Black couple settle lawsuit as home value at $500k below real price

[Tiffany Gibbons]

There is a second entry which was given the address "18 Pacheco St & 20, SAUSALITO, CA 94965" - which I missed because I used the address of "20 Pacheco St, SAUSALITO" as the lookup. Interestingly this second one indicates that many of the major FINAL inspections were not completed until well after the appraisal, including:
PLUMBING FINAL: 2022 Q3
MECHANICAL FINAL: 2022 Q3
ELECTRICAL FINAL: 2022 Q3

Then I see:
BUILDING FINAL NOT APPROVED 2022 Q3!!!!!
So, at the time of the appraisal, Feb 2020, the additions were far from approved, - and the FINAL is still not approved per records!!!!

How would George handle this if he had to inspect it 2/2020?
View attachment 74025
?

Is this the accessory dwelling unit? Remember at one point they planned on having an Air B and B type that the Tates said would have a view.

 

[Elliott]

California's property tax system can only be described as byzantine. Prop 19 is the latest incarnation.

"For example, a qualifying homeowner who owns a home with a taxable value of $200,000 that is worth $600,000 on the market would pay roughly $2,200 in property taxes now. If the homeowner moves to a $700,000 house, the homeowner would pay $3,300 a year in property taxes under Proposition 19. Without the initiative, the same homeowner would pay $7,700 annually at the new home.

Still, the beneficiaries of Proposition 19 are those who already benefit the most under the state’s existing property tax rules. Homeowners 55 and older in California are much more likely to be white and wealthy than younger renters, according to an analysis of Proposition 19 by the California Budget and Policy Center, a nonprofit that advocates for working low-income Californians."

Who wins and who loses with California property tax measure Proposition 19

Older homeowners would get a larger incentive to move into new homes and the so-called Lebowski loophole would go away.

www.latimes.com

 

[RCA]

California's property tax system can only be described as byzantine. Prop 19 is the latest incarnation.

"For example, a qualifying homeowner who owns a home with a taxable value of $200,000 that is worth $600,000 on the market would pay roughly $2,200 in property taxes now. If the homeowner moves to a $700,000 house, the homeowner would pay $3,300 a year in property taxes under Proposition 19. Without the initiative, the same homeowner would pay $7,700 annually at the new home.

Still, the beneficiaries of Proposition 19 are those who already benefit the most under the state’s existing property tax rules. Homeowners 55 and older in California are much more likely to be white and wealthy than younger renters, according to an analysis of Proposition 19 by the California Budget and Policy Center, a nonprofit that advocates for working low-income Californians."

Who wins and who loses with California property tax measure Proposition 19

Older homeowners would get a larger incentive to move into new homes and the so-called Lebowski loophole would go away.

www.latimes.com

Prop 19 is in line with Prop 13. It has nothing to do with race, but consistency of intent. Why are you bringing race into this?

 

[Elliott]

Prop 19 is in line with Prop 13. It has nothing to do with race, but consistency of intent. Why are you bringing race into this?

The LA Times brought race into it. It does follow, that Prop 3 and 19 have ended up benefiting higher priced property and the higher income class. I didn't break it, it was broken when I got here. The Marin City case seems to be all about race.

 

[RCA]

The LA Times brought race into it. It does follow, that Prop 3 and 19 have ended up benefiting higher priced property and the higher income class. I didn't break it, it was broken when I got here. The Marin City case seems to be all about race.

No, it doesn't follow. Many Blacks have high incomes. That is a fact.

You should frigging know by now that income levels is not an issue of bias. You don't know that? Really?

Marin City is not all about RACE. You are being racist.

Marin City is about incompetent appraisers, real estate attorneys, judges, and biased and racist government officials.

I haven't seen Miller's Appraisal - but why isn't anyone talking about the so-called $400K in upgrades the owners of 20 Pacheco are claiming Miller did not take account of? They by and large did not pass major inspections as of the date of the appraisal and apparently as of 3 years later, are still lacking an approved plumbing and final inspection. Add to that the subject area is largely zoned for affordable housing for very low and extremely low income occupants. INCOME-LEVEL IS EXCLUDED FROM FAIR HOUSING LAWS as a reason for bias. This last factor alone makes the subject area largely incomparable to Sausalito proper or Mill Valley.

This may be a textbook case of a failed appraisal, an incomplete appraisal which omitted important facts. -- I submit that an adequate appraisal would have prevented the entire problem. I don't see how it couldn't have. So, for all we know, Miller may have been the one to blame. But certainly, her attorney must have been incompetent to have lost the case. And the government organizations who supported her are clearly incompetent, unethical, possibly corrupt, or all of the above.

 

[Fernando]

No, it doesn't follow. Many Blacks have high incomes. That is a fact.

You should frigging know by now that income levels is not an issue of bias. You don't know that? Really?

Marin City is not all about RACE. You are being racist.

Marin City is about incompetent appraisers, real estate attorneys, judges, and biased and racist government officials.

I haven't seen Miller's Appraisal - but why isn't anyone talking about the so-called $400K in upgrades the owners of 20 Pacheco are claiming Miller did not take account of? They by and large did not pass major inspections as of the date of the appraisal and apparently as of 3 years later, are still lacking an approved plumbing and final inspection. Add to that the subject area is largely zoned for affordable housing for very low and extremely low income occupants. INCOME-LEVEL IS EXCLUDED FROM FAIR HOUSING LAWS as a reason for bias. This last factor alone makes the subject area largely incomparable to Sausalito proper or Mill Valley.

This may be a textbook case of a failed appraisal, an incomplete appraisal which omitted important facts. -- I submit that an adequate appraisal would have prevented the entire problem. I don't see how it couldn't have. So, for all we know, Miller may have been the one to blame. But certainly, her attorney must have been incompetent to have lost the case. And the government organizations who supported her are clearly incompetent, unethical, possibly corrupt, or all of the above.

The question is did Miller mentioned about the recent improvements/upgrades finalized. When I see new major renovation, I always ask owner and check building department if the work was finalized and approved. If not I would mention it in the report and client/lender would decide if there might be mechanical liens.

 

[Zoe]

The question is did Miller mentioned about the recent improvements/upgrades finalized. When I see new major renovation, I always ask owner and check building department if the work was finalized and approved. If not I would mention it in the report and client/lender would decide if there might be mechanical liens.

I would almost bet there had to be an appraisal done before the work was started. Lenders can get in big trouble there if work is started before that lien is put in place. One of the first things I would have asked is what did your last appraisal come in at if you don't mind me asking?

Okay, you gave $X in the year xxxx. You spent $X in the year xxxx. How did your renovations go?

I have a problem to solve. I am going to solve it the best way possible. I would have asked homeowners many questions. If the homeowners liked their last appraisal, they would have likely said here is a copy of our last appraisal we want to give you. Okay, thanks. I still would have measured and everything else in the preliminary analysis.

 

[RCA]

The question is did Miller mentioned about the recent improvements/upgrades finalized. When I see new major renovation, I always ask owner and check building department if the work was finalized and approved. If not I would mention it in the report and client/lender would decide if there might be mechanical liens.

You have just scratched the surface. Are we talking about an "as-is" or "subject-to" appraisal? For refinancing, it would have to be "as-is". But you really can't assign value to "as-is" on partially completed construction. - There are too many things that can go wrong. Do you know what can go wrong? Well, an inspector can come by and approve your rough electrical and sheetrock. Yes. And then on a subsequent electrical inspection, he might see some wires hanging from the ceiling that are 14 AWG instead of 12 AWG. Oh - guess what? You have to cut through all of the drywall and pull out the 14 AWG and install 12 AWG and then get another rough on the electrical, then patch in the drywall -- and gone are your beautifully done sheetrock walls and ceilings -- you will see the patchwork. I have seen this. - The inspectors can make mistakes on intermediate inspections, catch them on subsequent inspections - and you pay the bill. That's life.

For work done by builder-owners, the going can be very rough. That is the case with 20 Pacheco St.. Of course, some of the work has to be done by licensed sub-contractors. But usually builder-owners are looking for the cheapest licensed they can find - and will go outside the area to find a contractor - who may not be familiar with local codes. They screw up. That happens.

The upgrades are not done until they pass the final inspection. This is particularly important to realize when valuing 'as-is' on partially completed construction. Builder-owners can get everything screwed up and in the end, have to redo much of the work - always leaving the question as to what the work they have already done is really worth. In the case of 20 Pacheco St, I am pretty sure the owners had to add a drainage pipe downslope to Dutton St. Did they possibly try to do this themselves and build a slap concrete floor over much of the drainage pipe with the bathroom on the upslope side of the lower floor in order to preserve the area on the downslope side with the nice views? That is likely. And it may explain why it is still not approved. So, what do you think it will cost if it is indeed the case - to rectify the problem? He might have to break up the concrete slab flooring, remove the pipe - or more likely he may find that he really can't do it himself but has to hire a licensed plumber. Oh - this sort of thing is invariably VERY expensive. Imagine if he had also installed expensive flooring over the concrete slab. Headache. It is the dreaded project almost every homeowner in the SF Bay Area has to face if his home is over 50 years old. - Yea, it is damned expensive.

So, there we are, 3 years later and the plumbing is not approved, nor the final. And by the way, what exactly was approved 2020 Q1? Not that much. So, why is the owner complaining that he spent $400K and the work was not adequately valued by the appraiser - and yet the media didn't report the issue? What we read in the media doesn't make sense. Nor do we see any indication of this in the court records shown online. This also doesn't make sense.

Something is very wrong.

 

[Sadie]

I would almost bet there had to be an appraisal done before the work was started. Lenders can get in big trouble there if work is started before that lien is put in place. One of the first things I would have asked is what did your last appraisal come in at if you don't mind me asking?

Okay, you gave $X in the year xxxx. You spent $X in the year xxxx. How did your renovations go?

I have a problem to solve. I am going to solve it the best way possible. I would have asked homeowners many questions. If the homeowners liked their last appraisal, they would have likely said here is a copy of our last appraisal we want to give you. Okay, thanks. I still would have measured and everything else in the preliminary analysis.

If I recall correctly, the HO were first going to sell, but the CMA came in at something like $650k, way less than the original purchase price plus improvements. (Notice that the realtor was not called racist). IMO that is the starting point, not the appraisal that gave them the first refi.

 

[ucbruin]

If I recall correctly, the HO were first going to sell, but the CMA came in at something like $650k, way less than the original purchase price plus improvements. (Notice that the realtor was not called racist). IMO that is the starting point, not the appraisal that gave them the first refi.

If this is true Miller probably should have fought on....