I got an email from a client who was dismayed that his property taxes were raised. It bugged him, and I don’t blame him one bit. The home is a ranch with a finished basement, and I advised him that the finished basement needed a CO (Certificate of Occupancy) from the city to satisfy a buyer’s lender. So, motivated seller that he is, he got it.
And they raised his taxes.
And he can’t advertise the extra space he’s paying taxes on as part of his square footage, which is irksome. He wondered aloud why we couldn’t include the finished basement in the published square footage. It seemed only fair.
I agree, but after a long discussion we came to the conclusion together that the criteria the city uses to assess taxes and the standards by which real estate buyers and agents view legitimate square footage are apples and oranges. As I have blogged before, if a 1500 square foot ranch with a finished basement is marketed as a 3000 square foot structure, it will lead to blowback from buyers and their agents. In Westchester and the surrounding areas, we do not include the below grade portion of the home-the basement- as the official square footage of the structure. The only exception in raised ranches, or, as they are also called across the river, bi levels.
The reason for this is simple- everyone has to quantify square footage by the same standard or you have anarchy. A 2000 square foot ranch with a basement cannot be compared to a ranch with a true 4000 square foot footprint. People looking for a “true” 4000 square foot ranch will feel mislead and angry if they drive out to see a 2000 square foot house. So, we leave the basement out in the “official” square footage and mention the additional finished area in the remarks.
I know there are places where even mentioning square footage is a no-no. That isn’t the case in Westchester, and if you are going to do it, it should be done right. Square footage measures the above grade finished living area. That’s the standard, and if we abide by it as we all should, the public and our colleagues can hang their hat on the veracity of what we say with no unpleasant surprises.
You might notice the error box at the top right. It popped up every time I tried to submit my perfectly clear feedback because I had to answer each of the 5 questions with a 6-choice drop box, asking both my and the buyer’s thoughts. For price, the choices ranged from “very underpriced” (who would ever say that?) to “very overpriced.” For how the property showed, the choices were more nuanced. And I can’t submit it without answering everything!
I seldom see this discussed among real estate professionals, but it is worth addressing as more people consider putting their home on the market. There are some exceptions, such as an acrimonious divorce or estate with multiple heirs, but overall it is a rule I run my business by. When I am brought over to be interviewed to possibly list a house, I need all the decision makers present. Typically, that is a husband and wife, but it can be siblings, partners or parents and children. But when there are two people on the title in a “traditional” scenario, I can’t speak with just one owner- in the business, we call this a “one legged” meeting, and they are often time-wasters.
Like many of us, I followed yesterday’s news of the shooting in Arizona with sorrow and revulsion at the events. Thus far, half a dozen people, including a 9-year old child and a federal judge have perished and congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is in critical condition after being shot in the head.
Giving Zillow Agent Reviews Credit
Last month when Sara Bonert wrote about Zillow’s new agent review system, I voiced my skepticism. I don’t have a beef with the idea per se, I’ve just had my ups and downs with Zillow, as many of us have. Sara, to her credit, answered me both online and in person when we met at the Triple Play convention that week that Zillow would take strong safeguards against system gamers and crackpots.
The system is only about a month old now, and I haven’t really made any effort to get my past clients to write a review yet, but one came through unsolicited just a few a days ago. It is a nice review, but more importantly, it is legit.
Now, I probably shouldn’t hold myself up as a good example of the power of Zillow agent endorsements. For that, I’d suggest you check out Sheldon Neal’s reviews. Sheldon has TWELVE 5 -star reviews. He has 5 stars in all 4 categories from all 12 clients, or 240 out of a possible 240. AND since I follow Sheldon on Twitter, I have seen him Tweet the surveys when they came in. This is tremendous leveraging social media, but it is also another post.
My point is that thus far, the assurances I have gotten from Spencer Rascoff and Sara Bonert have been correct. They are overseeing the Zillow agent system and it is working. In light of my initial skepticism, I thought it only right to give them credit for doing what they said they’d do.
That means a great deal to me, because that’s how I run my own company.