Home buying thread
- Thread starter Pasteton
- Start date
- 24,489
- 45,418
Same, my house is cheaper per month than most 2 bedroom apartments anywhere in North Dallas, and I have a lot more than 2 bedrooms. The taxes are not great as pointed out but you're paying property taxes either way if you rent, you're just also subsidizing your landlord.
The trick is you need to be stable in where you live, I've lived here almost 13 years now, and no plans to move. It'll be paid off in 10 more years (I refi'd once to a 15 year 2.2%... lol) and it has already more than doubled in value. Will likely double again before I move for a tidy 200% gain.
Buying this house was probably the best financial decision I ever made.
- 3
- 11,115
- 42,051
I'm in pretty much the same boat. Around $55k left on the house, been here for 20 years (also did a refi, but for me it was a 3% lock-in). House is already worth 3x what I paid, will probably be 4x before I sell it. Plan on buying land outside town and building there, then move there and rent this house until I am ready to liquidate it.
Lanx
<Prior Amod>
- 60,864
- 134,280
well hoa fees is basically land taxes, if you don't pay the fees, they can take your condo, it's just that the hoa voted sell, so youre fucked
Last edited:
Sanrith Descartes
Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
- 41,518
- 107,588
"Buildings to be sold with just 80% of the voting interest"
80%
FYI, we can amend our Constitution with less percentages than that. Or remove a duly elected official via impeachment with less percentage than that.
Daidraco
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 9,271
- 9,368
I dont know, that whole thing is kind of sketchy and I would fight it even after the fact. Some super rich investor could come in and buy out the leading majority of the condominiums and then force a sale at a rock bottom price and it would be up to the remaining home owners to fight it in court, with limited funds. There is an acceptable level to the rock bottom price, Im sure - but the stipulations are probably based off what someone would buy the entire building for - which wouldnt equate to anywhere near the amount each individual condo would sell for, as its probably a scenario that when built, is a last resort in the case that no one wants to live there anymore.
I mean, Im just speculating - but there is probably way more to this story and the home owners that refused to leave have probably had more than enough time to fight it / get the fuck out. Either way, Im never going to support some rich asshole taking what rightfully belongs to someone else away from them. As that whole situation comes off as white collar theft.
I mean, Im just speculating - but there is probably way more to this story and the home owners that refused to leave have probably had more than enough time to fight it / get the fuck out. Either way, Im never going to support some rich asshole taking what rightfully belongs to someone else away from them. As that whole situation comes off as white collar theft.
Lanx
<Prior Amod>
- 60,864
- 134,280
the short answer on how this is possible is this
www.flsenate.gov
tldr: if 80% of the condo owners want to terminate the condo, then it's done. a single developer can buy up 80% of the condo and then choose to terminate, which it has done, and now these holdouts are being paid pennies b/c, well, they were played.
Chapter 718 Section 117 - 2014 Florida Statutes - The Florida Senate
www.flsenate.gov
tldr: if 80% of the condo owners want to terminate the condo, then it's done. a single developer can buy up 80% of the condo and then choose to terminate, which it has done, and now these holdouts are being paid pennies b/c, well, they were played.
Lanx
<Prior Amod>
- 60,864
- 134,280
some1 make sense of these taxes
also lulz at the last pic
www.zillow.com
they own all that, and have a disgusting jungle
*edit, on research, thats an empty lot, why the hell is there an empty lot in san fran?
www.zillow.com
also lulz at the last pic
71 Bradford St, San Francisco, CA 94110 | Zillow
71 Bradford St, San Francisco CA, is a Single Family home that contains 1238 sq ft and was built in 1915.It contains 2 bedrooms and 1 bathroom.This home last sold for $945,000 in September 2023. The Zestimate for this Single Family is $930,400, which has increased by $2,162 in the last 30...
www.zillow.com
they own all that, and have a disgusting jungle
*edit, on research, thats an empty lot, why the hell is there an empty lot in san fran?
666 Peralta Ave, San Francisco, CA 94110 | MLS #423900078 | Zillow
This is a 0 square foot, Vacant Land. It is located at 666 Peralta Ave, San Francisco, CA.
www.zillow.com
- 11,115
- 42,051
some1 make sense of these taxes
also lulz at the last pic
71 Bradford St, San Francisco, CA 94110 | Zillow
71 Bradford St, San Francisco CA, is a Single Family home that contains 1238 sq ft and was built in 1915.It contains 2 bedrooms and 1 bathroom.This home last sold for $945,000 in September 2023. The Zestimate for this Single Family is $930,400, which has increased by $2,162 in the last 30...
they own all that, and have a disgusting jungle
If that's in SF proper I would say chances are the home had been owned by someone in a family and under homestead style property tax exemption for some amount of time capping the maximum amount of taxes. The home then changed hands, and that triggered a "reset" of tax assessment on the property which then took in the current actual market value and no homestead exemption. Of course I don't know California, and SF property tax intricacies so I could be randomly babbling insanity right now.
Daidraco
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 9,271
- 9,368
If I had to hazard a guess, and its probably pretty accurate - they have a country mile long list of requirements for a new build. Something akin to what Blazin was talking about with his property, where it cost a quarter million, if not more, just to have proper land drainage etc in that San Fran lot. Knowing San Fran, you probably have to donate a million dollars to some LGBT fund or something, too.*edit, on research, thats an empty lot, why the hell is there an empty lot in san fran?
666 Peralta Ave, San Francisco, CA 94110 | MLS #423900078 | Zillow
This is a 0 square foot, Vacant Land. It is located at 666 Peralta Ave, San Francisco, CA.
Yea, we're just taking pot shots and theory crafting - but I somehow feel like we're not too far off the beaten path for whats really going on.
Kiroy
Marine Biologist
- 34,665
- 100,111
it's not even an exemption, it's the way property is taxed in CA. The property is assessed when it is sold/bought and that's the tax payment (plus I think a slight inflation bump per year) until it's sold/bought again.
One of the few things they do right and will likely be changed for the worse by the end of the decade.
And since we're on the subject, there needs to be a constitutional amendment that your primary living property cannot be taxed.
- 4
Lanx
<Prior Amod>
- 60,864
- 134,280
Burnem Wizfyre
Log Wizard
- 11,841
- 19,759
Run for President on the promise of signing an executive order stating primary living property is exempt from being taxed and over time wages can’t be taxed and you will in a landslide and preside in landfill.
- 1
Palum
what Suineg set it to
- 23,534
- 33,945
Burnem Wizfyre
Log Wizard
- 11,841
- 19,759
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,451
- 73,541
My city gets a huge chunk of its revenue from property taxes, most of which are primary living properties. How would you want them to replace those funds?
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 44,737
- 93,502
Grand Canyon Univeristy did exactly that 10 years ago. Used shell companies to buy up majority interest in condos adjacent to their campus then forced the remaining owners to sell.
Control
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 2,259
- 5,682
Why start with the assumption that those funds need to be replaced?
- 8