Foreclosure Alert: West Loop Penthouse $200K Under the 2003 Price: 933 W. Van Buren
Want some space and your own private top floor terrace in the West Loop?
This 3-bedroom bank owned penthouse unit just came on the market at 933 W. Van Buren and has already been reduced by $11,000.
From the pictures, it appears to have the kitchen cabinets and bathrooms still intact. The appliances are missing in the kitchen, however.
It has a south exposure, hardwood floors and a fireplace. Two heated parking spaces are apparently included with the price.
Is this a steal?
Two other penthouses on the same floor are also currently on the market.
- Unit #903: 2100 square foot, 3 bedrooms, 3 baths, 2 car parking for $600,000 plus $50,000 for parking. See the pictures here.
- Unit #918: 3 bedrooms, 3 baths, 3 car parking for $549,900 plus $30,000 for tandem parking spot and $25,000 for extra wide spot. See the pictures here.
John Forsythe at Coldwell Banker has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #912: 3 bedrooms, 3 baths, 1800 square feet, 2 car parking
- Sold in July 2003 for $620,000
- Lis pendens in June 2008
- Lis pendens in July 2008
- Bank owned in June 2009
- Originally listed in August 2009 for $418,900
- Reduced
- Currently listed for $407,900
- Assessments of $812 a month (includes the assessments for the two parking spaces)
- Taxes of $7338
- Central Air
So, use a fishbowl lens much?
This seems reasonable
As Jim Cramer would say, “Buy, Buy, Buy, Buy”!
If it seems reasonable as this one does, look for it to go under contract quickly. Six months later (or longer) we’ll maybe see a closing price in public records thats higher than this.
For some reason the foreclosures I follow that go under contract never seem to wind up in public records. Not sure why that is.
Anyone else impressed with the agent’s mustache?
UNRELATED QUESTION:
Sorry to divert from this place, but if anyone has any input on this situation, it would be appreciated…
Briefly, a condo in my building went under contract but it won’t close because of our reserve situation. We’ve always had lean reserves but never an issue with our operating account. The seller wants us (the Board) to essentially deplete our operating account by moving most of it to the reserves account in order to satisfy the requirements of his seller’s FHA loan. Aside from putting the operating account in a precarious position, I’m not comfortable shifting funds to meet the lender’s requirements because of what could happen down the road (i.e., the buyer defaults on the loan and the bank looks at what we did to qualify them…)
Anyone have a view on this? Who am I kidding – you all have views on where Groove sends his kid to school, so let me know! Thanks.
Jon:
You should move the money over. In the past, lenders did not scrutinize the budgets and reserves of HOA. However, all of that has changed now. Deals are getting killed left and right due to HOAs not having enough reserves, allowing too many renters, unresolved legal disputes, etc.
You need to make sure your building meets typical FHA/Conventional guidelines in regards to budget and reserves. Not doing so will hurt your property value because very few potential buyers will be able to get financing.
Jon- I think you already know the answer to this question, judging by your writing. I’d only say yes if you want to take the slight chance you’ll end up in a shiny pair of shackles at some point.
I like the layout in #903 but I’d remove that stupid 2 sided fireplace that’s taking up a crapton of space in the living/dining room.
Thanks Russ.
I understand that we should strive to meet these requirements, but should we do so essentially overnight? The deficiency is something along the lines of $3500 – why not tell the seller to contribute that amount to get the sale to go through? I get annoyed because this is someone that hasn’t cared about a single thing in the building ever… Talk me off the emotional ledge.
ChiGuy – are you serious that there is something legitimately wrong with doing what this seller proposes? I’m pretty sure we have Board member insurance, but I’m not sure there’s a get out of jail card free associated with it…
I don’t think ChiGuy knows what he is talking about. I’d trust Russ who is a mortgage broker and much more familiar with these things.
Jon:
There is nothing wrong with shoring up the reserve account. You are shifting funds from one account to another. Just include a letter that indicates that and explain your HOA didn’t realize that keeping a low reserve account could hamper financing and you are changing your policies.
HOAs often times do not know how their actions affect the ability of their owners and potential buyers to get financing. Nothing shady about it.
If the seller wants to make the deal work, you can request that he shore up the reserves on behalf to the HOA if the board doesn’t want to move money out of the operating account. Bottomline is your reserve account needs another $3500 in it. However, you really shouldn’t need a lot of money in the operating account. It sounds like the operating account has a huge cushion in it which should be put in reserves.
“Bob on August 26th, 2009 at 8:39 am
I don’t think ChiGuy knows what he is talking about. I’d trust Russ who is a mortgage broker and much more familiar with these things.
”
I would suggest moving the money over to the reserve account as the bank request just to get the sale done. You don’t want the unit to sit and be reduced in price.
Once the sale is through, the fiduciarially (sp?) responsible thing for the board to do would be to review the finaincial situation of all the accounts, and ‘possible’ decide to move the funds back to the operating account.
In all instances you are doing your job honestly and in full-faith….for some reason I have a sudden urge to apply for a job at Arthur Anderson…..
Jon (nice name, BTW):
I think you need to go with the old adage about the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few on this one. I’m not an expert, but I would guess that shuffling accounts like this would cause a problem at some point, either immediately or down the road. Why take on that risk over a mere $3500? If the slightest thing goes wrong you’re going to have lawyers involved… and I think you know what that leads to. You and your fellow neighbors will be stuck cleaning up a mess while the guy/gal who brought this pain on in the first place will be long gone.
I would agree with russ that you might want to re-evaluate your policy on acceptable reserve levels, but do it in a controlled manner.
Lived here back in 2006. lots of college kids from UIC and the El noise from the the Ike blue line will drive you nuts.
$17k/year taxes and assessments will prob be the stumbling block on this one. I can understand that sort of level on vintage units but it’s a lot for a $400k west loop condo. Feel like the same loop scenario as an oversupplied rental market (prices go down/investors buy/rents go down/etc….) 400k brings it into a lot of budgets but 17k takes it back out again.
Sonies –
But then how would the buyer hang and stare everynight at their giant plasma tv screen?
“I like the layout in #903 but I’d remove that stupid 2 sided fireplace that’s taking up a crapton of space in the living/dining room.”
Neo – I’m with you, I hate assessments… but relative to the 1800 square feet, this assessment is not too extreme. It’s the same as $540/mo for a 1200 sq ft unit. You’d find that all over the West Loop.
Fiduciary responsibilities are not solely made after a transaction. The Board’s fiduciary duties— depending upon what the By-Laws stipulate and waht the alw allows— are carried out at all times and consistently (i.e., before, during, and after transctions).
Whether the Board, or someone on the Board, perceives themselves to be acting honestly and in good-faith (that’s the proper legal term) does not matter, it is what the law states that counts.
In short, when in doubt don’t do it. Better still, consult a real estate attorney (her/his $300/hr rate is far cheaper than a lawsuit down the road).
BTW: Why would you even contemplate exposing the condo association to liability by shifting funds? If the seller—who you claim didn’t give a hoot about the building— needs to sell, the Board should dictate the terms (and not the seller) as to who puts the $3500 in the reserves to get the deal done. Call the seller’s bluff.
“the Board should dictate the terms (and not the seller) as to who puts the $3500 in the reserves to get the deal done. Call the seller’s bluff.”
Agreed. Make the counter-offer (Seller contributes the full $3500 to reserves) and see what he comes back with.
I’d also nail down (and agree with all board members) the exact amount of “excess” money in the operating account, if any. Then you have a “best and final” point established, with everyone on board that transferring any more (whether $0 or $3000) would be improper. And pay an attorney if necessary to be certain, even tho that *will* reduce the amount available to transfer (or amke the reserve “deficit” worse).
Most likely, the seller will contribute the 3500….not worth killing a deal over
Is that a good precident for the association to start charging sellers with the equivalent of a special assessment? I would be livid as a seller or owner if the association said, “Just chuck in more money as a fix.” The seller is not asking for additional funds. I’m with Jon. Just move $3500 from one account to the other. That’s very reasonable.
Shady or unreasonable would be for the seller to put in $3500 for the lender only to have the association refund it back after the closing. That’s shady. But transfering funds? Associations do this constantly.
Another option for Jon would be to suggest that the seller prepay several months of assessments. Receiving enough funds ahead of plan could permit a transfer from the operating account to the reserve.
Note carefully that getting the money back from the reserve account may be difficult, depending on how well the by-laws are written. If the association runs a monthly deficit over the winter (due to snow removal, leaf removal/gutter cleaning, heating costs, etc.), it is important to make sure that the operating has sufficient funds to make it to lower-cost months.
ugh. I like this building (nice roofdeck with surprisingly good view for not being very tall) and that layout looks good, but “south view” means its on the interstate side and will be NOISEY and DIRTY. Forget about using your balcony or opening your windows, ever.