfortable with a certain standard of living, which you may justify being lower than normal because your the owner, may not fly with tenants. Another thing to consider is, given that you've never be responsible for your own place, the little things that you've never thought of may prove to be way more of a headache than you could have ever imagined. Add to that someone else harassing you about things, and it can/could get very stressful. My suggestion would be to think long and hard, AND consider the worst case scenario BEFORE getting in over your head, financial and physically. While owning a house and not a condo/apartment has significant benefits, getting into something a little less risky, like a condo/apt, and then using that to segway into a rental+owner oc. may be a better approach. Another thing to consider is the amount of rental properties that are most likely to come on-line in W-burg soon that may suppress your rental income.

I'm not a real estate agent, so take what I say with a grain of salt:) Good luck.

Posted by: goodoleboy at May 8, 2009 11:45 PM in response to Becoming a landlord

Oh so youre not a RE lawyer gotcha

Posted by: brickoven at July 31, 2009 5:01 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

And you are?

Posted by: Kris at July 31, 2009 5:07 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

NO

Posted by: brickoven at July 31, 2009 5:19 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

I bet they do read this blog Brick but the cooler thing is they all know where the exit door is. No fear here!

Posted by: jack slade at July 31, 2009 5:34 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

It seems as if you and said LL are both unreasonable i.e. you seem to want more for practically nothing extra ( bring in a pet and a sick family member all while having to pay less rent...the audacity of hope:) and LL is kind of arrogant in saying you should feel lucky.
$1500 may indeed be expensive today but we don't know the kind of space you have. Is it really nice or large? The area is not bad given proximity to Prospect Park, Subways, and the Brooklyn Museum.
Maybe he can let you have a cat without increasing the rent but remember you are already doing quite well with the family member staying long term or even permanently. Does the law allow the extra person staying permanently? In a non rent stabilized building? Our advice will be to move if you are gonna be miserable.
The LL appears to have leverage in your specific situation since he doesn't seem to mind you moving right?

Posted by: pierre de taille at July 31, 2009 6:02 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

Brickoven, the law is about your right to have a lover and children. The landlord is free to charge whatever they like for the apt -- whether it's less for one adult, more for two, or vice versa.

Posted by: mopar at July 31, 2009 6:03 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

brxgrl we are renters as well so what you say is hard to swallow but we are afraid you are 100% right...wow the truth can be tough :( Thanks for the clarity.

"I suggest everyone read exactly what the law said. Note- it says nothing about preventing a landlord form adding a surcharge in another tenant moves in. So its not illegal. Small landlords are in a different position than a big one. Many of them live in their property, with their tenants. Many of them aren't clearing big profits by any stretch. The bank is not lowering their payments, the electric and gas companies are increasing fees, the city charges for water usage- So what you're saying is that the landlord should lose money and possibly his property to subsidize a tenant? I'm sorry but let's be fair about things".

Posted by: pierre de taille at July 31, 2009 6:15 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

yes it does cost extra 10 to 20 dollars for water per person per month. I do not charge my tenant extra when she has a roommate by the same token I don't give her a discount either when she does not. I take care of it. Does not mean the cost is not there. There are no free lunches, someone has to pay. Maybe you don't realized this- some expenses are constant (fix mortgage for example), some expenses varies. Simple concept, more flushes, more showers = more cost to landlords (small building or large makes no difference).

Posted by: ClintonHillGal at July 31, 2009 6:38 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

^------- great point!
"...I do not charge my tenant extra when she has a roommate by the same token I don't give her a discount either when she does not..."

This isn't directed at anybody in particular ;) but the LL's that "charge" extra for roommates; do you also deduct when they get rid of their roommates and live alone?

Posted by: CookieCutterBrownstone at July 31, 2009 7:22 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?

$750 for a one bedroom apartment in Crown Heights? Absolutely! In 1994.

Clearly, you don't know the market.

Posted by: BrooklynIsHome at July 31, 2009 9:24 PM in response to No Rent Reduction: Stay or Go?