0
0

Someone Please Explain "Pocket Listings"


 invite response                
2007 Apr 11, 4:57am   42,523 views  507 comments

by Randy H   ➕follow (0)   💰tip   ignore  

We've talked about so called "pocket listings" and the reasons this happens. But this is the first time I've witnessed one occurring first-hand, and I'm a bit confused.

There's a home in the neighborhood, near enough that I see it every day. It is clearly for sale. The owners cleared out, had it entirely repainted, staged, and it now sits in pristine showing order. No for sale sign. No MLS entry. No key box. Not a peep. Yet people are being shown the place by obvious realtors, sometimes many per day.

Seems to me there is too much activity to be just a "sister or brother" realtor trying to sell it before listing it. And unless there are multiple agencies colluding in the pocket-listing-racket, there is too much activity for this to just be within a single agency; even a large one. This house is getting more traffic than two others in better condition which actually have signs and key boxes.

And aren't pocket listings technically against the CAR's so called "code of ethics"?

And even more so, why the hell would any buyer even be interested in this? This particular home sold for $1m a in mid 2005, but only 0.5m in 1999. Given the listed comparables in the neighborhood, I'll bet they're easily trying to get $1.4-1.5m. But this is Tamalpais Valley, not exactly prime South Marin. Nothing close to exclusive "you have to be invited to buy here" prime Larkspur or Tiburon. So I can't for the life of me figure out why someone would even entertain buying from a shady agent a "not yet listed" home. It's not like finding a home in Tam Valley is hard to do. For sale signs on overpriced McCrapsions are everywhere -- I can see dozens from my bedroom balcony. And this particular "not yet for sale" house is kinda crappy compared to the standard in the immediate neighborhood, adding to the mystery.

I'm curious what people think. I know pocket listings are no big deal to those in the industry, but the practice is unethical according to their own industry representing body. I hate to be naive, but this one strikes close to home (as it were) and so blatant as to be a bit offensive to someone like me patiently renting and waiting for a tiny glimmer of sanity in house prices.

---Randy H
(I'm withholding the Zillow link for now, until I figure out if there are any legal repercussions to the owners. They're actually reasonably nice folks, which is itself a rarity in Marin.)

#housing

« First        Comments 487 - 507 of 507        Search these comments

487   Jimbo   2007 Apr 13, 6:10am  

TOS,

That was a serious question, btw, and I think goes to the heart of your dispute with RandyH. I was not trying to be snarky.

Does anyone know the answer to this?

What is the real and nominal appreciation rate for SFH in The Bay Area for the period from 1945-2000? Failing that, what is it for California?

488   Peter P   2007 Apr 13, 6:15am  

First thread to break the 600 glass ceiling for a long time.

489   HARM   2007 Apr 13, 6:19am  

Just make sure you’re doing proper ‘risk management’ to keep your assets in check. Excessive liquidity can lead to an unwanted asset aquisition, which would severely curtail further opportunities.

:lol: I think that would qualify as a "hostile takeover".

490   astrid   2007 Apr 13, 6:21am  

"We’re a service provider, first and foremost and we don’t want to get in the business of manufacturing."

ROFL!

491   HARM   2007 Apr 13, 6:23am  

Awesome posts, Jon!
Maybe we should have a "Best of" Patrick.net thread. Would take a while to trawl the archives, but would be fun and also instructive for new bloggers.

492   Jimbo   2007 Apr 13, 6:35am  

Actually, I just realized that my example in Berkeley does not meet FABs requirement that there be no government intervention.

Berkeley made a huge change to its rent control laws in the late 80's where they added vacancy de-control, which means that you can raise rent to the market rate when a tenant leaves. Before that, there was really no incentive to try and move someone out, unless they were destroying your property.

So there was no active government intervention, but the change in rent control laws had a huge effect on that neighborhood. Maybe it was "artificially" being held down due to government regulation.

493   Allah   2007 Apr 13, 6:35am  

It looks like 9% of the people that took this poll are FB's!

494   Peter P   2007 Apr 13, 6:41am  

So there was no active government intervention, but the change in rent control laws had a huge effect on that neighborhood. Maybe it was “artificially” being held down due to government regulation.

Well, the original problem was caused by excessive government intervention. Rent control is the cause of many evil housing issues.

496   astrid   2007 Apr 13, 6:47am  

In case of extreme emergency, prepare a poison pill. I would recommend world travel, a doctorate program in Eastern philosophies or sleeping with her sister/best friend/worst enemy.

497   EBGuy   2007 Apr 13, 6:51am  

Jimbo,
Full vacancy decontrol was due to Costa-Hawkins and occured at the state level (late 1990's). I do believe that Berkeley has turned a corner as there is probably a "critical mass" now pushing (and getting) improvements in the school system. Even in a downturn, the PRB should hold up better than its neighbor to the south. But then again, there are still parts of the city that have their own set of problems. How about this for most creative use of refinancing:

Moore has been sued repeatedly by neighbors who have contended that she allows the home to be used by drug dealers, claims supported by police testimony, including one investigator who called the home “the most notorious drug house in southwest Berkeley.”

Police have made numerous arrests of Moore’s relations for drug deals outside the house, and neighbors contend the house is a magnet for violence.

Plaintiffs won their small claims court actions against Moore, most recently in January, when Alameda County Court Commissioner Jon Rantzman awarded 14 of them $5,000 apiece—a total of $70,000.

While Moore had avoided payment of an earlier judgment by declaring bankruptcy, neighbor and plaintiff Laura Menard said she had taken out a new mortgage and was paying off the judgment from the most recent suit.
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?archiveDate=10-20-06&storyID=25352

498   Randy H   2007 Apr 13, 6:52am  

Is this some kind of Mexican Standoff as to who will create the next thread? It doesn't matter to me since I'm getting the comments in RSS. Let's shoot for 5,000.

499   EBGuy   2007 Apr 13, 6:52am  

Jimbo,
Full vacancy decontrol was due to Costa-Hawkins and occured at the state level (late 1990's). I do believe that Berkeley has turned a corner as there is probably a "critical mass" now pushing (and getting) improvements in the school system. Even in a downturn, the PRB should hold up better than its neighbor to the south. But then again, there are still parts of the city that have their own set of problems. How about this for most creative use of refinancing:

Moore has been sued repeatedly by neighbors who have contended that she allows the home to be used by drug dealers, claims supported by police testimony, including one investigator who called the home “the most notorious drug house in southwest Berkeley.”

Police have made numerous arrests of Moore’s relations for drug deals outside the house, and neighbors contend the house is a magnet for violence.

Plaintiffs won their small claims court actions against Moore, most recently in January, when Alameda County Court Commissioner Jon Rantzman awarded 14 of them $5,000 apiece—a total of $70,000.

While Moore had avoided payment of an earlier judgment by declaring bankruptcy, neighbor and plaintiff Laura Menard said she had taken out a new mortgage and was paying off the judgment from the most recent suit.
http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/article.cfm?archiveDate=10-20-06&storyID=25352

500   HARM   2007 Apr 13, 6:59am  

Randy,

I'll bite --give me about 5 minutes to pu up the next thread.

501   DinOR   2007 Apr 13, 7:06am  

New Thread?

I was thinking something along the lines of:

Rate The Debacle!

You can work from our pre-determined list of all time meltdowns,

1. Crash of '29
2. Crash of '87
3. Y2K
4. Housing Bubble

OR! Create your own list of embarrassing (and completely avoidable) disasters!

Make your case as to why "this turd" stunk worse than all the others combined. Buy! Sell! Trade some of the most humiliating events in finance!

?

DinOR

502   Peter P   2007 Apr 13, 7:10am  

Is this some kind of Mexican Standoff as to who will create the next thread? It doesn’t matter to me since I’m getting the comments in RSS. Let’s shoot for 5,000.

The thread bubble is back. :)

504   Jimbo   2007 Apr 13, 7:59am  

Please unmoderate my comment.

505   astrid   2007 Apr 13, 8:06am  

SP,

Not nearly so well as you:) Superb double entendre.

506   astrid   2007 Apr 13, 10:43am  

Oh, nevermind, SFBB's hilarious comments included spillage.

507   Wordy   2007 Apr 16, 3:38am  

Today, 4-16-07, we requested a release from our Exclusive Listing Agreement with our RE agent because, after 5 weeks, we had not received our MLS# listing. We had found our property listed on another RE company's website at 1/3 less than our contract stated. Our Agent told us "You are too involved with the sale." We had supplied 2 leads to this agent which she ignored. I created a beautiful website for her to obtain pictures of our property, which she never used.

Can anyone venture a guess at what was happening?

« First        Comments 487 - 507 of 507        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions