Kim Freeman, Buyer / FlipperAnother seemingly bleeding heart story about a couple losing their home. But the real story is that of a couple taking on crippling debt, in the hopes of cashing in with a flip, later on. Remember, buyers helped fill this bubble. Now what?... Her marriage is broken, and she lost her job. At the age of 46, she is basically starting over. She said, "Everything about this house was bad timing." Hmmmm... Realtards would advise you against trying to time the real estate market. But then again, for Realtards, it's always a great time to buy. One thing to note from the story: what exactly did they do with $110K in profit from the sale of their first home??? (I hope they didn't use any of that money for "cosmetic" reasons)
13272 Charloma Dr, Tustin, CA
Sale History
05/13/2004: $703,000
08/16/2000: $258,000
2008-01-20: Humbled homesellers
Sale History
05/13/2004: $703,000
08/16/2000: $258,000
2008-01-20: Humbled homesellers
Kim Freeman calls her tale a "riches to rags story." At the center of it is a house in Tustin her husband calls "the albatross." It's a story about bad timing and bad luck – a tale of woe that many 2007 home sellers are telling after enduring the slowest housing market in at least two decades.
The good news here is that the Freemans' house is in escrow after 2 1/2 years on the market. The bad news is they've had to cut their price to $563,000 – $226,000 below their original asking price and $140,000 less than what they paid for the three-bedroom ranch house.
Things seemed rosy when Bill and Kim Freeman bought their Charloma Drive house with the big back yard in the spring of 2004. They had just sold a home in Las Flores for a $180,000 profit after owning it for less than a year. Their plan was to do the same with the Tustin home, reselling at a higher price in less than three years.
They saw the three-bedroom home on a corner lot, noticed it had a remodeled kitchen and pounced before another buyer could get it. They paid $703,000. In retrospect, she said, they probably moved too fast. They put $70,000 down – all that remained from their $180,000 profit from the Las Flores house after taxes and paying off debts. (Where did the $110K go?)
They put the home up for sale for $789,000 in the spring of 2005. They got an offer for $750,000. Acting on their agent's advice, they rejected it. In March 2007, the couple rejected a $675,000 offer because it would have meant losing their down payment, plus an additional $10,000 in cash they'd have to pay at closing.
2 comments:
Another amazing story. There will be so many more to come for a long time yet....
As far as the $110K -
---
They put $70,000 down – all that remained from their $180,000 profit from the Las Flores house after taxes and paying off debts.
---
It looks like they paid off credit cards or something of that sort....
Also, the story has a very strange statement that makes no sense:
---
The bad news is they've had to cut their price to $563,000 – $226,000 below their original asking price and $140,000 less than what they paid for the three-bedroom ranch house.
To make matters worse, the Freemans' marriage has broken up, in part because of the house. And Kim Freeman, a 46-year-old corporate sales manager and mother of two young daughters, has been laid off from her job.
The couple now is six months behind on their mortgage and could lose the home outright if their escrow doesn't close.
---
Uhhh, is it just me, or did she already LOSE the home? Is she going to come up with the difference of the shortfall to pay off the lenders? She owes more than she is selling for!
If she's in default, it's NOT really possible for her to have the money to "square up." Fact is, it was never her home to begin with....
And now she's got NOTHING!
Although - she did live rent free for few months......
The bad news is they've had to cut their price to $563,000 – $226,000 below their original asking price and $140,000 less than what they paid for the three-bedroom ranch house.
I agree, Jeff. At this point, what does it matter that they are successful with their short sale. Saves their "credit", but BFD; they're broke and nobody will loan them money, anyway.
Someone pointed out at another site that since they owned the house less than 1 year, they WOULD have to pay taxes on the gain. All the more reason to wait 1 year.
Post a Comment