 SF Home Only $488K! (by W [CA]) Jun 21, 2024 9:18 PM
 SF Home Only $488K! (by ken [NY]) Jun 21, 2024 9:29 PM
SF Home Only $488K! (by W [CA]) Jun 21, 2024 10:16 PM
SF Home Only $488K! (by Oregon Woodsmoke [ID]) Jun 22, 2024 10:04 AM
SF Home Only $488K! (by DJ [VA]) Jun 23, 2024 2:22 PM
SF Home Only $488K! (by Ray-N-Pa [PA]) Jun 23, 2024 6:58 PM
SF Home Only $488K! (by John... [MI]) Jun 24, 2024 11:19 AM
SF Home Only $488K! (by W [CA]) Posted on: Jun 21, 2024 9:18 PM
Message:
This San Francisco home is priced at a low $488K, but there's a catch
Natalie Neysa Alund, USA TODAY
The 3 bed, 2 bath home at 30 North View Court in the city's Russian Hill neighborhood is up for $488,000, according to a listing posted on Zillow.
But there's one catch: The new owner may not be able to move in until 2053.
According to the listing, the single-family home is currently tenant-occupied and to be sold as is. It's described as an "investment opportunity for just the right buyer."
"Current tenant claims SF City- tenant protection class- status," it continues. "Tenant's current lease appears to grant tenants strong long term rent rate amount restrictions, unconventional method of rental payment, and possible occupancy rights until 2053."
Under an agreement, the listing reades, the current tenant can possibly continue to live there until 2053 and pay the same amount of rent each month just under $417 , , ,
--152.89.xxx.xxx |
SF Home Only $488K! (by ken [NY]) Posted on: Jun 21, 2024 9:29 PM
Message:
they pass these kind of stupid laws the city shouldnt be able to increase taxes for the same time period. that would fix that problem --74.77.xx.xx |
SF Home Only $488K! (by W [CA]) Posted on: Jun 21, 2024 10:16 PM
Message:
Actually, the deceased owner was probably paying about $1k per year; the new owner would pay about 1.2 percent of the purchase price under Prop13,,, 4800 per year? --152.89.xxx.xxx |
SF Home Only $488K! (by Oregon Woodsmoke [ID]) Posted on: Jun 22, 2024 10:04 AM
Message:
I suppose something might happen to that tenant. If the "right" investor buys that property. SF can be pretty dangerous. --76.178.xxx.xxx |
SF Home Only $488K! (by DJ [VA]) Posted on: Jun 23, 2024 2:22 PM
Message:
KEN, you should buy it.
You have a history of knowing how to get people out --71.82.xxx.x |
SF Home Only $488K! (by Ray-N-Pa [PA]) Posted on: Jun 23, 2024 6:58 PM
Message:
For the right price -
I was wondering where I could relocate my skunk farm too --24.101.xxx.xxx |
SF Home Only $488K! (by John... [MI]) Posted on: Jun 24, 2024 11:19 AM
Message:
Ken: What "stupid law" are you referring to here?
This has nothing to do with rent control or any other "stupid law." It happened because we allow people like us to write up whatever rental agreements we want.
In this case, it looks like the tenant got the very elderly home owner to write up a long-term lease at a stupidly low rate. The landlord agreed.
In any case, this situation happened not because of any "stupid laws" other than allowing landlords to make their own decisions about renters.
He signed a long-term agreement with his tenant and then he died. The only "stupid law" here is that someone was likely taken advantage of an elderly person and there was no law to protect him.
So do you want MORE government regulation to protect elderly people (or their heirs) in this sort of situation? Or do you want LESS government regulation like usual? You can't have it both ways. (Or, at least, you can't blame "stupid laws" when one didn't exist here and the one that SHOULD have been here would be for more government regulation that most of you are usually against.)
--107.181.xxx.x |
Reply:
|
|