“Bait-and-DON’T Switch”: Should Home Sellers Disclose That There’s No Basement?
Is That, “No Finished Square Feet in Lower Level?”
or, “There’s NO LOWER LEVEL . . . AT ALL?!?”
“If your parents don’t have kids . . . you won’t either.”
–Anonymous
“If your listing doesn’t get showings . . . you won’t get offers, either.”
–Real estate corollary, Ross Kaplan
[Editor’s Note: The views expressed here are solely those of Ross Kaplan, and do not represent Edina Realty, Berkshire Hathaway, or any other entity referenced. If you need legal advice, please consult an attorney.]
It’s certainly a judgment call, for both the home owner and their agent.
While uncommon in the basement-friendly Upper Midwest, I’d estimate that 2% of the housing stock locally lacks such a feature.
Most common reason: a high groundwater table.
There’s even a name for such homes in the Twin Cities (at least when they’re one-stories): “California Rambler.”
“California Colonial”(?!?)
If it were my listing, my counsel would be to divulge, up front, that the home doesn’t have a basement.
I may not necessarily trumpet that information, but I’d at least put it in the “Agent Remarks” field on MLS, where Buyers’ agents will see it, and presumably relay to their clients.
My logic?
The standard for disclosing house-related information isn’t what the Seller thinks is relevant — it’s what a reasonable Buyer thinks is relevant.
And many Buyers locally, especially families with kids, want a basement — ideally a basement with an Amusement Room, extra storage, and maybe even an Office, Media Room, or Guest Bedroom (or the potential).
Error(?) of Omission: Seller Rationale
So, what’s the rationale for not disclosing that a home doesn’t have a basement?
One. Homes that don’t get showings don’t get offers.
Especially if the home is otherwise super-impressive, the listing agent and Seller may be explicitly gambling that once Buyers are inside, they’ll be so wowed that they’ll overlook the lack of a basement.
Two. The listing agent wants to show their client that they’re working hard for them.
When homes get (too) few showings, clients can wonder if they’re agent is effectively marketing their home.
Better to drive traffic through the home, then — when the showing feedback inevitably cites the lack of a basement as the leading objection — use that to wring a price reduction (or two) from the Seller.
Three. The basement-free home may very well be a deal breaker for many Buyers.
However, if they’re not already working with another Realtor, the listing agent may be able to sell them something else.
In practice, such Buyers typically either contact the listing agent directly to set up a showing, or, come through their weekend open house (and no, Sellers aren’t usually wise to this angle).
Time-Saver, or, “Quality > Quantity”
Suffice to say, I find all of the above justifications cynical if not disingenuous.
But, I’d argue: so what?
Far better to have fewer but higher quality showings, which are more likely to progress to a second showing and ultimately, an offer.
Which, after all, is kind of the whole point of going to the considerable trouble of listing a home in the first place.
Meanwhile, failing to disclose such a significant fact not only wastes many Buyers’ time and their agents’, but Sellers’ time, too (at least ones who are diligently prepping in advance of each showing, as they should).
**While MLS explicitly has a field titled “BelGrdFinSqFt” (“Below Ground Finished Square Feet”) it doesn’t distinguish between homes that have unfinished basements, and homes that have no basement at all.
See also, “Homes With No Basement: How Big a Discount?”; and “How Not to Have a Wet Basement, Ever.”
from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8230700 http://ift.tt/2t81KdN
via IFTTT
Comments
Post a Comment