Detroit house on EBAY worth $71k for $2.25k

http://cgi.ebay.com/Nice-Investment-...3%3A1|294%3A50

"Estimated value of $71k If you are not intend to live in it, you can easily rent it at $550 a month." "
NICE NEIGHBOURHOOD- DESIRABLE PART OF TOWN - GOOD RENTAL AREA"

Now actually I don't know the neighborhood but I remember posts about Robinwood as being mentioned in the threads "Worst neighborhood" This must be the good part of the street. There are $975 in closing costs.


Doesn't Michigan have a Deceptive Trade Practices Act ?

Anyway there seems to be a market for people selling Detroit houses on Ebay- there's at least 10 as I speak. Its amazing that people buy properties unseen. I have a feeling the high bidder is going to be in for a big surprise - only 4 hrs to go on this one!

Robinwood has to be one of the worst streets in the entire city. Almost every house is fire damaged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brandon48202

Robinwood has to be one of the worst streets in the entire city. Almost every house is fire damaged.

---

Yeah, but it's a long street, and this house is at the opposite end of it. It's in the 7/Van Dyke area, near Nortown Bakery. It's not the greatest neighborhood, but it is a lot more intact than the State Fair area.

BTW, I found this quote while scrolling through the eBay listing:

Quote:

---

"Sometimes one pays most for the things one gets for nothing." Albert Einstein

---

Not exactly the sort of motivational speech I'd use to sell someone a foreclosed house in a rough part of town for pennies on the dollar. :)

A friend of mine lived down the street from that house years ago - the area was *ruff* then, one can only imagine how bad it is now.

Gosh I took a look at the pictures - house is in a mess. It would take a considerable amount of cash to redo the whole kit and kaboodle and that's what the place would need before you could consider renting it. No profit for several years, the way I figure it.

I wrote the person who listed this- told him he better hope Michigan doesn't have a Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

A bit of puffing is ok - but the combination of it being rentable for $550 a month 71k value [[ the definition of market value is what a willing buyer would pay a willing seller in an arm's length transaction) and nice neighborhood - is a bit too much. Of course the person who buys without looking probably isn't free of fault.

"Nice neighborhood" is relative to whom utters the phrase. Just an opinion. Depends what one considers "nice".

Sstash - You are taking just one point out of context.


A jury or judge would look at the totality of the circumstances and claims

A. market value $71k
B rental claims $550 a month
C neighborhood

The person who listed it just emailed me saying she was going to send the listing to her attorney to see what he thinks.

Using your logic I could sell you a "great car" for $5000 on Ebay even though it didn't have an engine. Well in my opinion it could still be great-tires might be nice and the color pretty.

The Price alone reflects what they are selling. A house and property in 2009 for 2 thousand dollars. The judge would laugh at the buyer for expecting much of anything.

and the seller is based in the u.k.?

$2250 was just the bid - as of a few hours ago.

I don't think the fact that someone gets it for a low bid -removes the seller from liability, however if you have some law that shows otherwise....

and if the seller *is* in the u.k. - well, who's laws apply? and how does one go about filing for, and participating in, a civil trial - and winning?

Nice neighborhood? In 2009? Don't think so.

Nortown is awful; only a few handful of Detroit neighbohorhoods are worse.

$550 in monthly rent is laughable. You can get that in a good Detroit neighborhood, but not Nortown.

And the people saying it's not as bad as other neighborhoods because it's not as bombed out have it all wrong. The worst neighborhoods in Detroit are NOT the bombed-out ones; the worst neighborhoods are the ones that still have lots of thugs living in them.

The totally bombed-out neighborhoods barely have anyone, outside of a few forgotten senior citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crawford

Nice neighborhood? In 2009? Don't think so.

Nortown is awful; only a few handful of Detroit neighbohorhoods are worse.

$550 in monthly rent is laughable. You can get that in a good Detroit neighborhood, but not Nortown.

And the people saying it's not as bad as other neighborhoods because it's not as bombed out have it all wrong. The worst neighborhoods in Detroit are NOT the bombed-out ones; the worst neighborhoods are the ones that still have lots of thugs living in them.

The totally bombed-out neighborhoods barely have anyone, outside of a few forgotten senior citizens.

---

If you're referring to me, all I said was that it was less bombed out, not that that made it better or worse than anywhere else.

I drove down this street and posted pics...there are MAYBE three houses right near woodward that might be worth living in. The whole street looks like bombed out Berlin though so I can't imagine anyone wanting to buy or rent on this street.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roq

I drove down this street and posted pics...there are MAYBE three houses right near woodward that might be worth living in. The whole street looks like bombed out Berlin though so I can't imagine anyone wanting to buy or rent on this street.

---

I agree, but, it's a totally different animal around the 7 Mile / Van Dyke area. That's around the 7500- 8000 block. Not as many burned out houses, lots of brick homes. It's not Bloomfield Hills but it's way better the Robinwood near John R./ Woodward Ave.

You tube video about all the abandoned houses on the west-side Burt Rd and I 96 area.

I would be curious to know who would estimate that this house would be worth $71,000. That house needs A LOT of work to be worth that much in a neighborhood like that.

Plaintiff: "Your honor we bought a house in the inner city suburbs of Detroit, and discovered it is in a bad neighborhood after the seller told us otherwise"

Judge: "Bwahahahaa"

I'll make it really really simple for you SSTASH. If Michigan has a Deceptive Trade Practices Act and someone intentionally misdescribes a product, they can be liable. Just because someone is an idiot and buys it doesn't relieve them of liability.
An extreme example would be someone selling an adulterated product here is some medicine or here is some unwrapped suspicious looking candy. The person who eats it - perhaps should have known better - suspicious looking candy unwrapped is a no-no- but hey its free and the guy giving it said it was "yummy".

You are right the judge may say -"how could you be so dumb as to eat that unwrapped candy or take those powerfull medicines - just because they were free?"

Do you really think that relieves the seller of liability?

Why do you think they have Deceptive Trade Acts? They are to protect suckers- maybe the person shouldn't have been dumb enough to -buy the car-- the house- the boat -the candy - the materials ---- and I somewhat agree because people shouldn't be buying houses on Ebay without due diligence.

If you still are not with me it something like walking the worst part of Robinwood at night flashing jewelery and money falling out of your pocket- looking lost. Yes you are an idiot for doing so - you may even be asking for trouble. So when 2 guys take his stuff and slice his throat - should they not be prosecuted?

"Bwaa Judge criminals killed my wife and kids - we didn't know it was a bad neighborhood and that they would slice their throats for money?"

Not Guilty???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ocean2026

I'll make it really really simple for you SSTASH. If Michigan has a Deceptive Trade Practices Act and someone intentionally misdescribes a product, they can be liable. Just because someone is an idiot and buys it doesn't relieve them of liability.
An extreme example would be someone selling an adulterated product here is some medicine or here is some unwrapped suspicious looking candy. The person who eats it - perhaps should have known better - suspicious looking candy unwrapped is a no-no- but hey its free and the guy giving it said it was "yummy".

You are right the judge may say -"how could you be so dumb as to eat that unwrapped candy or take those powerfull medicines - just because they were free?"

Do you really think that relieves the seller of liability?

Why do you think they have Deceptive Trade Acts? They are to protect suckers- maybe the person shouldn't have been dumb enough to -buy the car-- the house- the boat -the candy - the materials ---- and I somewhat agree because people shouldn't be buying houses on Ebay without due diligence.

If you still are not with me it something like walking the worst part of Robinwood at night flashing jewelery and money falling out of your pocket- looking lost. Yes you are an idiot for doing so - you may even be asking for trouble. So when 2 guys take his stuff and slice his throat - should they not be prosecuted?

"Bwaa Judge criminals killed my wife and kids - we didn't know it was a bad neighborhood and that they would slice their throats for money?"

Not Guilty???

---

ocean, that's great. now, what if the seller is in the u.k.? they have your money, how do you petition them to court, is your cause actionable, what is your burden to pursue litigation? and what is your hope of "winning?"

The carl - good question and it gives more creedence to Sst's point [[ although its still legally incorrect). Why would someone be buying Detroit property from a UK resident. Actually the seller had replied and her explanation was she bought it years ago for more and assumed it was worth more than we might. In that case she might be fine especially if she bought it and left - like in 1920 lol.

Assuming she does have bad intent- Michigan may have a criminal portion of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Interestingly enough I was bought a computer from a Viperline - think the guy's name was Doss -bass something and he lived in Clinton Township. Along with about 20 other victims, we requested Michigan's AG do something. A month or two later I got a letter from Jennifer Chisholm's office saying they didn't have the resources to prosecute internet crime and turned it over to the Feds. Viperline went to jail for a year and I got 10% back.

Anyway... Michigan could extradite from UK but if its only once case -one house - its really doubtful they would as Michigan would bear the costs. As it is across state and fed lines it would most likely become a Federal case as well.

As for a civil case it would not be worth filing UNLESS one found that she had other properties in Michigan- then the convenience factor shifts drammatically as jurisdiction would be here. She would have to come here to defend -pret trial hearings- dockets etc


Once again she seems to have a somewhat plausible explanation. She thanked me for my comments and said she was sending it to her attorney. She did not act defensive whatsoever.

I just thought it was interesting to point out that Detroit is being sold on ebay. This could be a good thing if buyers come and fix up their houses.

The REDC Real Estate Disposition Corp is actually worse than EBAY. It is a private company and if one reads the fine print- they have a reserve but they also allow representatives of the buyer to bid as well. Maybe they are different in Detroit.

If there is someone in the Northern or Southern hemisphere, or anywhere along the equator, that is unaware that Detroit has a much higher than normal level of crime, they must live in a cave or something. That's why the Judge would laugh. And like I said "Nice" is just an opinion. Not a benchmark of any sort of warranty. What the house is worth is not the sellers responsibility. They could say it's worth a million, it is speculation and again opinion, it wouldn't matter. It's worth what it ultimately sells for. The burden is on the buyer to find out what it is really worth and that is probably what they'll pay, if they don't do the research, oh well.

Anyone that would buy a house off of Ebay without looking at the actual property isn't too bright anyway.

Bidding is over.
US $2,550.00

Robinwood west of Packard doesn't look that bombed out on Live Maps, but that doesn't tell everything, I suppose.

sst - perhaps you're just illiterate- maybe you just can't read lol. How many examples do you need? No one is arguing that the buyers are smart- Remember the example of the family walking down the worst part of Robinwood showing money and Jewelry? Yes WE KNOW THEY ARE DUMB [[ and they aren't the only ones) That does not excuse anyone perpetrating a scam. You really don't understand this do you? There were 3 suspicious items by the seller - and I listed them. Its not just "nice" READ. Then look at your fingers and count 1 -2-3. Three is not the same as one. Got it?

Yes here they are again:

"A. market value $71k
B rental claims $550 a month
C neighborhood"

A-Opinion B-Opinion C-Opinion.

It's you that does not understand. You are implying if someone pays too much for a property, they have grounds for legal recourse. I'm sure there are a bunch of recent home purchasers in the Detroit area that wished you knew what you were talking about, but you don't. Hell if that were true, why get an appraisal and home inspections? If it is not all the seller "says" it is, just make them take it back.

Think about it man: "Your honor they told us this house was worth more money than it really is" That Judge would laugh them right out of there.

You must have missed this , I copied it directly from the Ebay auction page you posted:

""We encourage you to look at our home before bidding and do your own due diligence on this property. Any representations of this property and everything we put in this ad based on our opinion and it is not guaranteed.""


Just exactly what I've been saying. It also says it is the sellers responsibility to investigate any back taxes.

Disclaimers themselves don't absolve perpetrators. Every pharma on TV has a disclaimer "if you experience sudden heart attack" but that may not protect them.

There is nothing wrong with you having an OPINION that the sellers aren't doing anything wrong - Let me ask you a simple question - how many times did I say there may not have been any bad intent on their part? That's right COUNT them but you might have to use an entire hand [[ count each finger as ONE). Do you remember me saying [[ 3 times) that I received an email from her?) and she sounded ok? ) At least since the EMAIL No one is arguing with the fact she may be totally innocent however you changed your position substantially from....

"BWAA Judge I got cheated [[ remember the analogy BWAA judge I got mugged and my family killed")

HERES THE POINT _ GET IT THIS TIME! If someone INTENTIONALLY cheats someone it doesn't matter how DUMB the victim is [[ that rule of law protects YOU specifically so why complain?) they are still liable civilly or guilty criminally.

READ IT AGAIN - and again until you understand it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by softailrider

I agree, but, it's a totally different animal around the 7 Mile / Van Dyke area. That's around the 7500- 8000 block. Not as many burned out houses, lots of brick homes. It's not Bloomfield Hills but it's way better the Robinwood near John R./ Woodward Ave.

---

Thanks, I'll go check it out this weekend.

I saw a few of the house pop up 2-4 time in this video.