On 9/22/2017 1:29 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/22/2017 11:58 AM, Casa de Masa wrote:
>> On 9/22/2017 9:28 AM, John Kuthe wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 12:05:49 PM UTC-5, Gary wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> Don't we have a "sell as it is" thing here? Owner doesn't want to
>>>> improve anything, just sell. And buyer knows about the required
>>>> things to fix. They pay less and fix up themselves. Is this not
>>>> true?
>>>>
>>>> If a seller just want's to unload a house, there should be no
>>>> govt requirement to fix things first as long as the problems are
>>>> stated out front and the buyer agrees to it (and the reduced
>>>> price)
>>>
>>> If the house was NOT OCCUPIED this MAY have been the case. But
>>> because it IS occupied this house must pass an Occupancy Permit
>>> INspection before being legally transferred to a buyer's possession,
>>> in this case ME! And because the cheap Chinese landlord(s) just want
>>> to get out from under this house for as much cash as they can get, we
>>> settled on a cash as-is sale price of $108,000!
>>>
>>> Why is it SO HARD for folks here to understand that? The cheap
>>> Chinese landlord(s) don't want to put any money into this house to
>>> "fix it up" and I DO!
>>>
>>> In fact I just signed a roofing "repair and RESTORE" estimate for
>>> $113,671 from Old World Roofing company here in STL who DOES restore
>>> these old red clay tile roofs like we have a lot of here in STL!! See?
>>>
>>> http://oldworldroofingco.com/Home_Page.html
>>>
>>> John Kuthe...
>>>
>>
>> OMG!!!!
>>
>> You put MORE into the roof than the whole house?
>>
>> Dude, you're underwater right NOW!
>
> Maybe once restored it will be worth $500,000.

Yeah, sure. And the Chinese man who still owns it will either raise the
price or sell it to someone else after letting John pay to repair
everything.

Jill