Bank Owned Greystone 3-Flat Listed at 45% Under 2007 Price: 852 W. Oakdale in Lakeview

This vintage 3-flat greystone at 852 W. Oakdale in Lakeview recently came on the market.

852-w-oakdale-approved.jpg

It is bank owned and is listed for 45%, or $480,000, under the 2007 purchase price.

Built in 1891, the greystone is on a 25×125 lot and has a 2-car garage.

From the public records, it appears the property was given some kind of historic landmark designation in 2006.

The units are as follows:

  1. Unit #1: 3 bedrooms, 1 bath
  2. Unit #2: 3 bedrooms, 1 bath
  3. Unit #3: 3 bedrooms, 1 bath

There is an unfinished basement with storage and laundry facilities.

All three units are currently vacant.

The listing does not have interior pictures but says “minor TLC needed throughout.”

There is separate heating and no central air.

Is this a deal?

Drew Kemper at Novation Realty has the listing. See the listing here. (no interior pictures)

852 W. Oakdale: 3-flat, 9 bedrooms, 3 baths, 3049 square feet, 2 car garage

  • Sold sometime before 1990
  • Sold in September 2005 for $900,000
  • Sold in March 2007 for $1.06 million
  • Lis pendens foreclosure filed in September 2009
  • Bank owned in January 2011
  • Currently listed at $580,000
  • Taxes of $15,028
  • No central air
  • Separate heating

30 Responses to “Bank Owned Greystone 3-Flat Listed at 45% Under 2007 Price: 852 W. Oakdale in Lakeview”

  1. I thought this looked like a good deal…and the agent remarks in the MLS confirmed that suspicion: “***MULTIPLE OFFER SITUATION***SUBMIT HIGHEST & BEST OFFER BY 4 P.M. ON 2-15-2011″

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. It’s not worth ’05 price, at least as a straight rental.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  3. At this list? smashing deal, but if like Chris M found, they probably listed low to get a bidding war.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  4. SFH-conversion possibility? Seems like a nice spot for it.

    Also, agreed – low list to get a war. Epic!

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  5. I lived on the second floor of this building in the early 90s for a few years. Ah, the memories. Great neighborhood. Solid building. Think we paid 1500 a month in rent, even back then.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  6. Rather than asking “Is this a deal?”, I think the more interesting question is “What will this sell for?”

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. Yawn. Another fake asking price. And I wonder how many people here will say that it won’t even sell at asking.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  8. Hard to say what it will sell for without seeing the interior and mechanicals. If it only needs cosmetic work of $10k or so per unit I could see this going for $650k to $675k

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  9. You have to wonder what bank did the financing on the 2005 transaction–just ridiculous. I’m guessing WaMu or HSBC and that it was more than 90% financed.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  10. Bob:

    1st MERS for $795,000
    2nd MERS for $159,000
    downpayment of $106,000 = 10%

    2nd refi with Chase 05/24/2007 for $164,900

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  11. Long as there isn’t a huge mechanical/structural issue and the interior is usable this is a great rental property. I agree with everyone else… no way it closes at or below its current asking.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  12. I saw this prop on Friday. Needs a lot of work, units are not in good shape at all. Bedrooms are super small, 3rd bedroom is 7 by 8.5. Really a 2 bed w office. Even master is small, probably 10 by 12, compared to other lakeview properties. That said, there is tons of common space. Large living and family room, w adjacent dining room. Kitchens are 80s style, need work. Very nice facade and decks, but inside needs work. 10k per unit someone suggested is wayyyyy low. Realtor provided rent history which was 4700ish for all 3 units in 2007. Play here is complete gut and flip into three 2 bed condos??

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  13. Thanks for the update TH Value.

    Should anyone be surprised the bedrooms are small? It’s 1891 vintage. Most of them are like that if built on a standard lot.

    I’ll be interested to see what this goes for. What about converting it into a SFH? Seems like it would be the easier play than condos (especially with only the 2 car garage.)

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  14. Does anyone know how much this would cost to convert to a SFH?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  15. “I’ll be interested to see what this goes for. What about converting it into a SFH? Seems like it would be the easier play than condos (especially with only the 2 car garage.)”

    but where would you put the 9 bathrooms?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  16. Sold to plaintiff for $938,000 at foreclosure auction on 10/15/10 (no bidders at this level).
    Balance due on 1st mort was $804,708.
    Plaintiff: Sutton Funding, LLC

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  17. It would be a massive single family home. The street is mainly greystones apartments with a few single family conversions mixed in. I don’t see a big deal about the bedrooms. Like I said I lived there in my early 20s and it’s what you expect in a rental/vintage place.
    Location is amazing. But marketing as a 2 bed plus office could be okay.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  18. you could combine two units for personal residence and rent the third. and as your family grows you can combine the last rental unit at a later date.

    at 580k (if you can get that) that idea would be great for a one kid family or a starting out couple looking to grow a family. as it allows a lower cost now with rental income help and to be able to add space as income increase and family increases.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
  19. so how difficult is it to legally change a 3 flat to a SFH? what’s the advantage, less taxes?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  20. “so how difficult is it to legally change a 3 flat to a SFH? what’s the advantage, less taxes?”

    Difficulty from zoning/alderman/etc approval? Not hard. Expensive, but no real approval issues, at least on a side street like this.

    Taxes are *higher* on SFHs than multi-units, at least in Lake View T’ship. The advantage is to do it w/o permits, so that the assessor has no trigger to review the use classification and hit the prop with (much) higher taxes.

    “Does anyone know how much this would cost to convert to a SFH?”

    Call the place 5000 SF, assume *no* structural issues, provide for mid-range finishes, plan on a minimum of $500k.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  21. I think that this one stays a rental multi-unit. This is not really a market that creates incentives for massive conversion projects. It would be pretty crazy to do it on spec and a homeowner could likely find much better properties to start with or properties that are already finished. How much work could it possible need to turn it into 3 nice 3 bedroom units to rent to young professionals, college kids, etc. for $2500 each? Small bedroom sizes aren’t the absolute end of the world. I think it sells in the high $600s or above.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  22. thanks anon- what are the litmus tests for this? all the units have to be contiguous, single metered, etc? I’m curious as I see so much of the reverse, single family homes being sliced and diced into 2 or 3 (or more) apartments.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  23. “thanks anon- what are the litmus tests for this? all the units have to be contiguous, single metered, etc?”

    Zoning has to allow it and you need to meet building code requirements. And you can’t change it back “as of right” and have a legal multi-unit again.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  24. “The advantage is to do it w/o permits, so that the assessor has no trigger to review the use classification and hit the prop with (much) higher taxes”

    What defines SFH v 2/3 flat?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  25. “What defines SFH v 2/3 flat?”

    What the assessor has it listed as, mainly. The biggies, as I understand it, are electric meters and exterior doors, but that’s not something one really asks about or expects a straight answer regarding.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  26. I will be the adversary here… I think this is listed at the right price. The bank wants it sold and this is their min number. If this is not in rental move-in condition and needs a gut on the inside, then it is more than fair. Comp…

    http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/848-W-Barry-Ave-60657/home/28598810

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  27. Anybody know what happened with this one? Final offers were supposedly due a couple days ago. Did it go for over ask?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  28. “Anybody know what happened with this one? Final offers were supposedly due a couple days ago. Did it go for over ask?”

    Nobody will know until the property closes.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  29. “Nobody will know until the property closes.”

    Just wondering if anyone had some inside info. There seems to be some pretty connected/crafty people on this Crib Chatter site.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  30. Also, Redfin does list it as under contract now, whereas it didn’t yesterday.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply


eight + = 13