Cash Only Buyers Please at 3535 N. Wilton in Lakeview
This 2-bedroom unit at 3535 N. Wilton in Lakeview is currently listed as a short sale.
On the market since September 2009, the price has recently been cut again.
Don’t expect to finance the deal as the listing says: “cash only buyers.”
It also describes “anticipated” future special assessments between $25,000 and $50,000. Oh, and $2500 is due for past specials.
The unit is just a block south of Wrigley Field (you can probably hear the crowds on game day.)
Built in 2003, it also has the newer kitchen with granite counter tops and stainless steel appliances.
Ginger Menne at Baird & Warner has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #3: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, 1520 square feet
- Sold in September 2004 for $435,000
- Originally listed in September 2009 for $395,000
- Reduced several times
- Lis pendens foreclosure filed in December 2009
- Currently listed as a “short sale” for $280,000 (parking included)
- Assessments of $124 a month
- Taxes of $6124
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
Sabrina, your Pictures link is going to a unit at 10 E. Delaware.
So I can’t see what this place on Wilton looks like, but it sounds like a nightmare- a horrible financial trap you’d have to be stone crazy to step into.
Even if you deduct those $75K worth of specials from the price, you might be facing many more down the road.
Who’d want this at any price?
you can see pics here: http://www.trulia.com/property/1068977191-3535-N-Wilton-Ave-3-Chicago-IL-60657
Truly astounding anyone would have paid $435k for this.
even more interesting is that it looks like flips/resales are starting at 10 E Delaware.
RILF!
& in before Sonies..
Ohmygod, this is almost a new building.
There must be many really serious flaws in the construction to need to spend this kind of money. There is no excuse for something this new to have $75000 worth of specials.
I can’t figure why anyone would have paid $435 for this sad, fugly, ordinary place to begin with. Probably because it was NEW and the buyers thought, well at least we won’t have any problems.
Little did they know. The 00s saw an absolute nadir in the quality of home construction in this city and the rest of the country, and we can only wonder how much of the garbage built in the past 10 years will either be torn down or devolve into slumhood as the problems begin to cost more to mitigate than the places are worth.
Definite RILF, Sabrina the original link you posted was for an 850k 1 bedroom!!! holy crap
as for this place, decent deal if you could finance it, but I could think of quite a few other things to spend 280k of cash on!
Sonies, would you REALLY take on something like this, even as a gift?
Think about it…. what could go so wrong with an almost-new building that it needs this kind of work? And how much more will it need down the road?
At least with an old building that’s been standing for a few decades, you know what you are dealing with- old systems that need steep upgrading and routinely high assessments and the need to improve the energy efficiency. That’s why older places tend to be cheaper on a per-square-foot basis.
But with this place you really have no idea. Anybody who loves this place so much better pay for the most thorough inspection he can buy.
Be scared…be very, very scared.
“There is no excuse for something this new to have $75000 worth of specials.”
I think you added a zero. The past due specials are $2,500, with future up to $50k. Still, way, way, way (etc) too much, but not $75k* bad (which x4 for the 4 units, would half to be about 1/2 of the original, total construction cost–the ~1/3 they’re facing is bad enough).
“the original link you posted was for an 850k 1 bedroom!!!”
That is listed as a 1 ba, even tho the pix show a .5 bath, too. May be a case of a listing realtor not trying, b/c s/he knows it will *never* sell with that list price.
“Sonies, would you REALLY take on something like this, even as a gift? ”
I’d take it as a gift, sell it at a steep discount to some sucker, then roll that profit into a large down payment for a property that doesn’t suck structurally or locationally, oh and that would be tax free too!
You mean not even a hot Realtor can save the owners of this McCrapBox extraordinaire?
Oh yeah and how are Bob’s shorts doing? Bob’s shorts are doing fantastic as the market has obviously come around to Bob’s point of view that we’re living in a ponzi economy and current valuations are nowhere near justified.
We looked at this place back in early October when it was a short sale and listed at $395,000. There was mold damage in the building that you could almost taste in the air, mainly impacting the common stairwell on the north side of the building iirc. The rooftop deck had been removed at that point to fix the roof, which was a definite work in progress.
Nothing unique about the place that you couldn’t see all over that area, except for the mold and water damage. That’s unique enough to give breathing problems for even 2-pack a day smokers.
*cough*, *cough*
Yeah, but what if you got stuck with the dump and all its liabilities and couldn’t find a cash buyer.
I’m seeing cash-only deals for absurdly cheap prices all over the place, especially up north in Edgewater,Rogers Park, and West Rogers Park, as well as other more challenged neighborhoods. That means financing is not available, because the place has really big problems.
Obviously, this place is one of those and really ought to be much cheaper. There are too many other places an investor could buy for $12,000 (Leland & WInthrop), $27,000 (Arthur &Fairfield, a big five room in beautiful building), that with $40K or $50K worth of work would cash flow easily as rentals. Or even with less work. Yet I don’t see these places being snapped up.
Now, this place at least looks good inside the unit, so you have to wonder what horrible structural problems lurk within the walls.
Condo buying has become very scary since the bubble burst. We just had no idea how many rotting bodies there were on the beach until the tide rolled out.
Didn’t you say you were short back in March or april? How’d that work out for ya…
I actually viewed this place twice in the past six weeks, and was pursuing making an offer until very recently, when the original special asmt estimate jumped from $64k to “$100-200k. That larger figure is very concerning, both in terms of a jump from the original estimate and in terms of the spread in possible cost. They really don’t seem to have a solid idea of how much damage there is.
The backstory is this: built in ’03, it developed a small leak in the roof where the seal pulled away from the perimeter wall. Water got in slowly, over time, and did a lot of damage. A special asmt was levied originally to rip off and replace the roof (around $60k), and this second special asmt is to fix all the interior damage to the 4th and 2nd floor. This unit is the 3rd floor, so one thing I never quite understood was how water damaged floors 4 and 2 but skipped 3. Perhaps someone can explain that.
Otherwise – I agree with the sentiment that this place could well be a money pit. And I agree that the unit itself is cookie-cutter-condo for sure. But at the price point, size, and with a big roof deck, this would make sense for someone who likes being close to Wrigley….except for the big big risk you take that the water damage won’t be fully resolved until you’ve spent your every last dime.
I highly doubt that the water damage simply “skipped” the 3rd floor as the realtor stated. I’d be VERY afraid of what lurks behind the dry wall and under the carpeting….
No carpet in the place, but I agree with you — we were scared off for sure when the special asmt estimate jumped as it did. How much is a contractor just guessing with a spread of $100k between his high and low estimate?
Cash only so you can’t sue the bank for loan fraud for things they knew about when they sell you this place
cash only because no bank in their right mind would give a mortgage on a place with this many structural issues. Probably can’t get title insurance either.
“A special asmt was levied originally to rip off and replace the roof (around $60k)”
$60k to replace a roof? Really?
Let’s say that they replaced *all* the plywood underlayment–is that a fair price, or were they gouged? Seems to me, this was way, way (etc) too high, unless it included something v. unusual.
“Probably can’t get title insurance either.”
Oh, you can get title insurance. There’d probably be an exception for mechanics’ liens, but that’s only a lien, not a genuine dispute about who has title.
Insurance products don’t exist to cover these kinds of contingencies?
Yeah, I didn’t get far enough to review documents related to the first special, so there may have been more going on than was initially conveyed to me.
Gouged. Majorly.
Also, anyone have a theory for why building insurance wouldn’t cover something like this?
“Insurance products don’t exist to cover these kinds of contingencies?”
Insurance products exist for *any* contingency, it’s just a question of pricing, terms and exclusions. And, if the risk is hard to quantify, you’re likely to substantially overpay for the coverage or get tripped up by an exclusion.
uh no insurance before the association was established perhaps?
Don’t forget about the potential costs associated with mold remediation.
The scary thing is Lakeview & Lincoln Park are covered with similarly constructed units like this one.
“anyone have a theory for why building insurance wouldn’t cover something like this?”
A fairly clear, simple answer is here:
http://insurance.freeadvice.com/complaint/home/76/277/
Even shorter and simpler: HO/Condo insurance (generally) excludes damage caused by poor construction/lack of maintenance from converage. Assume that the roof was improperly installed, I would expect no coverage–your recourse is to sue the roofer.
Thanks, anon. Really sucks. You’d think it would be easy/common to get insurance to cover poor construction, with insurer being the one to go after the builder (after paying you!)
Eeek, you’re telling me. I can’t tell you how many cookie-cutter upper duplexes I’ve looked at in these sorts of buildings. And, the prices, for the exact same thing, can range 100K for no known reason.
(We’ve decided against an upper duplex in any sort of building.)
“The scary thing is Lakeview & Lincoln Park are covered with similarly constructed units like this one.”
“Thanks, anon. Really sucks. You’d think it would be easy/common to get insurance to cover poor construction, with insurer being the one to go after the builder (after paying you!)”
Like I say, you could, but it probably wouldn’t be cost effective.
Also, that’s the “home warranty” business, basically.
Also, what *really* sucks is that it’s all about the circumstances when you first notice the problem–if the leak were reported to an insurer immediately after a big, windy storm, that’s probably a covered event. But if, once the claim inspcetion starts, they discover that the leak was there for a long time before that (water stains, etc), then it might be excluded, plus you might have your rates increase substantially. And if the leak is first reported after a light April shower, it’s almost certainly excluded.
Ironically, many people are attracted to new construction homes because they look “new”. However, most are ignorant to the overall sh*tty construction of these places. I have had people question why they need an inspection when the home is “new”!
I would never ever buy new construction unless I could see the builders previous work up close to get a sense of their quality.
They guy that sold all these new construction condo plans must be right as it seems like every developer bought the plans from the same place.
I’ve looked at places like this outside of LP. I’m no Bob Villa but I noticed many signs of poor workmanship. Just plain sloppy work. Like they were in a hurry with a gun to their head or something. Leaks from the outside, bad concrete, etc.
Sooo glad I had the sense to pass, even with the realtor (they are looking out for you after all) telling me what a great deal it was.
The new stuff scares me.
Sorry about the bad link. It has been corrected. I must have been channeling a post for tomorrow today. 🙂
how many places have we seen here in the last week that have that one blood red accent wall in them? I’m thinking this is the 3rd or 4th one?
It’s an interior design trend I could well do without!
More than a couple coats of paint to cover that over. But clearly there are bigger issues going on here than just some dark walls. Wonder how low it will go.
Look carefully at this type of condo construction – and avoid at all costs. These small condo buildings, though relatively recent construction, were typically built by small inexperienced contractors and the buildings are consequently a homeowner’s nightmare of leaks, cracks, mold, and special assessments. Tribune and WBEZ have covered this issue several times.
During the period from 2000 2007 every sub-contractor thought that he could be a GC. This made for some bad decisions. They were hiring day labor as that was all that was available. The guy would need to become an expert on concrete one week, roofing the next, and later drywall. I lived in one of these buildings in Bucktown from 2002-2005. I only made 15% over 3 years but was delighted when I was able to get out of that place. It was less than 5 years old and I could tell that it was starting to show signs of aging. Almost sold it to a Cubs player but he would not meet my final price and waanted to negotiate the final $3k with free Cubs tickets. Being a fan it was tempting but I passed and got a better offer!
How many condos in Lakeview and LP have we seen with MAJOR problems posted on CribChatter? FAR TOO MANY. Can wee see some *moderately priced* condos that don’t have major issues from those areas, or are they all crap? Seems like everyone has a gripe of some sort with every condo/SFH/hi-rise/etc that crib chatter posts. I understand no home is perfect, but can one or two be posted without being torn apart for the price, structure, builder, taxes, assessments, location, or even paint color?
(Granted, I wouldn’t get myself into this financial mess either… but still.)
I love Lakeview and Lincoln Park and like to see different units in those areas, especially chatted about by someone other than realtors, home inspectors, and loan officers. I find realtors just try to sell you they place for its benefits and this gives a different perspective, although it seems curbed to be very negative. The posts on here seem to be very *argumentative*, and I used that word lightly, while discussing the postings. Why would I ever buy a place if 99% of people seeing a posting about it would tear it apart for the slightest detail?
Maybe this site should be changed to CribBitching.com
“roma on February 4th, 2010 at 2:34 pm
Truly astounding anyone would have paid $435k for this.”
Not really. 435K is what they were going for in 2004. I used to live 2 blocks from here. I turned a 50K profit in 18mos on a 2 Bed 1Ba with no parking doing nothing but painting it.
BTW, Unit 4 seemed to have sold in 2009 for $425K http://www.trulia.com/homes/Illinois/Chicago/sold/22944443-3535-N-Wilton-Ave-4-Chicago-IL-60657
anon (tfo) on February 4th, 2010 at 3:59 pm
“A special asmt was levied originally to rip off and replace the roof (around $60k)”
$60k to replace a roof? Really?
Let’s say that they replaced *all* the plywood underlayment–is that a fair price, or were they gouged? Seems to me, this was way, way (etc) too high, unless it included something v. unusual.
**60K seems about right to me. The mold removal will cost a bundle too
The contractor should be in Jail for creating this kind of situation for 4 owners. But he’s probably back in Poland or Romania by now smiling on all the profit he made on this building.
Yay, another generic Lakeview/Lincoln Park McCondo. And this one is in huge trouble. The saddest part is they probably tore down a 100 year old high quality Victorian house to build this piece of junk.
Bob B. on February 5th, 2010 at 11:02 am
How many condos in Lakeview and LP have we seen with MAJOR problems posted on CribChatter? FAR TOO MANY. Can wee see some *moderately priced* condos that don’t have major issues from those areas, or are they all crap? Seems like everyone has a gripe of some sort with every condo/SFH/hi-rise/etc that crib chatter posts. I understand no home is perfect, but can one or two be posted without being torn apart for the price, structure, builder, taxes, assessments, location, or even paint color?
I’d imagine that moderately priced condos without issues actually sell quickly as opposed to sitting on the market forever or getting foreclosed on before they can sell.
What does “moderately” priced mean?
$200,000?
$300,000?
$400,000?
My friend rents from the owner on the second floor. Their is no water damage to his floor but they do have a special for the roof. 60K seems high though.
Just noticed the non-special assessment are actually reasonable: $124 a month. That doesn’t make up for the special assessments, of course, but it’s interesting.
Great story, jp3. Which player?
This place needs a seller who is 1) a rabid Cubs fan, 2) really stupid and/or in denial blinded by proximity to Wrigley to see this unit’s problems and 3) cash rich.
I can see a combination of 1 & 2, but all three could be tricky… and the foreclosure clock is ticking…
This place would be one of the rare occasions I could approve of a homeowner just tossing the keys back to the bank. Who would want to deal with this mess.
In most cases the decision to toss the keys back to the bank is already made for the borrower i.e. job loss, reduction in income, life changing event, recasting ARM, 20% or more underwater on the mortgage, etc. The borrower gasps at straws to keep the property but what’s done is done and sometimes there just isn’t enough money for the debtor to pay all his obligations.
“GoCubs on February 9th, 2010 at 12:44 pm
This place would be one of the rare occasions I could approve of a homeowner just tossing the keys back to the bank. Who would want to deal with this mess.”
grasps, sorry, no gasps!
Gocubs: “60K seems about right to me.”
Really? I’m not talking about all of the work that was probably actually done, I’m talking about $60k to “rip off and replace the roof”, as Brian told us.
Yes, most likely either (a) the work was not fully described to him, or (b) Brian shorthanded it to post here, or (c) the association got totally screwed.
If it were $60k for tear-off, new underlayment, new insulation and a couple new joists in the “wet area”, and rebuilding some portion of the roof deck, sure, that’s a or b. But $60k for 1500 SF of tear-off and replace rubber roof? That’s have to be C, no?