Would You Rent from the Bank? 400 W. Deming in Lincoln Park
This is the first time I’ve seen the bank actually try and rent out a unit it now owns at the same time they’re apparently going to try and sell it.
This 1-bedroom unit at 400 W. Deming, in the historic Marlborough, which is literally right on Lincoln Park, recently came on the market as a rental.
But the unit is bank owned.
The listing states, “for sale by bank throughout the lease. Tenant will have 48 hour notice before showing and 120 days notice to vacate once sold.”
Has anyone ever seen anything like this before?
Why even bother with the tenant at all?
And what tenant would want to rent under these conditions?
There are no pictures of the interior of the unit but it is one of the larger 1-bedrooms in the building with a 12×11 dining room.
There is no central air or washer/dryers in the unit. Parking is rental in the neighborhood.
Rosie Russ at Baird & Warner has the rental listing. It’s not yet listed for sale on the MLS. See the listing here.
Unit #9N: 1 bedroom, 1 bath
- Sold in March 2001 for $172,000
- Sold in March 2004 for $209,000
- Currently listed as bank owned and for rent for $1100 a month
- No central air
- No in-unit washer/dryer
- Bedroom: 16×10
- Living room: 18×12
- Dining room: 12×11
- Kitchen: 12×6
That bank must really be hurting if they’re going to cause all this additional headache for themselves for a measly $1100/mo.
Here’s a novel idea: lower the price to pre-bubble levels!
LMAO! These banksters sure think they are renaissance men as evidenced by their foray into being a landlord. They wouldn’t know how to deal with a tenant like me.
Not to mention I can’t imagine how un-responsive the bankers would be to maintenance issues if it takes them half a decade to sell a foreclosure from the time of last payment.
Hate to tell the bankers but if you can’t be successful in banking you sure as hell can’t be successful at being a landlord.
I used to think the bankers weren’t as stupid as stuck flippers who jump head over heels into being a landlord as at least their hesitation showed they know something the flippers don’t. Nix that sentiment.
Ha! I would be funny if the tenant just never paid the rent, then the bank would be in a situtation where they have to evict the tenant! I am sure they would love that ordeal.
Jason (TFO),
you are my new comedic idol 🙂
Thanks! Sorry about the type-o “It”
LOL whaaaaat this is strange, just take the tax loss and move on morons!
This could be their way of renting it to an employee w/o the negative publicity WF got for the Malibu beachhouse.
They better be thankful I just did my lease renewal and hope they don’t get a tenant with a lot of animus towards the bankers like me.
I would so trash this place by the time I left you’d think it was an apartment in Somalia.
If my next landlord ran a background check and found an issue I’ll just respond: “Who are you gonna believe the bankers or me?”
Bob:
“Sec. 21-1. Criminal damage to property.
(1) A person commits an illegal act when he:
(a) knowingly damages any property of another without
his consent
…
(2) … The acts described in items (a), (b), (c), (e), and (f) are Class 4 felonies if the damage to property exceeds $300 but does not exceed $10,000.”
Sec. 5?8?1. Sentence of Imprisonment for Felony.
“(a)(7) for a Class 4 felony, the sentence shall be not less than 1 year and not more than 3 years.”
And I wouldn’t out it past them to elect to press charges, if you really, really trashed the place.
So when you need something fixed does a guy in a suit show up with a toolbox?
I think its a good idea if the manage all the good properties, then focus on the best return from marginal properties, then when they can unload the rented properties. why chide them, when they are trying to minimize their stupidity. they need to earn lot of money to pay back the tax coffers.
“And I wouldn’t out it past them to elect to press charges, if you really, really trashed the place.”
anon(tfo), as you might have suspected I have a pretty good criminal defense attorney.
Criminal charges would never stick. For all the bank knows, someone broke in and had a party while Bob was out of town. Anyone who isn’t a total moron could trash an apartment and lose only their security deposit, and possibly their credit rating if they care.
I have another take on this: I think it would be great for nomadic consultants and people who want to gamble on potentially saving money while living in a desirable neighborhood. Perhaps these people aren’t home much. 120 days’ notice sounds reasonable, and 48 hours’ notice isn’t bad for showings if you know what you’re getting yourself into. I would be the tenant.
Brian Z: Are you saving money though?
A lovely similarly sized 1-bedroom in the same building was also recently listed for rent for $1300 (no bank as the landlord and not short-term.) It has granite counter tops in the kitchen etc.
I think 48 hours is plenty adequate for cleaning the place and hiding the contraband.
I think 120 days is also very reasonable notice for moving out.
With the showing period it would make it feel more like a hotel than a home to me. Would make us straighten up more though which would be nice.
“For all the bank knows, someone broke in and had a party while Bob was out of town.”
Carson: Banks are sooo stupid.
Audience: How stupid are they?
Carson: They’re soooo stupid that they have no idea how to check if a police report has been filed.
Audience: [silence]
Bob’s reliance on a good defense lawyer is a better idea. Not saying anything about anything is better than layering on lies.
I am sure the bank hired a maintenance service, like any other “armchair” investor.
“I think 48 hours is plenty adequate for cleaning the place and hiding the contraband.”
Are tenants obligated to clean the place before showings? What if they make it messy and unattractive on purpose, to scare the potential buyers away?
I saw a similar deal just as the market was tanking and someone couldn’t sell their unit – it was listed for sale and for rent with similar conditions. Didn’t even bother going to look at it. Maybe the banker responsible wants it for themselves?
“Maybe the banker responsible wants it for themselves?”
or for his side girl?