Former Romney home to be demolished

**cman710** · May-17-10, 10:41 AM

To me, there is an additional benefit to demolition here besides getting rid of a non-viable home. Once the demolition has been complete, there will be an empty lot available to someone who wishes to build a house. The city should sell the lot to someone who is willing to build at least a medium-sized house on the property. Throughout Palmer Woods, there are already houses that do not fit the predominant architectural style, so I think that having a more modern house would be okay. In the end, it will result in a taxable, occupied property, so I think everyone would benefit.

**n7hn** · May-17-10, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by cman710

To me, there is an additional benefit to demolition here besides getting rid of a non-viable home. Once the demolition has been complete, there will be an empty lot available to someone who wishes to build a house. The city should sell the lot to someone who is willing to build at least a medium-sized house on the property. Throughout Palmer Woods, there are already houses that do not fit the predominant architectural style, so I think that having a more modern house would be okay. In the end, it will result in a taxable, occupied property, so I think everyone would benefit.

IF someone is willing to build there. Id rather see the lot split between the two neighbors,,,,thats just me

**cman710** · May-17-10, 02:39 PM

Yes, I agree. Splitting the lots would also be a good option, especially if there is no interest in building there. What spurred my thought regarding someone rebuilding there is that I saw a pretty sizeable house being built on Oakman recently, and I figure if someone is willing to invest there, there could also be someone willing to invest in one of the city's nicest residential neighborhoods.

**buckster1986** · May-17-10, 03:38 PM

It's sad it has to go but understandable. The place is more than eyesore for those neighbors.

**Patrick** · May-17-10, 06:20 PM

DetroitZack, great ppics. The crescent-shaped Tudor to the south of the Romney home was designed by Richard Marr. It was long neglected before being purchased recently. The Palmer Woods Homeowner's Association did a great write-up about that home in one of their newsletters, which can be found on the PW site. Marr designed a good number of homes in Palmer Woods as well as Sherwood Forest. Bloodgood Tuttle did a few in Palmer Woods as well. I must say that the Romney home looks more like something out of Indian Village rather than in PW.

**ragnarok1981** · May-18-10, 09:18 AM

I live down the street from this house and I have watched the rise and fall of it. It used to be what we thought was an eyesore when all the windows had iron bars over them and the property was not kept up. Then some people bought it and fixed it up and it looked nice for a few years but as has been discussed before it went into foreclosure. One day my mother and I were out walking our dogs and I saw the new buyer out in front signing papers to buy the house. I said to my mom that there was no way these people could afford the house. You could just tell by looking at them and the car that they were driving that they simply did not have the money unless they really wanted to look like they were well below their means. Soon after they bought the house they began to do massive renovations, they tore the old roof off, and started putting on additions. This it turns out was all a scam, they had according to neighborhood sources gotten about 400,000 in loans to do the renovations. They put about 50,000 into it and then ran with the rest of the money. The state that it is in right now is not because of people coming and stealing a slate roof, which I don't recall it ever having to begin with, or stealing anything else. They left that house with no roof and totally open to the elements. This was just before the whole "bubble" popped and we fought with the bank to foreclose on the house so that someone could buy it and rehab it. But the bank which was Main Street Bank LLC, refused to do so because if they foreclosed they would get stuck with the back taxes on it. So because the bank chose to do nothing the house stood there and decayed further. At one point a tree fell in the yard and it was finally dealt with by a neighbor who simply had enough of looking at it. I know that many people out there look at this story and think that a bunch of rich folks got together and used their influence to get the city to tear down the house and use its resources on something they think should be used somewhere else. Let me just say that our influence didn't mean squat, we fought for years to get the county to seize that house. Then after they seized it we had to fight and fight to get them to agree to finally take it down. We still don't know when it will actually be demolished and knowing how local government works it will probably be a while. I want to say that yes this house is an eyesore, yes it has a little historical significance but not much, but remember that their are children living right next door and all around in close proximity to that house. Think of all the vermin that infest vacant open homes like that and what they could do to little kids. I know that is the case with many of the vacant homes in the area and I think they should be torn down too. Just remember that it is not necessarily the influence of the people that get things done, it is also just as much how willing you are to fight the government to take action and deal with it. If you aren't willing to call officials on a daily basis and ask what are they going to do about a vacant property then don't attack others who did fight and who finally managed to succeed against the miles and miles of red tape.

**n7hn** · May-18-10, 10:54 AM

Thanks forthe info. I was a bit less sympathetic to the neighbors that watched the roof stolen, but the added info makes more sense as to how that happened. I still think the house got some priority due to the area and tax base, but also I think that was appropriate. Being its history puts it under the magnifying glass too, its good to remove the historical embarrasment. Im sure had this house not been attached to romney it would still be sitting without a demolition plan. Anyway, great news for palmer woods.

**RickBeall** · May-19-10, 07:39 PM

Hi ragnarok1981,

Thanks for giving us a little context. I hope the house is quickly torn down.

**Zacha341** · May-19-10, 07:55 PM

Thank you for sharing this... I think the same couple ran that scam over in the midtown/ new center area. Buying up big homes, blue prints in their hands, then they'd go get people from the homeless shelter and have them walking on the roofs initially doing a half-done roof replacement, which of course failed what little was actually done, then up with the blue tarp. Then the tarps rip and tear and blow around the area... Someone else with a few nails and hammers, the the years went on and nothing further was done.... and the fight was on [[for years) to get these once gallant house torn down.

In the mean time decent neighbors are forced to mow lawns and watch rats and raccoons run in and out. These scammers need to spend some time in jail, that bought these homes with no true intent on rehab.

Originally Posted by ragnarok1981

I live down the street from this house and I have watched the rise and fall of it. It used to be what we thought was an eyesore when all the windows had iron bars over them and the property was not kept up. Then some people bought it and fixed it up and it looked nice for a few years but as has been discussed before it went into foreclosure. One day my mother and I were out walking our dogs and I saw the new buyer out in front signing papers to buy the house. I said to my mom that there was no way these people could afford the house. You could just tell by looking at them and the car that they were driving that they simply did not have the money unless they really wanted to look like they were well below their means. Soon after they bought the house they began to do massive renovations, they tore the old roof off, and started putting on additions. This it turns out was all a scam, they had according to neighborhood sources gotten about 400,000 in loans to do the renovations. They put about 50,000 into it and then ran with the rest of the money. The state that it is in right now is not because of people coming and stealing a slate roof, which I don't recall it ever having to begin with, or stealing anything else. They left that house with no roof and totally open to the elements. This was just before the whole "bubble" popped and we fought with the bank to foreclose on the house so that someone could buy it and rehab it. But the bank which was Main Street Bank LLC, refused to do so because if they foreclosed they would get stuck with the back taxes on it. So because the bank chose to do nothing the house stood there and decayed further. At one point a tree fell in the yard and it was finally dealt with by a neighbor who simply had enough of looking at it. I know that many people out there look at this story and think that a bunch of rich folks got together and used their influence to get the city to tear down the house and use its resources on something they think should be used somewhere else. Let me just say that our influence didn't mean squat, we fought for years to get the county to seize that house. Then after they seized it we had to fight and fight to get them to agree to finally take it down. We still don't know when it will actually be demolished and knowing how local government works it will probably be a while. I want to say that yes this house is an eyesore, yes it has a little historical significance but not much, but remember that their are children living right next door and all around in close proximity to that house. Think of all the vermin that infest vacant open homes like that and what they could do to little kids. I know that is the case with many of the vacant homes in the area and I think they should be torn down too. Just remember that it is not necessarily the influence of the people that get things done, it is also just as much how willing you are to fight the government to take action and deal with it. If you aren't willing to call officials on a daily basis and ask what are they going to do about a vacant property then don't attack others who did fight and who finally managed to succeed against the miles and miles of red tape.

**Zacha341** · May-19-10, 07:59 PM

Yeah, about 5 years ago there were all these "investment" scams related to rehabbing houses. Jerks they were.

I recall some crank approached me at a JOB FAIR [[of all places - they did not have a booth, just trolling the place with cards about unlimited income potential...) with the scam of investing in home to tear off some of the payment. They did not put it that way but I knew what was up. And I was like NO THANK YOU!

Originally Posted by mjs

The mortgage hustles can also be greatly reduced with some effort from the county and feds.

First, the feds need to prosecute agreat deal more of them. Prosecuting mortgage scams is very expensive so they rarely get prosecuted at the local level. Last I heard, the state wouldn't prosecute them and Wayne County was the only county that has even considered prosecuting them. Victims have said that DPD won't even take a complaint because they feel its a civil matter. A great many of these are FHA loans. If the government wants to be in the lending business, let them protect their loans.

Second, there's very little repercussions for flipping fraudulent or misrepresented loans to other lenders. So, most of the fraud doesn't get reported because its better for the lender to hide it. Why? Because hiding it allows them to bury it in a bundle of loans they sell to another lender or better yet, to the public through mortgage mutual funds known as REITs. Even if they can't sell it, as long as they don't foreclose on it, they can still claim the asset is worth the value of the loan rather than the value of the property. Loans can sit in this status for decades. These are many of your "abandoned" homes.

The first part could be addressed by a federal law saying that if you sell a mortgage you've held for less than a year and it goes into default within a year of selling it, you are liable for a portion of the loss. I know the objection, but there's no benefit to society or the integrity of the lending process in encouraging multiple rapid loan flips. The second part could be addressed with a SEC rule that if there's been no payment made on a loan for six months, the asset must be valued at FMV.

Finally, Wayne County needs to get in line with the rest of the country and record their deeds in a timely manner. In Oakland County, a deed will appear in the records a week to three weeks after its filed. In Wayne County, its six months to a year. Thats the opening that makes Detroit so prone to mortgage fraud. If a property has been sold multiple times in the last year and the value keeps rising, its a flag of potential fraud. Long recording times make it very difficult for loan officers, loan purchasers, and out-of-town heirs to find issues before it too late.

**ragnarok1981** · May-20-10, 12:01 AM

Originally Posted by n7hn

Thanks forthe info. I was a bit less sympathetic to the neighbors that watched the roof stolen, but the added info makes more sense as to how that happened. I still think the house got some priority due to the area and tax base, but also I think that was appropriate. Being its history puts it under the magnifying glass too, its good to remove the historical embarrasment. Im sure had this house not been attached to romney it would still be sitting without a demolition plan. Anyway, great news for palmer woods.

The Romney family had nothing to do with getting the house torn down. The house was slated for demolition before any of those stories broke about the Romneys living there. It was something a lot of palmer woods residents knew about, but I dont think it was common knowledge at all outside of the local area. If people want to think that it is getting torn down because of PW residents influence or money, or because the Romneys had something to do with it, then that is their own crazy theory. Believe me I was one of the people who had to work on getting that place torn down, I know how it happened and what it took to get it slated for demo. For a long time it looked like we would never get rid of it, but our persistence paid off in the end and that is what I recomend to anyone in a similar situation. Just keep going after the people in power until they deal with it.

**ragnarok1981** · May-20-10, 07:10 AM

The person who bought the house for 645,000 in 2001 is not the person who is responsible for its current state. To go and post information about them is unfair and uncalled for. Please use a little common sense here and dont go posting info like that when you dont know that the person is actually responsible.

**Goose** · May-20-10, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by ragnarok1981

The person who bought the house for 645,000 in 2001 is not the person who is responsible for its current state. To go and post information about them is unfair and uncalled for. Please use a little common sense here and dont go posting info like that when you dont know that the person is actually responsible.

i disagree, that gross overpayment was most likely the first step in the homes demise, of all the transfers on the property, as discussed, this one is ripe for the possibility of some type of mortgage fraud, once the property piled up that much mortgage debt, and banks wanting to get back as much as possible, it was a downward spiral after that...

besides, the information posted was easily available just by typing the name in google, nothing private was included....

**ragnarok1981** · May-27-10, 02:30 PM

Goose unless you live in the neighborhood and have first hand knowledge of went on then dont make assumptions like that. The person who was named here in this thread actually improved that home. But like so many others in the country and world they got in over their head and they lost the home. Should they have known better and not ended up in that situation? Obviously the answer is yes, but the real crook is the guy who took out the enormous home improvement loan and ran off with a majority of the money. A lot of great homes have fallen into disrepair because people got greedy and did not think about the future. In this case it was not someone not thinking about the future, here the guy knew he was screwing over the house and ran off with the money. Afterall why on earth would a guy with only a wife and one kid need to put on additions to a home like that? In the end the home could have been saved if Main Street bank had done the right thing and listened to the neighbors who were begging them to do something. But the bank was just as bad as the guy who caused the damage. Personally I think both the former home owner who caused the damage and whatever bank officials let the damage continue should have to come in and dismantle that home by hand, brick by brick.

**n7hn** · May-27-10, 03:19 PM

alot of this is banks faults too...... they fueled the frenzy. Dont tell me they didnt smell trouble brewing as they threw loans out .... Ive never seen a time easier to get home loans. They also have not handled the repo's well nor have they made an appropriate response to keep people in those homes.

**swingline** · May-28-10, 11:56 AM

Ragnarok, the chronology of the house is still unclear from the posts on this thread. Are you saying that after the $645K purchase in 2001 and subsequent foreclosure, another person purchased the home out of foreclosure and then obtained in excess of $400K in loans secured by the home?

$645K in 2001 would have been at least 200% of the legitimate market value for that home in unrestored condition. Amazing that someone would make such a purchase, and even more amazing that a bank would make the loan without being the victim of misrepresentations on the appraisal. If the seller was legit, they sure hit the jackpot.

And then you're saying that after the foreclosure, another lender loans in excess of $400K to somebody else? Makes no sense at all. Sounds like two consecutive fraudulent deals on the same house.

**n7hn** · May-28-10, 08:25 PM

Banks dont just throw money at people. They evaluate and accept the risks as well when they make the loans. Now they deny help using the "new standards" that went out the window when they made the commitment to fund loans they needed to keep their numbers up. Now people are held to standards that the banks should have used in the first place. The New standards are used against those seeking help. Personally by the new standards people wouldnt qualify in the first place, end of story. People would have been in homes or not.

If i were to lend $20 to a crackhead, then shame on me for not knowing better. The market made people panic [[Like crack) that they HAD TO buy NOW or never be a homeowner, Mtg providers, agents and the news fed this to the max, and it simply wasnt true. The banks allowed it, went along, helped it feed on itself , funded it, and now wanna have some structure.

Personally My bank made my home loan [[I borrowed $70,000 less than approved for) to me and then called me over extended for a car loan when I only owed them money. So THEY overextended me......right? They didnt think Id need a car in the next 30 years? They dont see they wanted to give me MORE [[and pressed for me to spend more) just a moment ago? Im not saying that people shouldnt be held accountable, but dont train me one way , then use your own standard against me later claiming innocence.....Actually that same car loan would have gotten me a better , more secure job as Id been able to commute further, but the job didnt tolerate car trouble excuses....

**ragnarok1981** · June-01-10, 09:24 AM

Swingline that is what I am saying. I really cannot say as to if there was any kind of fraud in 2001. I think that was a case of someone buying a home and they got in over their head due to some unforseen event. At that time homes in the neighborhood were regularly going for prices of 645,000, maybe a little less on some but that is a good size house and when home prices were good it could demand a price like that. But it was not that person who caused the house to be in the state that it is in now. They left the home in relatively good condition. It is the last person who owned it that tore off the roof, took out the foundation, put on unfinished additions, removed windows, and gutted the home. I know this is just the internet and you dont have to believe anything I say, but as a neighbor from down the street from this home I am well aware of the history of what has taken place. This home is a prime example of everything that went wrong with the realestate boom and bust. Banks gave out lots of crappy loans and in this case I think that is what happened. Then people committed mortgage fraud and ran off with the money. There is a home only a block away from the Romney house where the home was sold over and over again for several years and the price just kept going up and up, and this house was a dump to begin with and was not built well in the 1990's. In the end I think it was over 700,000 and even the neighbors would look at it and not understand how anyone could pay that much. It was because of mortgage fraud. I have seen it happen to a lot of homes in the area, people were getting loans that they could not possibly afford and then ditched the house when the payments ballooned. I would personally love to see the people on both sides of this fraud to be convicted of fraud.

**pkbroch** · June-08-10, 11:18 AM

Former Romney house is gone without, as one neighbor said, without a whimper as of this Tuesday morning.

**pkbroch** · June-08-10, 11:25 AM

The story is on the web sites locally, and the sites of the Boston Herald and Chicago tribune.

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/in...neys_chil.html

**jackie5275** · June-08-10, 01:25 PM

I don't understand why the news media is making such a story of this demolition. Yeah, the Romney's last owned this house, NEARLY 60 YEARS AGO. Mitt Romney hasn't lived in Michigan in ages. What is the relevance of this slow news day story?

**econ expat** · June-08-10, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by jackie5275

I don't understand why the news media is making such a story of this demolition. Yeah, the Romney's last owned this house, NEARLY 60 YEARS AGO. Mitt Romney hasn't lived in Michigan in ages. What is the relevance of this slow news day story?

Not exactly newsworthy 'current events' for Detroit, is it?
Maybe in Massachussets- Former Governor's birthplace in Detroit abandoned, neglected, demolished... Yawn

**buildingsofdetroit** · June-08-10, 04:41 PM

http://www.freep.com/article/2010060...ood-home-razed

Anyone notice that it was razed by the same firm that flattened Tiger Stadium?

**mikefmich** · June-08-10, 11:14 PM

I don't see this as such a story.......just a small corner blurb as filler material.
It is a shame to lose houses in Palmer Woods.....one might think of all places, it could be one small corner of the city immune to the plague that infests the entire city.

**CLAUDE G** · June-09-10, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by buildingsofdetroit

http://www.freep.com/article/2010060...ood-home-razed

Anyone notice that it was razed by the same firm that flattened Tiger Stadium?

Are you sure it was those same idiots that razed Tiger Stadium?

All the trucks I have seen from Farrow lately have pictures of them doing the demolition at Tiger Stadium, and make it look like they are proud of what they did.

Those people make me sick