A Single Family Home for a Condo Price: 1802 W. Diversey in West Lakeview
This 2-bedroom fee simple single family home at 1802 W. Diversey in West Lakeview just might be the kind of space that many buyers have been looking for.
The home offers the privacy of a single family home without the maintenance of one. It is located in a gated community and has a homeowner’s fee.
The house has an eat-in kitchen, a lofted office on the second floor and a private patio off the kitchen.
Is this a good starter home? The listing says it’s in the Burley school district.
Mario Greco at Prudential Rubloff has the listing. See more pictures, a virtual tour and floor plan here.
See the property’s website here.
1802 W. Diversey Unit #I: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1600 square feet, garage
- Sold in September 1996 for $214,500
- Sold in January 2000 for $295,000
- Sold in August 2006 for $410,000
- Currently listed for $399,000
- Assessments of $150 a month
- Taxes of $5293
- Central Air
- Bedroom #1: 15×12
- Bedroom #2: 11×11
I never knew quite what to think about this little community…
Is that an active train (maybe Metra) running through the back yard?
I saw a couple of these in 2007, both listed in the $400s. The layouts were interesting – but very narrow. One half of the subdivision backs up to the Metra, so it was pretty loud. They are single family homes with garages. Not too close to Lathrop and a couple of parks nearby. Nothing special – but the price seems right. Landmark Village is right down the street tho, I think I’d rather live there.
Two in a row with twins. Was that by design, Sabrina?
“Is that an active train (maybe Metra) running through the back yard?”
Yes, Metra. Don’t think there’s anything else that runs on that line.
One note about the listing:
sez “Huge private patio off kitchen”. While I’m sure it’s “private” in that no one else has rights to use it, the photos clearly show it isn’t “private” in that it offers no privacy.
Do the community rules allow for construction of fences b/t the patios? For pet purposes, if nothing else?
A developer in Plainfield wants their houses back…
If this residence is wood framed, it would need a very thorough inspection to check for moisture infiltration under the Dryvit. Most “moisture warranties” only cover part of the cost of repair – http://www.moisturewarranty.com/
***A developer in Plainfield wants their houses back…***
I saw an open house on this block a while back…..sorry for the snide, sotty remark but it’s the exurb ghetto. Though to be fair perfect for people who have little kids and want them to roam the gated block without worry.
“A developer in Plainfield wants their houses back…”
LOL!!!!
The seller is transferring his moisture-free warranty and the Dryvit has been recently inspected and found to be correctly installed and properly maintained. Nothing but METRA runs on the tracks – and a bunch of other McMansions are steps from the same tracks as well.
“Nothing but METRA runs on the tracks – and a bunch of other McMansions are steps from the same tracks as well.”
OTHER McMansions? Like this is a McMansion? Ha!
I thought MG’s message sounds awfully defensive, then realized it’s probably the agent. This place is in between everything and in nothing at the same time. You can get way better outdoor space with a condo – sans Metra.
“and a bunch of other McMansions are steps from the same tracks as well.”
At what point in time did 1600 sq ft wood frames start beoming McMansions? What repairs does it need? As Is? Huge Patio?? 24′ x 8′?
Yes Jon, this is the agent appearing in his usual defensive mode. ‘Mode’ strikes when there are many repairs/shortcomings that need to be addressed and they are brought to the attention of said agent.
This is Picardy Place, right next to the red brick townhome development of Landmark Village. I used to have a townhome in there that backed up to this development.
Picardy Place *suuuuuuuucks*. Dryvit, slab construction, and the Metra blows by this area at full bore. Money is better spent on a SFR in Landmark Village, or better yet, neither.
And comparison to the “McMansions” on the East side of the tracks is laughable at best. 2k S.F. Dryvit frame homes are not in the same league as the 4k+ S.F. all masonry upscale homes on the East side…
Sorry – I meant a townhome in Landmark Village, not even a SFR, for the same price.
Looking at the floorplan, I figure a bit over 1300 SF — someone tell me that I’m doing something wrong but as I figure it…
744 for the 24×31 footprint of the first floor
Minus 175.5 (for the garage)
Plus 744 for the second floor
Minus about 54 and 36 for the missing piece above the garage and the staircase
Plus 118.75 for that awful loft.
EQUALS 1,341 SF
You’d have to be pretty creative to get to 1600 SF or use your garage as living space like they did on Design Star…
It’s a cute house, but if you’re going to be this insulated from all the inconvenience, hassle and noise of the city, why not just move out of the city and get much more for your buck?
To be clear, I am the agent for the listing and I was merely answering questions or clarifying comments. My use of the word “other” was incorrect – I obviously wasn’t meaning to imply that this listing is a McMansion. What I meant to convey was that other way more expensive houses are close to this train line as well.
As for square footage, that is the number from the original development’s floorplan.
Westloopelo, unless you want to start another smackdown and be exposed for the backbencher that you are, I’d keep your little comments to your little self.
This house looks like it was airlifted in from the exurbs!
“As for square footage, that is the number from the original development’s floorplan.”
I don’t know what the “original development’s floorplan” is, but it’s probably not the accepted method of calculating square footage when selling a place. There’s NO WAY you get to that number (see above) unless you count the garage (and the stairs twice…). Based on the living room, though, nobody’s going to be conned into thinking this is 1600 square feet, so probably no harm in the misrep.
Wasn’t meant to “con” or “misrep” – just meant to inform.
backbencher?
I think the headline gets to the center of the issue: single-fmaily homes are so expensive – how nice to be able to own a newer single family at this price point. Not for everyone (location, style, size, etc), but i would imagine there’s def a demand for this product type at this price point.
and priced perfectly – under 2006 price and under 400K.
Agreed, Bubbleboi. While with unlimited funds I would expect that few here would choose it, it seems like a pretty good deal for the pricepoint and location. Actually, make that a very good deal — if the sellers are listing it for under 2006 pricing (without going through a painful series of price reductions), they’re probably pretty serious about moving.
For all the people who want to beat this place up, its not a condo or townhouse and while a little west, its a great price for a single family home in this area. I bet it sells at or above list.
Which is weird either I am slowly becoming a RE bull (unlikely) or the properties featured on here are becoming less ridiculous over time and more realistic.
“Wasn’t meant to “con” or “misrep” – just meant to inform.”
If you do the simple math and change the listing, then I believe you. My guess is that you won’t, so we’ll see.
I think it is priced fairly and will probably sell pretty quickly. Decent space. The house is just out of place for city living from a curb appeal perspective.
I have looked at a number of homes in Picardy Place. This one has some updates done to the kitchen, but has two major things going against it.
1. It is the smallest of all the floor plans offered in the community. Other larger floor plans have closed for between 5% – 10% higher than this place.
2. It is on the wrong side of the tracks. Picardy Place has two rows of housing. One side backs up to the Metra, the other backs up to another community and affords you a “little” yard.
Now as far as the ‘hood’ goes, it is actually a pretty good area. There are lots of parks, you can walk to Dominick’s or Jewel, Starbucks, Scooter’s Frozen Custard and it is within strolling distance to Roscoe Village. (We lived in the area and loved it.)
Price is a bit high; I imagine MG set it at $399,000 knowing the seller will get between $360 – $370.
“A developer in Plainfield wants their houses back”.
now thats some funny stuff,
400k for a starter home is a scary thing! very scary.
the place is nice, the area is nice, the price is nice. umm i guess its all around nice.
as for me i hated all those cheesy townhome “villages” that popped up off of diversey, too sterile no soul. its like “the glen” in glenview, and that whole “planned” living thing the did on that military base. and those town homes and condos on clyborn too. all to sterile, blandness, and exburb montgomery for me.
what i dont like is you cant really add on later like a true SFH.
but i guess its a good price for the area, it should sell.
btw (really 400k is starter home pricing?)
Its funny Groove77, being from the suburbs and now living in the city I love city life and could never leave it. That being said I still maintain my preference for suburban style housing stock, which Chicago has very little of.
For this part of town “in the green zone” most ‘starter homes’ are indeed 400k but instead of a single family home suitable for family living are McCrapBox condos with people living above and/or below you.
I always say don’t pay 400k for a glorified apartment or your a GD idiot. This is not a glorified apartment but an actual home.
very true bob,
i do think the place is a good price, a good home, a good area. and as we have seen on CC there are 2/2 condo’s twice the price of this in marginal hoods.
if you want “suburban style housing stock” you have a bunch down milwaukee ave from irving to addison. that same area on irving east of cicero. bridgeport and close to comiskey park, university village has some, edgebrook golf course area, irving and california at the old popcorn flavor lot.
there is also a hidden suburb in chicago behind gomper park, a cemetary and sauganash.
The Glen is worse than this, it’s certified toll brothers frame mcmansions on small lots that sell for $900k and up.
But what is their exact square footage? Jon needs to know – or do the simple math for him.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=foster+%26+pulaski,+chicago&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.038806,79.013672&ie=UTF8&ll=41.980756,-87.736033&spn=0.0039,0.009645&t=h&z=17
The hidden suburb in sauganash
And the homes aint cheap either.
http://www.redfin.com/search#lat=41.98113115134967&long=-87.73729920387268&market=chicago&status=3&v=5&zoomLevel=17
“And the homes aint cheap either.”
Disregarding location (major difference), $539 for 5509 N Kildare is a lot “cheaper” than $399 for this place–it has it’s own land, it’s about 50% larger, etc etc.
But I don’t think that really gets to Bob’s city life; may as well live in Lincolnwood.
“Jon needs to know – or do the simple math for him”
jon live is in bucktown, and thats all i need to say about that 🙂
HD, “And the homes aint cheap either”
wholy shnikies batman, that aint cheap. good find HD. i found that area when our company was going to buy a company in that business park over there i was over there two years ago when sauganash flooded and i tried a shortcut to get around traffic and found the hidden burb with only one way in and one way out.
“But what is their exact square footage? Jon needs to know – or do the simple math for him.”
Thanks, MG, but I’ll do the math myself. All I did was point out that the listing that you [mis]represent to be 1600 SF is actually more like 1350 SF. I’m not even a realtor, but I sincerely doubt that you count the garage in the calculation. Rather than changing your listing you make passive-aggressive comments on here. Nice.
“As for square footage, that is the number from the original development’s floorplan.”
Jon,
Although I am left wondering what this statement means also, I am thinking MG is using the ‘Fl style’ of sq ft calculations.
All those prefab, throwaway housing development homes in central Florida (much like this one) are measured from their EXTERIOR walls…and in a few companies’ (agents) minds, any concrete surrounding the house will count for usable sq ftage as well. Yes, patios too.
All that hollowed out concrete block space adds up fast…and in this case that “HUGE PATIO!!!” is probably the missing ##s you are looking for. Give that a try and see if you come up with the exagerrated number.
Also, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for MG to make any corrections to his listing…he has a hard time admitting to his listing’s mistakes/shortcomings.
“Westloopelo, unless you want to start another smackdown and be exposed for the backbencher that you are, I’d keep your little comments to your little self.”
Girlfriend, what are you talking about? Backbencher…WTF does that mean? Put down that hairdryer and settle down!
As much fun as it has been in past to ‘smackdown’ with you, I am done with your mindless chow-chow. Now go be the best little agent you can be, break out your tape measure and correct your exaggerated numbers.
Get ready folks, MG’s next post:
“Forget the zero, go with hero!”
“All those prefab, throwaway housing development homes in central Florida (much like this one) are measured from their EXTERIOR walls…and in a few companies’ (agents) minds, any concrete surrounding the house will count for usable sq ftage as well. Yes, patios too.”
Yeah, and there are many, many folks here who *defend* that measuring protocal when it is applied to apartments (can’t say condo, b/c this place is a condo). I’ve asked many times and will ask again:
Why is it okay to count outdoor space and ignore any interior walls, stairs, etc in the square footage of an apartment, but not if you own the four walls?
MG-
Do you find is appropriate to count the garage in the sq ft-age of the home. How about the staircases, closets, etc.? Lets not even focus on this listing, but in general. Based on the room sizes that you listed, and the pictures/layout of the property I would estimate that Jon is correct in his estimate of 1341sqft.
I was interested in determining who was correct. I took a look at the Chicago Zoning database & the Cook Co. assessor. This property is listed as 1348sqft. -Serious kudos to Jon on that estimating, seriously, within 7 sqft, very nice-
Now, I understand that the developer claimed 1600sqft on thier original flyers. So, what. Thier initial misrepresenation does not justify all future misrepresentations. As a responsible RE profession do you not find it your duty to verify/measure for yourself. Please dont claim you were just using the info the seller gave you. Do you not have a duty and responsibility to a set of ethics that comes with being a licensed professional that the sellers to don’t necessarially have. Also, just using the developers numbers is lazy, does your portion of the commission not include 30-40 minutes of using a tape measure.
Is there an open house coming up? I’m sure a few Chatter here could stop by to calcualte the actual sq ft-age.
So, along with some others here I ask you to correct your listing; you are doing a disservice to yourself, your clients, and to Prudential.
Can someone provide the proper means of filing a complaint with REALTOR, MLS, or whomever else would be the correct oversight for listings.
Roget – er, westloopelo – beforee you get your pink thong in a bunch, look up “backbencher” and you’ll see it refers to someone who talks a lot but doesn’t have the power/authority to change anything.
Never mind my pink thong, just answer the questions put to you regarding the square footage of your listing and your obvious incompetance as a RE professional.
Great work Tom!
“Roget – er, westloopelo – beforee you get your pink thong in a bunch, look up “backbencher” and you’ll see it refers to someone who talks a lot but doesn’t have the power/authority to change anything.”
What, then, do you call one that misrepresents the property he is trying to sell (contradicting the assessor, the floor plan posted on his own website, and the calculation a non-real estate agent can do on a post-it note), has the ability to change the listing when duly called out *busted*, yet doesn’t do anything to the listing or admits his mistake. Instead, he engages in name-calling and evasive senseless argument. What do you call that person?
MG,
Tom has a well written and pretty darn good argument against your listing.
I for one would really like to hear your response to it. (given the hissy fit between you and West loop is greatly entertaining)
“Why is it okay to count outdoor space and ignore any interior walls, stairs, etc in the square footage of an apartment, but not if you own the four walls?”
In all of my holdings I do not and never have counted anything other than interior floors which you can walk on. No exterior space, no stairwells, no closet space, no interior walls or even hallways…ever. To do so, which is the general RE rule of thumb, is misleading and a downright lie.
I imagine in order to rent units apartment complexes list the sq ft of all areas that they ‘think’ might comprise a living space. Do I agree with it….of course not and they are wrong to do so.
But according to MG, since I am a backbencher and I think I have the power/authority to bring about change….
“I hereby, on this, the 23rd day of September, in the year two thousand and nine at exactly 3:41 pm, declare that NO Real Estate Representative shall be allowed to determine any square footage of any property, real or imagined, that they represent without actual use of hands, knees and a measuring instrument of preapproved means. To continue to represent such properties without the practice of dropping to their knees (clearing throat) and doing their due measuring dilligence, that Real Estate Agent will thereby give members of CribChatter full right to brand the words “useless member of society” upon the body part of their individual choice.
Groove…you first…
“Groove…you first”
wait what did i do?
For one, sqftge is by definition APPROXIMATE and can be measured in countless ways so one person’s 1300 can be another’s 1600. For two, the assessor’s site is not accurate in almost every instance b/c they don’t actually enter a dwelling to measure it. So to assume the assessor is correct and another source is incorrect isn’t logical. But most importantly, sqftge is just a number and nobody’s buying a home w/o walking thru it and assessing for themselves whether the home works for them or not.
Hope that helps.
^^^^^^sorry forgot i can read english!!!!
i get first swing 🙂
“For one, sqftge is by definition APPROXIMATE and can be measured in countless ways so one person’s 1300 can be another’s 1600.”
LOL so boy genius, how do appraisers get their square footage typically used in appraisals? Or do they just wing it and try to get within 300sqft of accurate? You’re the epitome of a shady realtor, no wonder all the realtard clowns in this city want your paycheck and do business your way!
” But most importantly, sqftge is JUST A NUMBER and nobody’s buying a home w/o walking thru it and assessing for themselves whether the home works for them or not.”
WOW professionalism as I have never seen it in 25+ years in the RE Business!! It’s just a number…never mind! I will have to remember this when all the geniuses here go thorough the trouble of calculating the PPSF on new construction buildings. “It’s just a number”.
And I will have to go back through all my years of files and change the way I calculate my expenditures. I wonder if I can retroactively change the prices of all the rehabs I have sold for 25 years?? MG wanna help me figure this one out?
Thanks MG, thanks alot!!
**Walking out of this dust up shaking my head**
MG = Epic Fail
“get within 300sqft of accurate”
Enh, +25% is good enough, regardless of size. Say it’s 5000 SF, even if it’s only 4000. Close enough, right?
i like this logic actually. my place is 1450…so now I will say it’s 1800-1900sq ft. now i’m ball’n baby bay bay.
MG –
But see the thing is – with all of the ways one can calculate square footage and with as little meaning as you attach to the square footage number – there’s no way that you get to 1600 square feet on this place unless you count the stairs twice, the first floor roof, and the garage (which based on your complete non-response to this is not acceptable even to sketch agents).
Footprint is 24*31, loft is 118.75 — 1606.75
There’s NO WAY that is an acceptable calculation.
But, at the end of the day, you’ve been told about this and the listing remains (and you don’t seem inclined to change it). Because you think that all buyers should get in there and verify measurements to make sure they comport with your BS, you probably should just put “BUYER BEWARE!” on your listing pages. Then we’ll leave you and your misrepresentations alone.
“It’s just a number…never mind! I will have to remember this when all the geniuses here go thorough the trouble of calculating the PPSF on new construction buildings. “It’s just a number”.”
Just list everything as 5000 SF. It’s just a number, no one would ever rely on it.
Say it has 3 bathrooms, too. After all, three is just a number, no one would ever rely on that.
Oh, and I guess that’s the justification for saying places have 1 parking spot, when they don’t. 1 is just a number, it doesn’t mean anything.
Extended snark aside, I say “put up the floorplans and f*%k the SF listing”. The floorplan is a million times more useful than even an ultra precise square footage calculation.
Tom,
“I was interested in determining who was correct. I took a look at the Chicago Zoning database & the Cook Co. assessor. This property is listed as 1348sqft.”
besides this home, condos and townhomes, for SFH i would not trust the assessors numbers my home is actually 800-1000 sq ft more than it says due to me turning the attic into living space (did i need a permit for that?) and finishing the basement and adding a full bath and bedroom down there. well cant count the basement being below grade and all.
MG,
Very disappointed in your rebuttal, i see your point, but but not happy with it.
Good idea mac, I can now list the place I bought for 60k more than I bought it for based upon $/sqft a few months ago, its just a number right?
tehGroove: “i see your point”
What? Math is hard? No one believes numbers in an MLS listing anyway?
Help a guy out, b/c I don’t see a *real* point.
Groove – your response makes my point. In addition, I could leave the sqftge off and then the other half of this board will whine about it not being there – even though the floorplan is posted with the listing and everyone can decide for themselves how to measure the sqftge.
“In addition, I could leave the sqftge off and then the other half of this board will whine about it not being there – even though the floorplan is posted with the listing ”
I’ve never seen anyone here whine about unlisted square footage. Ask what it is–maybe. But the SF complaints focus on (1) overstatement and (2) what counts in the calculation.
And, please, make it the norm that the floorplan is available online; maybe others will actually follow your lead. Then, as you say, everyone can measure the sf their own damnselves.
MG,
snaps to you for taking on a firing squad here, (yes i am bringing the phrase “snaps” back).
one thing is i wonder why your response was so, for lack of a better word/phrase, “what ever”. i would think with many people having the feeling that agents are between a snake oil salesman and a used car salesman on western. that you would defend your profession with more pride and void the stigma thats bieng attached to agents.
now i posted before about floor plans with listings, (groove’s & Anons floorplan Emporium), and dont think an hour, pencil and paper, plus a laser tape measure would be hard for an agent.
MG you come into the lion’s den you gotta expect to be attacked.
Floorplans have been available on my listings for the past 6 years. I wish others would follow my lead. As for the board whining about the lack of sqftge on listing sheets, that is simply not true. Take a quick look back and you’ll see it’s a common complaint. That being said, there are people on this board whose opinion I respect and as such will change the sqftge number.
Even if he were to produce a floorplan, who’s to say that the room sizes haven’t been altered to match his guestimate of the sq ft-age?
I think you lost all credibility. First with your obnoxious replies and demeaning manner of speaking down to posters and now with your snarky reply to an obvious misrepresentation of facts.
What would your BFF ‘G’ say, MG? Huh, what would he say?
And I often wonder why I do not trust RE agents/brokers…even my own family members who handle my transactions.
You cast a bad light on ALL members of your profession…if that were any more possible!
Still on for that smackdown, dear one?
ROTFLMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!
“Even if he were to produce a floorplan”
WL–
You’re off base here. The flooplan was available in the listing, which is why folks were able to jump on it.
“That being said, there are people on this board whose opinion I respect”
i got $100 bucks that westloop and I are not one of them.
“westloop and I are not one of them”
You’re WL? WOOOOW!
also so far i only see you and Jennifer Ames doing the floorplan thing,
snaps for that
One now has to wonder in what other areas in his life does our Dear MG use the line…”What, size…it’s only a number…come on take a walk through and see for yourself”.
Still ROTFLMFAO!!!
groove – i don’t have a problem with you or anyone really on this board. Even Westloopelo serves a purpose – albeit comedic effect isn’t probably his intent.
No anon, I know there was one on this listing. I am just saying in the future, now that he shot his foot off, will anyone be able to believe him?
I know I will take GREAT pleasure in C&Ping this thread for future use.
And to think I was just going to finish installing some moulding today!!
“i got $100 bucks that westloop and I are not one of them.”
Got ya and raise ya $500! Deep down I do think MG does really, really admire and respect me…he just doesn’t know it yet…
Groove you are definitely determined; two “snaps” in a row! 😛
(Except when I see/hear “snaps” I can’t help but think of Reese Witherspoon in “Legally Blonde 2” where she gets the members of Congress to give snaps for good deeds…I’m guessing this isn’t a reference you were aiming for?)
I bow down to you GG!!
Applause Applause Applause
And quite frankly, I work really hard for a perfectly adequate, but not particularly huge salary. When I see the utter stupidity of many Chicago RE agents, I sometimes wonder if I should ditch the JD and start selling houses.
Couldn’t I make a killing just by acting honestly and not being a complete moron?
GG – I left the law 7 years ago. There’s plenty of room for you – but you won’t get very far in our business if your head explodes over sqftge and how it is measured.
GG, as an attorney, you must not have any Realtor clients. You’re supposed to kiss Mario’s ass so he’ll send you closings, lawsuits, and introduce you to other higher income individuals. There’s a handful of high volume realtors at my firm and when they say “jump” we say “how high?”.
We are within days of closing on a condo. The listing sheet said it was 1510 sqft, however, we learned from the appraisal that it is actually 1260 sqft, a full 20% less than advertised! Yes, we toured the property – 3 times actually, but none of those times did we measure for ourselves. Originally we thought we were getting a fair price per square foot. Now, not so much. Even though we are upset that it’s not the square footage as advertised and feel betrayed by the sellers/listing realtor, we are still going through with the closing because we love the property and location. We will be wary next time, however. Buyer beware.
Unfortunately exaggerating the square footage has become the norm. I don’t want to waste my time finding out the real square footage is when i arrive at the home, just goddamn tell me it so I don’t waste my time looking at the place.
The square footage on appraisals is always less than what developers and re agents advertise. Appraisers only use the livable areas while typical the developer looks at the entire floor plate.
I have seen 1500 sqft places feel like 1000 sqft and vice versa. Many places have a lot of wasted space. The best thing to do is figure out what size rooms you need and go from there.
The industry does need to come up with a standard methodology though.
Well, as a start I would recommend using the methodology that the appraisers use. If apraisers only count livable space, and the appraiser put together the appraisal that the bank will use to determine whether or not to fund the loan, then this seams like a logical standard to use.
I have to believe that there are some standards, where are the legit RE agents on this board. Does the NAR or MLS have standards, or at least guidelines……?????
“Does the NAR or MLS have standards, or at least guidelines……?????”
Nope
If you are a buyer looking at properties you should be able to get a good feel for 1300 s.f. listings vs. 1500 s.f. (200 s.f is a 20 x 20 room). Using developer floor plans is the standard and you do not represent your client’s best interest if you use the appraiser’s measuring standards. Marketing a property as smaller than the other units will put you out of work in a hurry.
“200 s.f is a 20 x 20 room”
lol please tell me you are a realtor, that would be funny
Holy panties in a bunch. Do realtors and developers exaggerate sizes? Yes. Does that justify wanting Mario Greco’s head on a stick…NO! How many realtors are honest and motivated enough to include a floor plan, days on market and a real presentation of the property? Besides Mario Greco, the Gareson group and Jennifer Ames, I haven’t seen any realtors actually put an effort into selling a property. Isn’t that how the real estate bubble got started? Everyone listening to someone else instead of doing their own research?
GG – LMAO. No offense but lawyers invented stretching the truth to get the job done! If you want to surround yourself with honest people, go teach first grade. We all have told a lie or two to get what we want.
Full Disclaimer: My company creates Floorplans (vis-home.com/demo1), and we’ve done several thousand jobs in the past few years working in Chicagoland. We have never received any money from Mario Greco.
In my experience, “Square footage” is not an exact term and can have a range of meanings. Some MLSs have an exact definition of square footage as “Living Square Footage” – which typically (though not always) implies above grade, and not including patios or decks. To the best of my knowledge, MLSNI member Realtors don’t include this information in the vast majority of listings because most don’t know what that definition is.
Some define “Square footage” as the footprint of the building multiplied by the number of floors – for example, we had a client who ordered a floorplan of a home in Lake Forest because that’s the justification the municipality used to raise her taxes.
Some define square footage as the interior, wall-to-wall measurements of all rooms. Those may include rooms like halls, closets, etc. or may not.
And as far as Lauren’s comment about realtors not including floorplans – not true. We do many dozens of jobs each week in Chicago and suburbs – next time when you’re looking on the MLS/Realtor.com, put your cursor over the “Virtual tour” field – if the URL includes “smartfloorplan.com”, you’ve got a Picture Plan.
For someone who is really concerned about square footage my recommendation is to simply determine total livable space – the sum of the square footage of all rooms. You can’t live in hallways, bathrooms, or closets – unless you’ve had a really bad night. When you do this and compare those numbers to the stated square footages where available you will see that the ratio is all over the board. Much of that variation is a function of layouts but you will also see what has to be gross exaggerations. For instance, I recently did this for some 2 bedroom condos and found ratios ranging from 2.3 to 1.1. It’s hard to say which of these are a lie and which are just poor layouts because you have to see a place.
BTW, I’m using Max’ product on one of my listings and it’s pretty cool. However, I’m having an internal debate about whether or not you can put too much information online. On the one hand more information is always better and you can save yourself a lot of unnecessary showings if people can get a better feel for the layout before scheduling an appointment. On the other hand I worry about people not being able to properly visualize a place online and prematurely dismissing a viable home.
“Do realtors and developers exaggerate sizes? Yes.”
Lauren, I am more than a little bothered that you and others here feel it is justified and acceptable because this may be the operating procedure of some RE companies. To make such a generalization is dangerous as most of us know it is not true at all. It is as though because a few in the industry do so, although wrong and considered false advertising, all is fine with this deceptive practice.
As I stated yesterday, I have never exaggerated usable sq ft…NEVER. I go to great lengths to make sure the measurements are accurate to within an inch per room. I do this for a couple of reasons, the most important is to make sure the buyer knows, without question, exactly their dollars are getting for them.
A personal reason for me to get the measurements correct is that I always squeeze every cent to get the results that have kept me in business for so long. I go into each rehab with the idea of maximizing the usable space and this is the issue that is on top of my list…making sure every sq inch will serve a purpose for the new owners.
Seriously, to determine room sizes for a 2000 sq ft home, the process takes all of 15 or 20 minutes. The failure of the agent to do so is inexcusable! Exactly what are they doing to put that 6% in their pocket? I mean, if you are unable to provide true and relevant facts from the start of your transaction, WTF are you doing in this industry?
Whenever I am ‘forced’ to work with a new agent, I make this request to them and I have been met with a variety of reactions, 95% of them not positive. I think the most common response is “I will just use your measurements” at which point I take the fact sheet out of their hands and ask again. Any refusal to perform this simple request is a huge mark against them and they usually do not get my business. Of course since I use my nieces and nephew as my agents in Fl and NY, they know this is step one in performing THEIR JOB and we don’t go any further until this process is complete.
“Using developer floor plans is the standard and **you do not represent your client’s best interest if you use the appraiser’s measuring standards**. Marketing a property as smaller than the other units will put you out of work in a hurry.” WHAT??
Lack of integrity trumps the marketing of a smaller property once your clients find out that you are less than truthful.
Sparky,
I HOPE you did bring up this fact to both agents! If not, please do me a favor and do so, and do not be kind about it. The more the buying public presses this issue, the more likely the RE industry will be compelled to implement an industry standard. Silence does not result in change.
Gary,
I am a firm believer that the more RELEVENT the information that is presented in your MLS listing and brochures (floorplans, sq ft and even PPSF) the greater your chance of making that sale. I wish ALL realtors would do away with the useless script they employ in their listings and instead focus on the information that the potential buyer needs to make their decision.
In a perfect world, a buyer would not have to ask the many detail revealing questions they do. A good realtor truly working for his/her commission would anticipate their questions and either have them addressed in the listing or be ready to deliver such info without hesitiation. I think it has been years since I have come across such a person!
I am sorry all that I have gone to such lengths on this issue. I just believe that this is one of the most important issues that needs to be addressed BEFORE the buyer even steps foot in the unit in question.
Remember those of you who are planning on purchasing a home, insist on the agent verifying the measurements of the space of the home you are considering. If it means them getting down on their knees and measuring it themselves in front of you, so be it. Try it on just one room of the house you are touring. If the stated measurements are incorrect, that should raise a huge red flag for you and should place the agent in a very uncomfortable position. Whether or not you go on to deal with this agent is up to you and all I have to say to you is proceed with caution!
As was stated above, BUYER BEWARE!!!!
I’m late to the party but I’ll put myself down as one who bitches about missing square footage in listings. It’s easily measured, internal realtor squabbles aside, and it’s a significant part of the valuation. If you wouldn’t leave off the number of bathrooms, why leave off the square footage? I have never heard a convincing explanation.
Well, let me provide you with an example of a dilemma I faced recently. I have a listing in a building where the developer significantly overstated the square footage of the units. Other realtors listed the developer’s square footage. I wasn’t about to do that but I couldn’t list the true square footage either because that would not serve my client’s (seller’s) best interest. Everyone would assume my unit was smaller – which it wasn’t. Therefore, I did not list a square footage and when asked I simply explained that the developer overstated all the square footages (I checked on the plat) in the building and then told them the correct square footage.
When listing a property my first responsibility is to the seller and my responsibility to the buyer is to be truthful and to disclose any material problems with the property.
I understand your dilemma Gary and agree that is a hard position to be in. I think you did handle the situation correctly, but have to ask if you did make an inquiry of the seller you were representing as to how you should proceed with this matter? Did they realize they had been living in/paid for a place that has been intentionally misrepresented by the developer?
Another question for you as I respect your outlook and your approach to this business. Do RE agents and brokers ever discuss any type of industy wide or even company wide method that could be employed to determine the correct sq ft of a unit? What is your explanation of what should and should not be included in the measurements?
“When listing a property my first responsibility is to the seller and my responsibility to the buyer is to be truthful and to disclose any material problems with the property.”
Excellent motto and way of carrying out your business!
MG, Max, Gary, and the other agents
i am really happy agents come and post on this website, what they bring is very helpful to everyone. it helps us to see the other side of things plus learn very valuable lessons/tricks/tips.
i am happy with my house and with my agent, but can honestly say if i knew now what i have learned form CribChatter that i would have had a different agent and a different house. i looking back i was a complete idiot wet behind the ears fool my next purchase and sale will be way different.
Gary,
thank you for you example of the developers sq ft to other listing sq ft to your sq ft.
i see your side as a salesman and ethical person dilemma.
salesman; just get them in the door and i can sell them
ethical man; list as much accurate info as can. (less foot traffic)
i can see which one will get you more commission 🙂
Gary, fair enough. Did you have a long heart-to-heart with yourself to divine the true method of counting square footage from the myriad universes of potential methodologies?
And what percent of properties on the MLS are missing square footage data? Far more than have justifiable reasons for it.
In response to several of the questions:
1) The seller actually brought up to me that they suspected they had been snowed by the developer. I told them I would not list the developer’s square footage for that reason. Similarly, we initially included parking in our price until other listings in the building appeared with parking broken out.
2) I am not aware of a written standard for measuring square footage but have always understood it to be a measurement of the interior shell. That seems appropriate in that there is some value in large bathrooms and closets. What concerns me more is stuff like I saw in my neighborhood where a listing grew from 3300 sq ft to 3400 sq ft to 3500 sq ft as it moved from one listing agent to another. If only buyers could track which listing agents were pulling this kind of $%^&. I spoke to a buyer of another one of his properties and he was really pissed that he had been misled by the square footage.
3) In the 2 bedroom analysis that I did 27% did not list the square footage. It seems to me that the smaller places do not list the square footage. Of course, given the apparent inaccuracies in the numbers it may not matter.
There is also a potential liability issue with listing the square footage. Even if the realtor attempts to be accurate they can make a mistake or someone could accuse them of making a mistake. After all, the many attorneys here can attest to the fact that we live in a very litigious society. If the realtor uses the developer’s numbers they can at least say they were just sharing the information provided to them.
Personally I would prefer that no square footage figure be listed in any listing regardless of where that figure may have been obtained. Why be forced to accept inaccuate information and it’s consequences when you could easily determine the number on your own and in some way have this information included in the PPSF calculations.
“…but have always understood it to be a measurement of the interior shell. That seems appropriate in that there is some value in large bathrooms and closets.”
I agree with this statement IF the closets are of a walk in style or a dressing room set up where you are able to actually have furnishings/accessories such as chests, stand up mirrors, chairs/ottomans/stools or even a small love seat.
As far as the bathroom, yes that space no matter how small or large should be considered a part of usuable living space.
The only portion of the measurements that I vehemently object to including are hallways (not galleries), stairways, garages and outdoor spaces…although I do favor a seperate mention of the total patio/balcony/porte cochere/pool space offered.
In the end, full and honest disclosures that are determined by the listing agent/seller is the only thing that makes sense to most buyers. Given all the fraud that occurs on a daily basis by agents and brokers, can we not expect some transparency in these exchanges?
Gary, that sounds too straightforward. Mario said there were “countless!”
Others would know more than me, but isn’t it common practice in other cities to list square footage religiously? If so, how do they get around the purported liability? Is there no standard language? In the end, I think we can all agree that the most useful thing is to get the square footage of liveable space to within 5-10% of the true value. Anything else is irrelevant and I am sure most judges would share that opinion.
Incidentally, this realtor idea, suggested here by MG, that buyers will have an intuitive sense for the square footage of a unit by walking through is totally bogus and a lame excuse for not providing a piece of cold, hard, useful information that they already know as part of their basic research on their seller’s property and how to price it.
westloopelo, my objection to the do-it-yourself approach is that it only makes sense if you are serious about the property. If you’re browsing or merely want to run some comps, what are you to do?
While I think small, fly by night developers overstate s/f on some small developments, I don’t necessarily think it’s the case with high rise developments. I have worked on a few high rises in Chicago (on the development side) and when we produced floor plans we took the architectural plans directly from the architect (who calculated the s/f) and produced marketing plans from them. I find it hard to believe that firms such as SOM, SCB, Lucien Lagrange, Jeanne Gang, etc, would want their names associated with developers who overstate s/f.
I see that MG changed the square footage on the listing from the exaggerated 1600 to 1400.
How did he come up with this number? As I said earlier, I calculated it to be 1341 – counting bathrooms and hallways. Basically just excluding the garage and non-existent space (first floor roof and open staircase). Someone pointed out that I was 7SF off from the assessor… I pointed out that it was simple math and MG made a snarky comment. Curious to find out how we got to 1400…
It’s not a negotiation!
Jon-
1400sqft is within +/- 5% of the 1341 you had and the 1348 that the city/assessor had- that was me pointing out the 7sqft difference. I think the good fight was won and we should just be happy enough….
…I think this has possibly been one of the most constructive and usuful discussions on this board in a long time. The personal insult, off-color remarks, and rant were also limited (for the normal standards of this board).
Yes Chris, my suggestion of DIYing the measurements would unfortunately apply only to a property which you are seriously considering making an offer on.
Until the industry itself mandates one foolproof method and these standards of determining the real size are implemented nationwide, we unfortunately are left having to accept the numbers provided by the developers/builders/owners and most unacceptable, those provided by the agents who place blame on every step leading to the listing actually appearing on the MLS.
“I find it hard to believe that firms such as SOM, SCB, Lucien Lagrange, Jeanne Gang, etc, would want their names associated with developers who overstate s/f.”
Exactly! I think in order to implement an industry accepted standard nationwide the only allowable numbers that could be accepted would be the numbers that are provided by the architect. Every step after the final plans are complete place their own form of alterion on not only the original plans, but the amount of planned sq ft-age until it finally reaches the consumer. At which point they are no where close to being representative of what was originally devised.
I did a summer internship with a prominent architectural firm in NYC. Their standards and attention to detail were impeccable and they never strayed away from them. The slightest fraction of an inch mattered on a floorplan and in no way would they allow any type of alteration to their work.
I find it hard to fathom how developers and on down the list, in their blind greed, can justify taking liberties with copyrighted plans and distorting their real measurements.
Regulatory involment in many areas of the RE industry are long overdue.
Chris – What I said regarding sqftge was that a buyer will walk through a property and regardless of the sqftge number stated will know whether or not the SPACE/LAYOUT works for them. If too much of the sqftge is in the bedrooms v. the living area – for example – (or vice versa) that may not work for one buyer where it might for another.
“I see that MG changed the square footage on the listing from the exaggerated 1600 to 1400.”
I am sure it was begrudgingly done and was not something he truly wanted to do. I hope in the end though that he and all other agents on this forum have learned from this thread.
While this ‘fight’ was won, it still is not correct and represents only one listing out of the thousands that are on the MLS.
MG, what defense can you offer for not providing a useful piece of information to prospective buyers that you already know, other than trying to pull one over on them?
“I think the good fight was won and we should just be happy enough….”
Agreed – glad to have sparked, well ignited, the debate when I noticed there was NO WAY IN HELL this place was 1600 square feet. Even though there’s no methodology to the revised 1400 square feet (which was part of the legitimate complaining here), I think we can honestly say “getting warmer…”
Bottom line is that this was posted as a condo alternative, but you’ve got a very small place WITH homeowner fees. Fail. I’ll take the condo for $400 Alex.
At this point MG, just leave it alone. I think I can speak for most here and say we no longer care to hear excuses or explainations of what you intended to say or do. I think we all have made our points known on a very serious issue and rehashing what transpired here serves no purpose.
Chris – As I said in my initial post, I took the number from the developer’s original material. There was no intent to deceive and I had a reasonable basis to rely on that – especially since I post floorplans with all of my listings.
Laugh. OK I’m done. Congrats on the win all.
..so now that the sqft-age is (semi-) settled, lets actually talk about the property.
Love the general Roscoe-Village neighborhood. It may be a small house but its stil a SFH: no one above, below, or directly adjacent. It does have some curb appeal, at leat the 2nd floor has interest features and lines. Kitchen is a good size and good finishes.
There are lots of draw backs, mainly the small ‘yard’ and the Metra tracks. The 1st floor is also very narrow. I would like to have seen the kit in the breakfast table area & the utilities room reconfigured. This would have given a smaller kitchen but then at least there would be room around the table. You can see the 2 high chair almost touching each wall. Not having a 1st fl bath has all your guest going upstairs in the bedroom area. The stairs to te loft look very steep. I think that could be reconfigured to go parrallel to the railing as opposed to straight across.
Overall its a nice house at a low price. Its very limiting though. You can basically only have one kid (or twins, or 2 kids very close in age) in this house. For most people this house is only good for about 5 years and then they will need more room for more kids.
This house is for someone looking for this much space, and is willing to pay for the added benefits from it being detach, and is willing to deal with the shortcomings.
There will be someone like that, and its under the $417K FHA limit, which is key.
MG-
couple of questions on the property:
1. can fences be put up on the back porch?
2. whats included in the assmt. The ~$146 seems initially steep. But since its a private street I assume snow removal gets expensive. What other maintenance is inc.
3. Whats parking like/ what are the rules. What other rules (generally) are there? Can I paint my exterior any color I want? slap on a basketball net onto my garage? Some of the ‘gated communities’ tend to be uber restrictive on anything that may upset any neoghbors.
4. The main gate is at the south of the road, is there an entrance at the north end. This property is towards the north end, that some serious added distance to walk anywhere in the neighborhood.
“Love the general Roscoe-Village neighborhood.”
Yeah, now we can move on to that. This is as much Roscoe Village as it is Lincoln Park. The triangle b/t Belmont, Clybourn and Ravenswood is *not* Roscoe Village. This is “North Costco”, or “East Hamlin Park”, or “EOLH” (East Of Lathrop Homes).
” is there an entrance at the north end. ”
Yes, off of Oakdale.
Tom – 1. yes; 2. assessments include the usual water, common area maintenance incl landscaping and snow removal, etc. – there is A LOT of common area in this development; 3. 1 car garage and you can park a 2nd car on the pad until 6pm and there is general visitor parking on the “median” b/w the 2 rows; cannot paint or make alterations to the exterior w/o association approval; 4. yes on oakdale
This area is appropriately called West Lakeview. However, it is not in Lakeview. It is in North Center. How do you like that?
“This area is appropriately called West Lakeview. However, it is not in Lakeview. It is in North Center. How do you like that?”
I like it just fine. But, given the general view here about calling the area just south of here across Diversey “Lincoln Park”, technical accuracy wasn’t the point.
But, either way, calling it Roscoe Village requires a verrry broad view of what constitutes “Roscoe Village”. Even using a walking path (instead of an as-the-crow-flies path) Elston/California and Gordon Tech are both about as close to the RV shopping strip as this place.
I thought west of ravenswood was not considered West Lakeview… how do you like that? 🙂
“The triangle b/t Belmont, Clybourn and Ravenswood is *not* Roscoe Village”
-I think that the generally accepted neighborhood boundaries for Roscoe Village are Western to the Metra tracks/ravenswood & Diversey to Addision (excluding south of Diversey once you are also south of clybourn). Some will go as far IrvingPark to Clybourn.
-others are even tighter claiming only Western to damen & Belmont to Addision.
Like any unofficaila neighborhood, there is debate. Officially, per the city, this would be in the community area of North Center. I would personally says its in the neighborhood of Roscoe Village. Because I believe it to be and I believe that Roscoe Village for this home is a better selling point than saying it is in Lakeview.-mho
“Some will go as far IrvingPark to Clybourn.”
They that do that are morons. North of Addison is plainly not Roscoe Village.
South of Belmont also has it’s own community organization–Hamlin Park Neighbors–so including the area south of Belmont is, at best, dubious.
Of course, RV was a ‘hood creted by real estate marketers, so, what the hell, lets call everything b/t Ravenswood and the Kennedy from Diversey to Montrose “Roscoe Village”. It’s a better selling point (just like 1600 SF is a better selling point than 1400 SF).
– if you drive east on School Street there is actually painted on the train overpass’ Welcome to Roscoe Village’. Its looks pretty old.
Can we then agree on the east/west borders: Western & the Metra tracks?
I also agree that Addision is the norhtern border, the debate seems to be on the southern border. We’ll agree to disagree about the non-existant borders of this made-up area.
MG-
back to the parking: guest parking in the median? do you only get a limited amount of parking there. basically if you have 2 cars one is in the garage and the second would have to be in this median overnight/after 6pm at least? is that the correct scenario?
I’m just trying to figure out what a family with 2 cars does here. Is it correct that all (or almost all) the houses on the other side have a 2-car garage facing the alley?
I used to live three houses north of Addison on Damen and it was as roscoe village as roscoe village gets. I was a stone’s throw away from the bars at roscoe/damen and the strollers made their way north where I lived. EVeryone that lived there called it roscoe village.
“They that do that are morons. North of Addison is plainly not Roscoe Village. “
Except for the optometrist on the corner of addison/damen. He’s ‘eye care of wrigleyville’ which being 4 blocks west of ashland is hardly wrigleyville.
“This is “North Costco”, or “East Hamlin Park”, or “EOLH” (East Of Lathrop Homes).”
LMAO.
Way back 11 years ago when I tried my hand at being a Realtor, I remember very clearly that there was a huge DISCLAIMER on the MLS listings that said something like “square footage is approximate and your mileage may vary, so don’t take our word for it.”
Doesn’t that disclaimer still exist?
And, it would seem to me if it does, that the intent is to disclaim minor discrepancies, not to give listing agents the green light to inflate or exaggerate.
The EIFS, aka Dryvit, on these homes is pretty solid. Far fewer defects and moisture intrusion problems than most comparable EIFS SFH’s of this vintage.
Amen to the Square Footage b.s.!! I have listened to the bald-faced fabrications of Realtors for the last 12 years in thousands of transactions.
Another base canard in the R.E. industry is in regard to lead-based paint in older homes…..if I hear, “Just don’t let your kids eat the paint chips” one more time I will explode. Such willful ignorance and blatant lying in the face of a serious environmental hazard should not be without sanction.
An earlier commenter in this thread inquired about filing complaints with the MLS or Chicago Assn. of Realtors. I looked into that once when I was slandered by a re-litter and CAR will only get involved if it’s a dispute between real estate professionals; such as an argument over fee splits, referrals, etc. And….you have to a few hundred dollars to file a complaint. Nice industry!!
The square footage on the original floor plans was, most likely, calculated by the architect using the same standard across all floor plans the firm prepared. There is a voluntary ANSI (American National Standards Institute) standard for calculating square footage.
http://www.nahbrc.com/bookstore/bd1003w.aspx
The most commonly accepted boundaries for Roscoe Village are Belmont to Addison, Damen or the Metra tracks to Western.
The burb in the city some referred to above is Sauganash Woods which, of course, is not adjacent to Sauganash. You can see more than three dozen YoChicago photos at Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yochicago1/sets/72157594308426381/
Re-litter!! OMG this fantastic day could not have ended on a better note!!
Seriously though, I too have felt the need to report so many of these ‘alleged professionals’ over the years for various breaches of conduct it is not funny.
Definately an industry in need of serious regulatory oversight.
I think this chatter got caught up on the calculating sqft-age discussion; we never even looked at comps. There are a few larger units in this developement. initially I thought the $399K price was pretty good, these comps make me think other wise. Both are bigger & wider, are 3 levels (2+ lower level), and 1 has a 2 car garage & rooftop deck.
1806-I: 3bed, 3.5 bath 2200 sqft (not CC verified)-not on train side; open house this Sat-$450K
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1806-W-Diversey-Pkwy-60614/unit-I/home/13358147
1808-?; no sqft listed; 2-car gargage, 3 levels(inc LL); I dont think its on the track side-$445K
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/1808-W-Diversey-Pkwy-60614/home/12724910
Rooftop decks are awesome. +50K
The 1808-? unit is a 2 bed/2.5 bath. i forgot that in the original posting. Not only is there the added value of the rooftop deck, there is also double the garage, 1.2 bath not on the bedroom level, LL family room, and the whole thing looks wider (+ I believe not on the track side). Though you do loose the loft1’d say there is definitely more than a $45K gap between that unit and the 1802-I that this chatter is about.
MG
-I’m interested in your take on these comps as the property’s agent. I have to assume that you’ve seen these 2 units and reviewed them in great detail. Do you think that $50K is the correct seperation between your unit and these other 2? Do you find the other 2 priced correctly, too low, too high?
Does the HOA have restriction on sales and showing, etc? Can you confirm if this 2/2.5 unit is on the track side or not
I think the other units are priced a bit high – and even numbers are on the tracks. As for the parking question above, it is my sellers understanding that there is no limitation as to how many cars can be parked in the median but you can’t leave them there overnight w/o registering with the association – and even then you can’t leave them there for multiple consecutive nights. There are no restrictions that I know of re “sales and showings” assuming I understand your question.
“- if you drive east on School Street there is actually painted on the train overpass’ Welcome to Roscoe Village’. Its looks pretty old.”
It was painted in the late-70s/early-80s, when some realtor got the idea to market the area as Roscoe Village–I think it was in connection with the development of the lofts at Roscoe & Wolcott.
This place is back on the market for $409,900?
http://www.prellorealty.com/featured.cfm
MG — what happened?
Does anyone know if this is a flip or just relisted higher with a different agent?
(Incidentally, the square footage has crept back up to 1473 when it is probably 1341 and MG even changed it in his listing to 1400)
That’s an old listing you’re looking at, Jon—before MG had ithe listing. Having said that, MG couldn’t sell it so the seller hired another company—ReMax, i think. That company sold it—without ever mentioning square footage in the listing—and the place sold for $370,500 this past March.
MG really does the entire real estate community a disservice. As a real estate broker AND an attorney he should know better than to state “square footage is just a number.” Those are words to get an agent in a heap of trouble in a court of law!
Sign me, NOT a BACKBENCHER!