Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 244 posts

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#211

Post by surgical_fire »

_8j50 wrote: post #210
surgical_fire wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> who do you or the government think you are to take options away from people and profits Yes, who do they think they are, taking options away from grifters and swindlers from their deserved profits? The nerve on these people.

No, that's such a strawman. If they defrauded people lock them up. You very well know that is not what this discussion is about. And you dare suggest it is I who argued in bad faith!

You said clearly that predatory businesses are alright as long as the advertisement is not deceptive.

No bad faith on my part.

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#212

Post by gota »

iudqnolq wrote: post #181
bhouston wrote: post #75

They are a discount buyer, so it is generally a bad deal to use them and you basically shouldn't unless you have no other option. It is similar to getting a pay day loan, or selling stuff to pawn shop or keeping a balance on your VISA. You are going to get a bad deal. I don't really know what to do about it. How can you ensure people are educated enough to know that a discount buyer is a buyer who will under pay for…

In response to this article the company promised to stop suing customers to force them to follow through on sale contracts. That sounds like a constructive change.

That sounds like backing out for fear that regulation, resulting from popular pression, will mean that selling to folks with dementia will land you in jail.

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#213

Post by AtlasBarfed »

wombatpm wrote: post #150
seattle_spring wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you like to ski, Illinois is close to the last place you should be living.

We are within an 8-10 hour drive from some of the best skiing in the Midwest

... is that Lutsen or Upper Wisconsin / Michigan?

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#214

Post by AtlasBarfed »

pkphilip wrote: post #96
chasil wrote: post #90

I bought a local house in 2004 that suffered a failed furnace in deep winter (with great damage) for $17k. I put another $10k into it for repairs, and rented it. I started getting postcards around 2012: "I/we want to buy your house." I have a pile of them. None of them offered more than $20k. The home in question is very near Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois. I do a two mile walk through campus every day, s…

I can't imagine property being so cheap - that too in the US. Here in India where I reside, you wouldn't be able to get even a 100sq.ft of open land for that price.

I can't imagine it being that cheap IN A COLLEGE TOWN. I get it isn't a major Big10 university town, but still... that should mean walkable neighborhoods, better restaurants, etc.

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#215

Post by lacker »

_benedict wrote: post #185
55555 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are essentially a market maker for housing. You can sell your house to them _today_. It's necessary that they pay you substantially under market. If you want a good price, it'll take you 6 months to sell your house. You're paying a premium for immediate execution. Once you punish the fraud and crime, there's no problem left IMO. There's multiple of these companies competing and you should price shop before selli…

There’s a general problem with low friction transactions being used to exploit people with diminished capacity, particularly when intermediaries are involved (another common one in UK is signing them up for multiple phone contracts) and there may be some regulatory innovation possible in this area. Punishment after the fact is not sufficient if it doesn’t adequately prevent this population being exploited.

What is someone who owns a house but has reduced mental capacity supposed to do? The house is worth $500k, someone offers them $300k, the person doesn't have the mental capacity to shop around... I'm just not sure what the right solution here is. I'm afraid it would be even worse if they weren't allowed to sell.

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#216

Post by evancox100 »

poulsbohemian wrote: post #121
evancox100 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People focus on this but the far bigger lever is simply time. If it takes 2/3 the effort to get you into the $700k home then the agent comes out ahead on a revenue/hour basis, and can move on to the next customer. (And the much bigger conflict is for properties with a no or reduced buyer’s agent commission.)

>(And the much bigger conflict is for properties with a no or reduced buyer’s agent commission.) I work in two states, one of which now has a mixed commission model and the other soon going there... we aren't seeing a lot of properties without a buyer's agent commission, but in those cases (mostly FSBOs) I've simply negotiated a reasonable fee to represent the buyer and we've baked it into the cost of their financing…

I respect that there are many people doing their best to help their clients, without regards to the short run impact to their pocket book. (Obviously there is a long run benefit to keeping clients happy, etc, etc.) It is not hard to find examples online of buyers agents being told to ignore sub-3% listings, and the universal advice for people doing FSBO or flat fee listings is to still offer 3% tot he buyer.

I think it would be better if the system didn't have this conflict of interest in the first place. It sounds like your market is there already, I expect the rest of the country to eventually follow even if they have to be dragged kicking and screaming. (See Moerhl, Sitzer/Burnett)

On the positive side for agents, currently the best and worst buyer's agents are forced to charge essentially the same price. Breaking up the current model would in theory allow some differentiation. The best agents can offer more services that buyer's may want. Experienced buyers who need less help can go to an agent who charges less, etc.

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#217

Post by mjh2539 »

yawgmoth wrote: post #176
rsp1984 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious Q: What value do agents add? And what's wrong with buyers and sellers negotiating directly, as in pretty much any other market? As an outsider it seems that RE agents bring exactly nothing to the table except FUD around the transaction process which they then exploit for commissions so everybody, except the agents, are worse off. More than happy to be convinced otherwise.

They can provide access to listings that you might not have accesss otherwise. They also get stuff done fast: ours had a hole in our basement fixed (weep hole; Michigan basement) that would have prevented closing. We were first time buyers and it really made things sane.

They facilitate the market transaction and act as your fiduciary. To some people that is useful. To others, it's not.

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#218

Post by _8j50 »

surgical_fire wrote: post #211
_8j50 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's such a strawman. If they defrauded people lock them up. You very well know that is not what this discussion is about. And you dare suggest it is I who argued in bad faith!

You said clearly that predatory businesses are alright as long as the advertisement is not deceptive. No bad faith on my part.

How are they defrauding and scamming if they're honest? You made your counter-argument about something else so you don't have to address my argument. Bad faith.

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#219

Post by mjh2539 »

ttyprintk wrote: post #54
tmm84 wrote: post #33

I wish more older Americans understood how these people really work. My parents live in a neighborhood that has gone down hill through the years. They called up a company who did this kind of home buying. Usual visual inspections and the like went on with a quote being issued. They saw the amount was a little over the remaining mortgage which was less than the market value of the house. They decided to ahead of time…

Now and then, someone posts on HN their saga about disrupting real estate. It’s difficult, but I wonder what would help those like your parents. I wonder what it would take for eBay to auction real estate, and whether older people in 2030 would try that instead of this caveman.

Real estate is such a highly regulated industry with so many myriad laws governing it that you might as well ask what it would take for eBay to auction human organs.

Re: The Ugly Truth Behind “We Buy Ugly Houses”

#220

Post by gondaloof »

bhouston wrote: post #75

They are a discount buyer, so it is generally a bad deal to use them and you basically shouldn't unless you have no other option. It is similar to getting a pay day loan, or selling stuff to pawn shop or keeping a balance on your VISA. You are going to get a bad deal. I don't really know what to do about it. How can you ensure people are educated enough to know that a discount buyer is a buyer who will under pay for…

> a bad deal [...] similar to [...] keeping a balance on your VISA

Huh? Elaborate?

Post reply on HN