English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

for instance a home that is 600 square feet is priced for 450,000...more than double the average square footage price in the area.

2006-12-23 05:53:42 · 9 answers · asked by missdeerbee 2 in Business & Finance Renting & Real Estate

no it is not a typo..a property that i have been looking at is

Sq Ft: 672 and is priced @ 435

2006-12-23 06:07:07 · update #1

9 answers

Yes, it is a factor.

I don't think there is a house in existence that is only 600 square feet. Typo?

2006-12-23 06:01:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Even if you can sue, I am not sure that your damages would be awarded. How has this hurt you? If the agent can pull out comps of similar houses with sunrooms that sold for a similar amount, then the house was priced correctly, regardless of how the area was classified. You saw the place before you bought it, so even if you did not know the exact square footage, you thought the place was "big enough". And since the real question seems to be that you feel like you overpaid by 18K, would the seller have agreed to sell the place for 18K less? If not, you have no case, since what you paid was what the place was worth. No one prices their house by the square foot, so the fact that you paid an extra 10 bucks/sq foot for the "living area" in the second calculation is just an artifact of the math. Even if you go with that math, the fact that the house has a sun room, and other houses with a similar living area do NOT, means that the sun room has some value. It doesn't come free! And finally, this doesn't seem to be a question of square footage, but of how it is classified. And that can be a matter of interpretation, so the realtor is probably not going to be ordered to reimburse you anything. And to be frank, you sound a little greedy. If the property has not gone down in value, which even you say it hasn't, where and how have you been harmed by this? That is the second part that you will have to prove in a court of law, since it is supposed to make you "whole", not put you in a better position than before the tort occurred. So... would you have been able to buy the place if you offered 18K less? If not, no harm has occurred to you, and even if you would win on the merits of the case, you would not be awarded any damages, since there are no damages to award.

2016-05-23 02:03:22 · answer #2 · answered by Betsy 4 · 0 0

Square footage is just one factor to consider when buying a home. There are, of course, many other things to consider, such as size of the lot that the house is on (the land is worth something, too).

For reasons such as this, smaller homes tend to have a larger price per square foot than larger homes, because for smaller homes the value of the land begins to be become a bigger factor.

Nevertheless, without knowing more about the property you are talking about, it does sound like it is priced a bit high unless there is something extra special about the location (e.g., a mountain view). The best thing to do is to compare that property with the sale prices of properties of similar size in the same area... that will tell you what the market is at. A local real estate agent could do that. Also, you might check out www.zillow.com for another opinion of what the property is worth. That website will also allow you to search the sale prices of comparables in the area.

2006-12-23 06:26:44 · answer #3 · answered by frandogger 1 · 2 0

In a market where a 600 - 700 square foot house can even be priced at that much, square footage does NOT matter as much.

In a subdivision where the houses are priced 80k to 100k, an the lots are all about the same, and the construction quality is all about the same, then square footage is king. (in terms of pricing)

You're talking about an area where people are paying for the location, probably not the size or even quality of construction.

2006-12-23 07:50:58 · answer #4 · answered by teran_realtor 7 · 1 0

Hey, you must be in my area or you're looking at a small shed...I mean house on a large lot.

Square footage does play a role, but there are other factors, such as location, land/lot size, zoning, etc.

Ask a local agent as to why they think it's priced that way. If you're in Southern California, I can find out for you.

Regards

2006-12-23 08:00:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

square foot of the property In many markets it is not the house that cost so much it is the property .

2006-12-23 06:04:58 · answer #6 · answered by -----JAFO---- 4 · 0 0

location, location, location

i've seen downtown property go that high.. cause it is the land..

but if it overpriced and others cheaper..why bother..if the lot next door is 1/2 in price...buy that one..
once the land is gone.. it is gone..only got air space..

2006-12-23 10:11:44 · answer #7 · answered by m2 5 · 0 0

you say it's in the same area. if thats true and its more the double houses that are similar in size than its way over priced.

2006-12-23 06:21:31 · answer #8 · answered by sammyjk1 3 · 0 0

Guess that one's going to be on the market for a while.

2006-12-23 06:44:19 · answer #9 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers