Bank Owned Lincoln Park 2-Bedroom Sells For $52,000 Over Asking: 1024 W. Armitage
We’ve chattered about this vintage 2-bedroom at 1024 W. Armitage in Lincoln Park several times over the past year.
The last time we chattered about it, in December 2011, it had been re-listed as a bank owned unit for not much more than the 1998 price at $389,000.
See our prior chatter here.
But it must have been a hot property at that price because the property closed for $52,000 over the original list price, or $441,000.
In our original chatter, anonny thought this would sell between $425k and $445k- and it turns out he was right on the money even with the bank originally listing it at $389k.
If you recall, the building was built in 1890.
The unit had 19 windows, including those in the turret.
The kitchen had white cabinets, black appliances and some kind of stone counters.
It had all the amenities that buyers look for including central air, washer/dryer in the unit and garage parking.
Did someone still get a deal, even with paying well over the list price?
Linda O’Donnell at Re/Max Signature had the listing.
You can see the original photos of the interior here. The bank actually painted the unit before re-listing it.
Unit #2: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, den, 1760 square feet
- Sold in June 1998 for $377,500
- Sold in November 1999 for $368,000
- Sold in April 2003 for $467,000
- Lis pendens filed in February 2009
- Originally listed in September 2010 for $599,000
- Reduced in March 2011 to $549,900
- Appears to be bank owned as of July 2011
- Was still listed in September 2011 at $549,900
- Withdrawn in late September
- Re-listed from the bank in December 2011 for $389,000 (included the parking)
- Sold in February 2012 for $441,000
- Assessments of $266 a month
- Taxes of $8481
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 13×14
- Bedroom #2: 15×13
- Office: 8×8
I’m guessing bought by someone with an FHA mortgage and 15k down.
I don’t think so, that would put the loan in Jumbo category and unless something has changed,that is above FHA limits.
Bob: See my previous comment
homedelete (March 7, 2012, 8:09 am)
KNIFE CATCHER!!
Executed Recorded Document Type Amount
02/10/2012 02/24/2012 MORTGAGE $396,900.00
$396,900 / $441,000 = 10% down on a nearly half a million dollar house. It’s 2005 ALL OVER AGAIN! PARTY ON FOLKSSSSSS!!!!
“$396,900 / $441,000 = 10% down on a nearly half a million dollar house. It’s 2005 ALL OVER AGAIN! PARTY ON FOLKSSSSSS!!!!”
You’re complaining about 10% downpayments now?
I actually think that’s pretty good. Most that I’m seeing are still FHA level- like 3%. If someone puts down 10% (or, heaven forbid, 20%), I think “wow.”
I agree with homedelete on this. I think for this market to normalize, we need to go back to 20% down payments. I bet this place wouldn’t have sold for $441k if they had to wait for someone with 20% down. The buyer should have bought a place in the $220k range, which is what would have been in line with the amount of down payment they had.
“like 3%. If someone puts down 10% (or, heaven forbid, 20%), I think “wow.””
That might be less than a security deposit on a rental. 3% down, just lovely.
“10% down on a nearly half a million dollar house”
i am shocked!!!!!!
i am shacked that if the person could have put 3.5% down but instead put 10%??????? in a “Dr” Phill voice WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?
I’m actually advocating a return to the days when mortgages were 5 years or less and down payments were 50pc or more. Like you know, the way it used to be.
“down payments were 50pc or more. Like you know, the way it used to be.”
not disagreeing with you there, but say requirements are 50% why would put 65% down?
There are perfectly reasonable 5, 7 and 10 year lending options available with 10% downs. The subject property is, for most would-be LP buyers, a place in which the residents might live for under 5 years, and likely no more than 10. Why the hell would they put down more than 10%? To tie up more of their money (rather than investing it, paying down student loan or other debt, or saving it towards their next downpayment)? To risk losing more of it in a flat or declining (it seems to vary by the day) market?
The answer to that last question one has little to do with the “I’ll just rent and wait it out” approach, at least not for those who are a bit more picky about where and how they live (and there’s a good chance the buyers of this place (i) have high student loans but (ii) make too much to enjoy the tax relief available to those repaying student loans; I’d bet that the buyers of this place will greatly appreciate the interest deduction when they do their 2012 taxes). I know you can’t find me a Unicorn Compliant place to rent for the monthly carrying costs (the taxes of which should go down) of the subject property (with 10% down). But you’d also have a very hard time finding many places to rent that are true comps for the subject property at the same monthly cost. And yes, dear readers from the 1950’s, “how much a month” is *exactly* how one should approach 2 bedroom condos, in which their should be no mortgage burning parties held.
It’s above an ice-cream shop, right? If a person of the female persuasion bought it, I’m guessing “Hello home – bye bye diet!”
Mortgage burning parties? Bahamas I never even heard of them before someone mentioned it on here. then I Google’d them & found the Miller hi life ad from the 50’s talking about them. amazing how responsible & prudent it was back then.
I bet these wealth poseurs wouldn’t dare stoop to drinking domestic mass market beer, or *gasp*, sub-premium like hi life. these are modern day American consumers ridin’ the debt train and you can be assured if there’s a bump along the way they’ll be crying woe to me and begging for a bailout.
err bahaha my autocorrect must be daydreaming of a vacation
This has sure become a dull discussion.
I think it would be great to buy this whole building and rent out the apartments and storefront. Great location, interesting architecture. But I wouldn’t personally want to live there.
“It’s above an ice-cream shop, right?”
Uh, no. You’re thinking of the similar-looking building at Belmont/Paulina, 2.5 miles from here.
“There are perfectly reasonable 5, 7 and 10 year lending options available with 10% downs.”
You mean, “there are perfectly reasonably 30 year lending options which hold interest rates fixed for 5, 7 and 10 years available with 10% downs.”
when was that?
“I’m actually advocating a return to the days when mortgages were 5 years or less and down payments were 50pc or more. Like you know, the way it used to be.”
When was that? Back in the 1920s according to this article: http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=penniur_papers.
During the Korean War, Dad put down 50% to assume a GI mortgage that was paid off in the early 1970s.
Even in a multiple offer situation, someone must have REALLY fallen in love and wanted this place to pay $52k over asking price. This buyer really didn’t think that in this market they could find another similar 2/2 anywhere near the list price? I think they had themselves fooled!
“when was that?”
Never read “The Jungle”? And, as noted, continued thru the 20s.
“This buyer really didn’t think that in this market they could find another similar 2/2 anywhere near the list price? I think they had themselves fooled!”
*Sigh* (1) 389k was never the true list price (i.e., the price at which the bank would sell for); and (2) while 599k (the 2010 list) was obviously an absurd price, the unit is quite safely a mid-400’s place.
I would be most interested to see a listing – just one single listing – that presents a 1,700 sq ft 2/2, with a garage space, with in unit w/d and central air (to say nothing of a turret and 19 windows), in LP, for a list price of $389k and fees under $300/mo.
“I would be most interested to see a listing – just one single listing – that presents a 1,700 sq ft 2/2, with a garage space, with in unit w/d and central air (to say nothing of a turret and 19 windows), in LP, for a list price of $389k and fees under $300/mo.”
*3* bedrooms and *2* garage spaces, 1800 sf, for $375k:
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/2625-N-Ashland-Ave-60614/unit-3A/home/12771103
Hmm. 375 pre bubble, 150 at the peak, now 375 again. Can’t possibly be anything afoot there.
“the unit is quite safely a mid-400?s place”
That is the problem I have with Lincoln Park. Mid-400’s for a 2/2 (albeit a large one) on a busy street with a deck that rams up against the coach house unit above a store. No thanks!
“1) 389k was never the true list price (i.e., the price at which the bank would sell for)”
The bank would have sold this for closer to $389k if people didn’t get into such a bidding frenzy. I can see someone in a bidding war going over $400k for this (I wouldn’t) but at some point before $441k, I would think buyers would have stepped back and realized that indeed, this is not 2005 and while this place has some positives. it has some negatives too and (at least in my view) wasn’t worth such a rush over asking price
Why 400? Why not 200? You’re providing ballparks based upon what you think a 2/2 in LP should fetch, which is not what “the market” thinks. I doubt there was a bidding frenzy; I imagine it became quite clear very quickly to any prospective buyers what the actual magic number would look like. This a place that simply should have been listed in the high 400’s, with a closing price of right around what it just now sold for.* Again, the original list of 599 was a joke, as was the bank’s price.
* And, were it not (i) right above retail, it could have closed $10-15k higher; (ii) right on Armitage, it could have closed $10-15k higher; and (iii) quite so far west, it could have closed $10-15k higher. Had it been free from all of those downsides, it could have closed $30-50k higher. Those are the ballpark discounts I’d give on each of those downsides. I’d value things like being on the ground floor/dup down at $10-20k off, a full bath at $10-20k off (see, e.g., the dup-up-and/or-down that recently closed on Webster), etc.
“Hmm. 375 pre bubble, 150 at the peak, now 375 again. Can’t possibly be anything afoot there.”
Yeah, it’s called a “typo” or a “transcription error”. Because, even at the peak, and even tho it was World Savings, I don’t think anyone was securing $445k in mortgages to purchase a $150k condo. Only one current mtg on the place, for $313.
If there wasn’t a bidding frenzy, then why bid $441k? If the bank listed it at $389k and you think that is a steal and there aren’t other bidders out there, why not take a steal at $389k? People don’t pay over what they have to for homes just because the bank “should” sell it for that much.
I’m pretty sure there had to be at least one other offer for the buyer to pay $441k or more offers on the way. Otherwise there would be no reason to offer $52k over list even if that is the supposed “market price”
What you are basically saying is that people can’t get deals, they have to offer what “market price” is whether or not it is listed “below market”
“I doubt there was a bidding frenzy; I imagine it became quite clear very quickly to any prospective buyers what the actual magic number would look like. This a place that simply should have been listed in the high 400?s, with a closing price of right around what it just now sold for.* Again, the original list of 599 was a joke, as was the bank’s price.”
this sold for a good price i would say. Great location!! To compare a property on Ashland isnt even the same thing. And to everyone who scoffs at putting down 10%, 44k is a nice chunk of change.
I do not consider 2625 N Ashland even a remotely close comparison to this place on Armitage.
“I do not consider 2625 N Ashland even a remotely close comparison to this place on Armitage.”
I don’t either.
I was answering a question about a condo “in LP”. Not in a location comparable to this, not with “charm” comparable to this, simply a 2/2, with ac, garage and low assessments below a given price.
Even quoted the specific request.
“I’m actually advocating a return to the days when mortgages were 5 years or less and down payments were 50pc or more. Like you know, the way it used to be.”
’cause you don’t understand money.
“i am shacked that if the person could have put 3.5% down but instead put 10%??????? in a “Dr” Phill voice WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?”
This differs from your asking about paying extra principal pmts, how?
“This differs from your asking about paying extra principal pmts, how?”
wasnt me asking, i was answering (incorrectly too i think)
” i was answering (incorrectly too i think)”
wasn’t important. I just brought you into it so I can seem more balanced while simultaneously calling HD a dumbass. Avoided me making fun of Bob for thinking anyone would come to him in time a need. “hey buddy, can you spare a groupon coupon”
“I’m actually advocating a return to the days when mortgages were 5 years or less and down payments were 50pc or more. Like you know, the way it used to be.”
I really hope you’re joking. I agree with much of what you have to say, but this is totally preposterous.
” And to everyone who scoffs at putting down 10%, 44k is a nice chunk of change.”
Couldn’t agree more
“someone must have REALLY fallen in love and wanted this place”
This is Chad/Trixie ground zero. To some there is a GZ within the GZ and this is located there.
“wasn’t important. I just brought you into it so I can seem more balanced while simultaneously calling HD a dumbass.”
anytime you need to call HD a dumbazz please feel free to involve and quote anything i said, fictional or not 🙂
44k is a nice chunk of change indeed. but its a mere pittance compared to four hundred and forty thousand dollars for a two bedroom apartment.
“a mere pittance … for a two bedroom apartment”
Do we all see this as a ~$3,000/month apartment? With the parking included?
“anonny (March 12, 2012, 11:35 am)
I would be most interested to see a listing – just one single listing – that presents a 1,700 sq ft 2/2, with a garage space, with in unit w/d and central air (to say nothing of a turret and 19 windows), in LP, for a list price of $389k and fees under $300/mo.”
$345,000 and I’d trade you your 200sf for my extra half-bath and 300sf deck.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/933-W-Wrightwood-Ave-60614/unit-B/home/13360983
How about $389,000 and another bedroom and closer to the lake?
http://cribchatter.com/?p=11602
“anonny (March 12, 2012, 11:35 am)
I would be most interested to see a listing – just one single listing – that presents a 1,700 sq ft 2/2, with a garage space, with in unit w/d and central air (to say nothing of a turret and 19 windows), in LP, for a list price of $389k and fees under $300/mo.”
$345,000 and I’d trade you your 200sf for my extra half-bath and 300sf deck.
http://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/933-W-Wrightwood-Ave-60614/unit-B/home/13360983
So, anonny, with the help of SoPoCo’s links, why would this buyer have bid $52k over ask price without there being other offers? I still think that this had to be a situation where a buyer got swept up in getting the place they loved rather than just someone paying what the list price should have been.
the 933 W Wrightwood propert is right next to the El. And the red/brown/purple line blow through tat section. NO THANKS