Property with Negative Value

[redfish]

The City of Detroit would send you 50,000 such deeds. Just make sure you pay the future property taxes. You will be broke in a year and the properties will still have no value.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_localdtw/20110203/ts_yblog_localdtw/private-landowners-complicate-reshaping-of-detroit




Very interesting article about Detroit.


I am pretty sure this guy wasn't paid to take any of these properties. Negative values on residential properties in theory, makes sense, but in reality, it just doesn't hold water.

 

[Couch Potato]

I think I'm more comfortable in a universe of 4 dimensions, where 0 exists at the periphery.:Eyecrazy:


"Us physics types not only had to deal with zeros and negative numbers, but also imaginary ones."

But you physics types can't figure out whether its particles or waves, how can you cope with 0?

They can figure it out. They always know it is which ever one makes the problem easier. :new_smile-l:

Can't we move on to something more difficult to grasp like non-Euclidean geometry?

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Why would I owe them taxes? That's their problem. My problem is to resell the deeds...and craigslist will sell anything ... $5 apiece.

 

[The Warrior Monk]

gimme me a quit claim deed...

Not enough...you'd have to assume all liability for cleanup. FWIW, it's a former printing plant, and the property is contaminated with ink. If you're serious, give me your attorney's name and number, and I'll contact the property owner.

 

[The Warrior Monk]

But you physics types can't figure out whether its particles or waves, how can you cope with 0?

It's both both and neither. In the sense that we define particles as one thing and waves as another, it has characteristics of both. But since it displays properties of both, it is some other "thing."

But in reality it is only something we invent to explain that which our senses perceive.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Not enough...you'd have to assume all liability for cleanup.

why...? You are not talking the "market value" of the property. You are talking about assuming liability that isn't required in an "innocent owner" defense. Again, taxes, ditto. Nobody requires you to pay taxes. They may take the property after so many years, and so what if they do? Let the city or tax commission take possession. And if they do take possession would you think that they then put money with the deed to "sell" to the bidder who offers to take them off their hands? And if it has negative value, then the assessor should value it so and the tax collector ought to send YOU a check for negative taxes. Of course not. And there a a lot of "Brown field" programs out there to rehabilitate such properties. Why hasn't your client availed themselves of those?
http://www.brownfieldrestorationgroup.com/index.php
Lack of market is not the same as "negative" value. You can take one with a corp, then go into bankruptcy. You can rehab it, bundle it with other properties, - loads of ways to capture non-negative value.
http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/8444.html
http://law.justia.com/codes/virginia/2006/toc1001000/toc10010000012000010000000.html

 

[Michigan CG]

...........Negative values on residential properties in theory, makes sense, but in reality, it just doesn't hold water.

You have a lot to learn.

 

[Peter LeQuire]

It's both both and neither. In the sense that we define particles as one thing and waves as another, it has characteristics of both. But since it displays properties of both, it is some other "thing."

But in reality it is only something we invent to explain that which our senses perceive.

Now I understand - it are what it am. (Me and my good friend from that other dimension.)

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I really really would like to see a deed with negative documentary stamps....where's those comps in the MLS with negative values? Did the Realtor have to pay the owner to sell it?

it are what it am

and if you are bipolar, at least you still have each other...

 

[The Warrior Monk]

why...? You are not talking the "market value" of the property. You are talking about assuming liability that isn't required in an "innocent owner" defense.

Who said the owner was innocent?...The owner was the cause of the problem. It think it would also be difficult to argue the innocent owner defense when someone willfully purchases a contaminated property and understands the laws associated with such a property.

Again, taxes, ditto. Nobody requires you to pay taxes. They may take the property after so many years, and so what if they do? Let the city or tax commission take possession.

Nobody requires the taxing entity to take the property for nonpayment of taxes, nor does anyone require a foreclosure on a property for nonpayment of the mortgage. And guess what? In the case of contaminated properties, they often aren't taken back because of the liability issue.

Lack of market is not the same as "negative" value.

I'm aware of that. The lack of a market in this particular case, though, is because nobody wants to buy and investment that has, at best, a negative return. As a result, these properties don't simply transfer with positive market value.

This issue here is that market value assumes a transfer, contrary to reality, forcing the appraiser to determine what someone will pay for a liability...and is sure won't be a positive number or zero. While there may be a lack of deeds showing a negative market value, there are also a lack of deeds showing a positive market value (without other considerations).

Owning these properties sure aren't fun...it is years of endless aggravation of government involvement...it's why they are avoided like the plague.