- Find a Real Estate Professional
- Realtors®
- Mortgage Lenders
- Home Improvement Pros
- Other Real Estate Services
- Review an Agent, Lender or Pro
- Marketing on Zillow
- Real Estate Agent Advertising
- Join the Professional Directory
- Popular
- Real Estate Market Reports
- More
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
The builders will drive the market. It is a buyers market without question. Every buyer that comes to look at any comparable house within that zip code will say.... "those 4 sold for this much, why is this one so expensive"
- HEbner
- Contributions:14
The builder across the street is selling his homes like crazy, ( I assume because they are holding the mortgages) He is getting top dollar.
I want to put my home on market , but my husband is dragging his feet saying we must wait 6mos or so. for more homes to be sold across street at top dollar prices.
What would you suggest?
Thanks for info.
I want to put my home on market , but my husband is dragging his feet saying we must wait 6mos or so. for more homes to be sold across street at top dollar prices.
What would you suggest?
Thanks for info.
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
You most likely don't want to hear my suggestion. I would try to sell it asap.
http://housing-watch.com/home.aspx?d=50
http://patrick.net/housing/contrib/plummet.html
http://housing-watch.com/home.aspx?d=50
http://patrick.net/housing/contrib/plummet.html
- Nicholas Taylor, "Nick Taylor"
- Contributions:129
Your market in Florida Can be a bit like ours in California, I can see the point in Selling immediately but panic selling in something that always looks silly in hindsight. The market and prices are expected to get better in late 2008, and as long as you guys are not hurting for money in your mortgage it really wouldn't hurt to wait and then contact a qualified Realtor to help you get the job done. Prices will go up but it is only matter of time. That would make me think that as long as you are not hurting for money then it really might not seem like a good idea to sell just yet.
- HEbner
- Contributions:14
We will try to hold off. We appreciate your opinions.
- Nicholas Taylor, "Nick Taylor"
- Contributions:129
Your welcome and please do not hesitate to ask, and just hang in there and you will be ok. Best of wishes.
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
Well, if you can wait you might be in for a long haul. And, when the market does recover, just how much will you lose?
Countrywide thinks 2009...
http://money.cnn.com/2007/07/24/real_estate/housing_countrywide.reut/index.htm?postversion=2007072413
The NAR if you actually believe what they think... 2008. But, lets look at what they have "thought" before...
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/images/2007/06/07/housing_bellwether.png
Here's the results from 1,115 votes cast in what's an unscientific sample of public sentiment:
• 5.4% It's already under way
•4.5% Later this year
•12.5% 2008
•22.0% 2009
•15.9% 2010
•39.8% After 2010
http://blogs.ocregister.com/lansner/archives/2007/07/tell_us_when_will_2.html
Predicts at least a decade before turnaround
http://www.stock-market-crash.net/housing-bubble.htm
No-one really knows. It's a decision you have to make.
Countrywide thinks 2009...
http://money.cnn.com/2007/07/24/real_estate/housing_countrywide.reut/index.htm?postversion=2007072413
The NAR if you actually believe what they think... 2008. But, lets look at what they have "thought" before...
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/images/2007/06/07/housing_bellwether.png
Here's the results from 1,115 votes cast in what's an unscientific sample of public sentiment:
• 5.4% It's already under way
•4.5% Later this year
•12.5% 2008
•22.0% 2009
•15.9% 2010
•39.8% After 2010
http://blogs.ocregister.com/lansner/archives/2007/07/tell_us_when_will_2.html
Predicts at least a decade before turnaround
http://www.stock-market-crash.net/housing-bubble.htm
No-one really knows. It's a decision you have to make.
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
Being a contrarian, I'd say the fact that over half the population thinks the market won't recover until after 2008 is a pretty good indicator that it will have recovered by 2008. Put those predictions on the evening national news and it's a virtual certainty! ;-) :-)
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
How can you even ponder a recovery that soon? Are you being facetious? The markets in California and Florida will not recover for a very very long time. Prices there have already dropped unbelievable amounts... Here's your proof....
Lets look at California
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/
bought for 780,000 on market now for 629,999
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=968043&rc=blg_irvine&utm_source=irvinehousingblog&utm_medium=blog&utm_nooverride=1
bought for 1.3 million... on market now for 850,000
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=890144&rc=blg_irvine&utm_source=irvinehousingblog&utm_medium=blog&utm_nooverride=1
3 ST. KITTS WAY, Coronado, CA 92118
--3 bed, 3 bath, 2,091 sqft, built in 1990
--04/1998: purchased for $352,000.
--04/2007: listed on MLS for $1.1 million.
--06/2007: price reduction to $999,000.
--07/2007: price reduction to $875,000--$975,876, "Owner being transferred. Price lowered. Owner says bring all offers. $4000 painting credit to buyer."
9 ST. KITTS WAY, Coronado, CA 92118
--3 bed, 3 bath, 2,091 sqft, built in 1990.
--10/2005: purchased for $1.075 million.
--06/2007: listed on MLS for $1 million.
--07/2007: reduced to $946,000.
7405 CHARMANT DR APT 2006 SAN DIEGO, CA 92122
--2 bed/2 bath/934 sqft.
--05/2006: purchased for $390,000.
--02/2007: sold for $369,000, loss of $43,000 in 9 months.
Depreciation like that will in no way "recover" by 2008.
How about florida....
18930 KNOLL LANDING DR, FORT MYERS, FL 33908 (3,820 sqft)
--08/2005: purchased for $1.65 million.
--01/2007: listed for $1.75 million.
--Price Reduced: 04/25/07 -- $1,750,000 to $1,670,000.
--Price Reduced: 06/01/07 -- $1,670,000 to $1,500,000.
--Price Reduced: 07/05/07 -- $1,500,000 to $1,400,000.
14511 LIETO LN, BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34135 (2,904 sqft)
--12/2005: purchased for $1.33 million.
--04/2007: listed for $1.45 million.
--Price Reduced: 05/12/07 -- $1.45m to $1.4m
--Price Reduced: 06/01/07 -- $1.4m to $1.295m
Lets look at California
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/
bought for 780,000 on market now for 629,999
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=968043&rc=blg_irvine&utm_source=irvinehousingblog&utm_medium=blog&utm_nooverride=1
bought for 1.3 million... on market now for 850,000
http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=890144&rc=blg_irvine&utm_source=irvinehousingblog&utm_medium=blog&utm_nooverride=1
3 ST. KITTS WAY, Coronado, CA 92118
--3 bed, 3 bath, 2,091 sqft, built in 1990
--04/1998: purchased for $352,000.
--04/2007: listed on MLS for $1.1 million.
--06/2007: price reduction to $999,000.
--07/2007: price reduction to $875,000--$975,876, "Owner being transferred. Price lowered. Owner says bring all offers. $4000 painting credit to buyer."
9 ST. KITTS WAY, Coronado, CA 92118
--3 bed, 3 bath, 2,091 sqft, built in 1990.
--10/2005: purchased for $1.075 million.
--06/2007: listed on MLS for $1 million.
--07/2007: reduced to $946,000.
7405 CHARMANT DR APT 2006 SAN DIEGO, CA 92122
--2 bed/2 bath/934 sqft.
--05/2006: purchased for $390,000.
--02/2007: sold for $369,000, loss of $43,000 in 9 months.
Depreciation like that will in no way "recover" by 2008.
How about florida....
18930 KNOLL LANDING DR, FORT MYERS, FL 33908 (3,820 sqft)
--08/2005: purchased for $1.65 million.
--01/2007: listed for $1.75 million.
--Price Reduced: 04/25/07 -- $1,750,000 to $1,670,000.
--Price Reduced: 06/01/07 -- $1,670,000 to $1,500,000.
--Price Reduced: 07/05/07 -- $1,500,000 to $1,400,000.
14511 LIETO LN, BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34135 (2,904 sqft)
--12/2005: purchased for $1.33 million.
--04/2007: listed for $1.45 million.
--Price Reduced: 05/12/07 -- $1.45m to $1.4m
--Price Reduced: 06/01/07 -- $1.4m to $1.295m
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
The picture of the realty market is not all "rosie" like you seem to think it is. Sure there are markets that aren't down. But they were never up to begin with.
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
As to your post 2 above, the fact that markets are way down is an indication that they'll rise. You're relying on recent history to assume it will continue downward. That type of thinking doesn't work for either direction.
As to your second post, Washington state is not down, and it's had double digit increases for many years, and no declines for a couple of decades.
As to your second post, Washington state is not down, and it's had double digit increases for many years, and no declines for a couple of decades.
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
Aldreth,
In case you missed this when I posted in the other thread--recent sales figures for most of Western Washington (and a bit of Eastern):
http://www.nwrealestate.com/nwrpub/common/mktg.cfm
In case you missed this when I posted in the other thread--recent sales figures for most of Western Washington (and a bit of Eastern):
http://www.nwrealestate.com/nwrpub/common/mktg.cfm
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
I wasn't being tongue-in-cheek. Markets don't tend to go straight up or straight down. The more and the longer they've been going down the greater the chance they'll start going up.
Of course other factors influence that, like the economy, terrorist attacks, etc.
Of course other factors influence that, like the economy, terrorist attacks, etc.
- Randy Henderson, "Randy Henderson"
- Contributions:111
Ironically, this is exactly what happened with the stock market. Remember when we were at 11,000 on the Dow Jones? I had 100 percent of my wife's 401k in aggresive stock and growth funds.
The dotcoms went away, the market tanked, and I spent the next year throwing away our monthly 401k statements before my wife could get to the mailbox.
Now were at what-14,000? Turns out, I just bought stock on sale for a couple of years.
More people buy homes than stock. Homes have the added advantage of keeping you dry in the rain and warm in the snow.
Not everyone in the country bought too much house with no money down in the last 2 years. Those are just the people that are getting the newspaper ink. Owning a home has always been an American dream, and it will continue to be.
This correction (and that's exactly what it is) will pass.
The dotcoms went away, the market tanked, and I spent the next year throwing away our monthly 401k statements before my wife could get to the mailbox.
Now were at what-14,000? Turns out, I just bought stock on sale for a couple of years.
More people buy homes than stock. Homes have the added advantage of keeping you dry in the rain and warm in the snow.
Not everyone in the country bought too much house with no money down in the last 2 years. Those are just the people that are getting the newspaper ink. Owning a home has always been an American dream, and it will continue to be.
This correction (and that's exactly what it is) will pass.
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
I agree with what Randy said, but would point out that you only need a relatively small percentage of owners (of stock or housing) to upset pricing. If even 10% of owners want (or need) to sell at the same time, that would upset prices greatly.
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
BTW King Co, and Snohomish Co. foreclosures have skyrocketed, they are up over 60%.
Now how about some inventory numbers from that area too...
King County
SFH: 10,104
Condo: 2,986
Snohomish County
SFH: 5,642
Condo: 871
Pierce County
SFH: 7,960
Condo: 996
Now how about some inventory numbers from that area too...
King County
SFH: 10,104
Condo: 2,986
Snohomish County
SFH: 5,642
Condo: 871
Pierce County
SFH: 7,960
Condo: 996
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
Ahh I get it now, (I must be slow) your from Seattle.... HAHAHAH
Everyone knows Seattle is lagging behind. Do you know anything about economics?
Here's an example
http://www.redfin.com/sti ... id=476110
Its in KING County so it will do. Bought in 2006 for 364k on market now for...349k
and now some YOY inventory data
King : +65%
Pierce: +63%
Snohomish: +77%
Bellevue: +103%
Des Moines: +108%
Federal Way: +133%
Kent: +91%
Kirkland: +76%
Seattle: +92%
Californians are no longer cashing out on their equity, so that must mean, OH I KNOW, less people flocking to the lower prices of Seattle and Portland. Which aren't that much lower anymore thanks to your double digit increases for many years. Your inventory percentage increases are leading even California, with no slowdown in sight. I bet you can guess what that means right?
My god you guys are in complete denial.
Everyone knows Seattle is lagging behind. Do you know anything about economics?
Here's an example
http://www.redfin.com/sti ... id=476110
Its in KING County so it will do. Bought in 2006 for 364k on market now for...349k
and now some YOY inventory data
King : +65%
Pierce: +63%
Snohomish: +77%
Bellevue: +103%
Des Moines: +108%
Federal Way: +133%
Kent: +91%
Kirkland: +76%
Seattle: +92%
Californians are no longer cashing out on their equity, so that must mean, OH I KNOW, less people flocking to the lower prices of Seattle and Portland. Which aren't that much lower anymore thanks to your double digit increases for many years. Your inventory percentage increases are leading even California, with no slowdown in sight. I bet you can guess what that means right?
My god you guys are in complete denial.
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
Aldreth,
That sale you posted, the purchase in 06, they paid roughly $30,000 over the asking price after it had been on the market for over 30 days. So they were apparently financing some improvements, closing costs, or whatever. It's actually listed at a higher price than what it was listed at when it sold.
I'd be interested to see your link on foreclosures. I think you're confusing notices of foreclosure with foreclosure. Or maybe delinquencies. But the last time I checked (which has been a few months), they weren't out of line.
That sale you posted, the purchase in 06, they paid roughly $30,000 over the asking price after it had been on the market for over 30 days. So they were apparently financing some improvements, closing costs, or whatever. It's actually listed at a higher price than what it was listed at when it sold.
I'd be interested to see your link on foreclosures. I think you're confusing notices of foreclosure with foreclosure. Or maybe delinquencies. But the last time I checked (which has been a few months), they weren't out of line.
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
BTW, I've mentioned the inventory problem before, a few times. Just about every time I've mentioned that median prices are up.
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
Median prices tell you nothing. You should know that.
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
They don't give you the entire picture, but they're better than mean or mode when you're dealing with real estate sales.
But I guess I'd turn it around. If you think they mean nothing, why are you concerned about the declining median prices in other parts of the country? ;-)
But you're right. People could be buying much better houses today at slightly higher median prices. In certain price ranges the same house might have been more or less valable today, even with a rising median price for the area.
But I guess I'd turn it around. If you think they mean nothing, why are you concerned about the declining median prices in other parts of the country? ;-)
But you're right. People could be buying much better houses today at slightly higher median prices. In certain price ranges the same house might have been more or less valable today, even with a rising median price for the area.
- Aldreth
- Contributions:4226
Data is from foreclosure.com, which they receive from the county recorder.
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
I'm not seeing that they provide historical data. Link please.
- OCMomof2Girls
- Contributions:49
The market in California isn't really that bad. People have a tendency to panic when there is a price decrease. Like all things, the prices will start to go up again eventually. Real Estate is still the best investment for your money. Though I'd invest in a single family residence over a condo, as condos tend to lose more when the markets go down. The people losing money are those that are selling too soon after buying. Home values going up and down are like the stock market. It's all just on paper unless you are trying to sale. Those that have had the homes for a while may have made more of a "profit" last year over this year, but they really didn't lose anything. They still made a profit. So if you've had your home for less than 5 years, I'd wait to put it on the market if you can. Things will start to go up, but it may go up slower than it had in recent years for a bit. Markets like California's are still very much in demand. People will always want to live here and every year there is less available land for new housing... Location is everything. I do think that those wanting to buy, should BUY NOW as California will be turning a corner next year, and you'll start to see that increase. Take it from me, someone who actually lives in this market and has bought and sold multiple homes (my own) and has never lost any money on them.
Here's an article to read:
http://www.ocregister.com/money/nar-home-year-1770542-association-brokers
Here's an article to read:
http://www.ocregister.com/money/nar-home-year-1770542-association-brokers
- LawFitz
- Contributions:119
OCmom, have you ever heard of a credit crunch? Look it up. Then research what's going on in the mortgage markets right now.
Increasing supply (resetting rates -> foreclosures) plus decreasing demand (tighter mortgage lending) = decreasing prices.
Have you already forgotten 1988-1996. Here's refresher for you, my dear...
http://www.elliottwave.com/features/default.aspx?cat=mw*aid=3171*time=pm&ref=patrick.net
These things always go in cycles and we are officially in a down cycle. It will be between 2-5 years before we recover and see prices rebound to current levels. Based on past corrections, I'd bet on the higher end of that estimate rather than the lower end.
Increasing supply (resetting rates -> foreclosures) plus decreasing demand (tighter mortgage lending) = decreasing prices.
Have you already forgotten 1988-1996. Here's refresher for you, my dear...
http://www.elliottwave.com/features/default.aspx?cat=mw*aid=3171*time=pm&ref=patrick.net
These things always go in cycles and we are officially in a down cycle. It will be between 2-5 years before we recover and see prices rebound to current levels. Based on past corrections, I'd bet on the higher end of that estimate rather than the lower end.
- LawFitz
- Contributions:119
HEbner, sadly the builder didn't sell the last 4 homes below market, but at the level of the new market. Stop looking in the rear view mirror.
If you can wait 2-5 years, do so. If you can't then consider taking a loss or foreclosing because it's going to get worse (possible much worse) before it gets better.
If you can wait 2-5 years, do so. If you can't then consider taking a loss or foreclosing because it's going to get worse (possible much worse) before it gets better.
- OCMomof2Girls
- Contributions:49
Dear LawFitz,
No dear, I didn't forget 1988-1996. Are you trying to be condescending? I bought my first home in Dec. of 1989 for $185k in Mission Viejo, CA. Remember, I actually live in the market I'm talking about? In January of 1990, one month after I purchased that home we had the "big" drop. My home was then worth $165k. Had I sold it then, I would have had a loss. As I didn't sale it then, the drop really didn't mean anything. I don't own that home any more, but I can tell you that it's worth much much more than what I paid for it. You can't even by a condo for what I paid for that house.
As I said previously, you should own a home 5 years prior to selling it. The only people losing money right now, are those that are selling too soon after buying. Condos are not the best investment, but I did sale one last year for $318k over what I paid for it. I had kept it as a rental after purchasing a house. Rental income was a great return on my money, and I was even renting it under market value as I liked my long term tenant. So renting out a property is another good option if one has owned a property less than 5 years. I've never lost money on any of the properties I've purchased in OC, CA. I don't believe in being so doom and gloom...especially when it's not that bad. It's like the stock market. People panic and sale too soon. OC will go up.
As for the original poster. Why would you want to sale a home after only 2 years? Please wait, but if you must move, I'd rent out the property for 2 years, and then sale it.
No dear, I didn't forget 1988-1996. Are you trying to be condescending? I bought my first home in Dec. of 1989 for $185k in Mission Viejo, CA. Remember, I actually live in the market I'm talking about? In January of 1990, one month after I purchased that home we had the "big" drop. My home was then worth $165k. Had I sold it then, I would have had a loss. As I didn't sale it then, the drop really didn't mean anything. I don't own that home any more, but I can tell you that it's worth much much more than what I paid for it. You can't even by a condo for what I paid for that house.
As I said previously, you should own a home 5 years prior to selling it. The only people losing money right now, are those that are selling too soon after buying. Condos are not the best investment, but I did sale one last year for $318k over what I paid for it. I had kept it as a rental after purchasing a house. Rental income was a great return on my money, and I was even renting it under market value as I liked my long term tenant. So renting out a property is another good option if one has owned a property less than 5 years. I've never lost money on any of the properties I've purchased in OC, CA. I don't believe in being so doom and gloom...especially when it's not that bad. It's like the stock market. People panic and sale too soon. OC will go up.
As for the original poster. Why would you want to sale a home after only 2 years? Please wait, but if you must move, I'd rent out the property for 2 years, and then sale it.
- LawFitz
- Contributions:119
OCmom, sorry if I came across as condescending, it was not my intent.
It's not about doom and gloom, it's about taking a realistic assessment of the situation at hand and reacting in an informed and proactive manner. Trust me when I tell you that I am a very optimistic person. We live in the greatest country, with the greatest political and economic system the world has ever seen.
That said, our capitalist system is based on cycles. The business cycle and the real estate cycle don't always coincide, but they both exist. You've been fortunate enough to invest in real estate over the longer term, through cycles. Your experience has given you a positive psychological frame of mind with regards to the asset class, but unfortunately your circumstances are not ubiquitous.
I completely agree with you that holding RE over longer time periods will generally yield positive returns. Problem is that the original poster may not have the ability to hold over that longer time period. The bigger problem is that we are now exiting a RE cycle that was exacerbated by credit market and leverage conditions that were unprecedented. This background led to appreciation that was/is unsustainable based on fundamentals (rents/incomes) and as a result we will see a much larger correction than the historical norms for real estate.
No region is immune to the correction as it will be based on a nation wide credit crunch (which is already under way) but those areas with the most extreme appreciation (e.g. CA and FL) are subject to the most extreme corrections.
For you to sit there and advise this poor poster to wait and see based on your experience is short sighted and irresponsible. Asset bubbles are as old an capitalism and corrections are part of the cycle. We are in the midst of one right now. If a person can hold for the next 2-5 years, great. They will likely be just fine. But if not, they should sell sooner, rather than later and things are going to get worse before...
It's not about doom and gloom, it's about taking a realistic assessment of the situation at hand and reacting in an informed and proactive manner. Trust me when I tell you that I am a very optimistic person. We live in the greatest country, with the greatest political and economic system the world has ever seen.
That said, our capitalist system is based on cycles. The business cycle and the real estate cycle don't always coincide, but they both exist. You've been fortunate enough to invest in real estate over the longer term, through cycles. Your experience has given you a positive psychological frame of mind with regards to the asset class, but unfortunately your circumstances are not ubiquitous.
I completely agree with you that holding RE over longer time periods will generally yield positive returns. Problem is that the original poster may not have the ability to hold over that longer time period. The bigger problem is that we are now exiting a RE cycle that was exacerbated by credit market and leverage conditions that were unprecedented. This background led to appreciation that was/is unsustainable based on fundamentals (rents/incomes) and as a result we will see a much larger correction than the historical norms for real estate.
No region is immune to the correction as it will be based on a nation wide credit crunch (which is already under way) but those areas with the most extreme appreciation (e.g. CA and FL) are subject to the most extreme corrections.
For you to sit there and advise this poor poster to wait and see based on your experience is short sighted and irresponsible. Asset bubbles are as old an capitalism and corrections are part of the cycle. We are in the midst of one right now. If a person can hold for the next 2-5 years, great. They will likely be just fine. But if not, they should sell sooner, rather than later and things are going to get worse before...
- LawFitz
- Contributions:119
they get better.
It's the natural cycle of asset markets. In the past RE pricing was less volatile. But the new era of mortgage brokers, exotic mortgages, levered secondary markets and fraudulent applications has created a new dynamic for housing valuations. It will result in much more volatility with pricing moving up (2001-2005) and down (2006-???) at an unprecedented degree.
You really didn't think it was normal that RE prices nearly tripled in 5 years did you? You sold at the top and I applaud you for that. But don't mistake your good fortune for a normal occurance
It's the natural cycle of asset markets. In the past RE pricing was less volatile. But the new era of mortgage brokers, exotic mortgages, levered secondary markets and fraudulent applications has created a new dynamic for housing valuations. It will result in much more volatility with pricing moving up (2001-2005) and down (2006-???) at an unprecedented degree.
You really didn't think it was normal that RE prices nearly tripled in 5 years did you? You sold at the top and I applaud you for that. But don't mistake your good fortune for a normal occurance
- Kary L. Krismer, "Krismer"
- Contributions:2454
Lawfitz,
Real estate is local.
Check out what the prices for the Seattle area over the past 20 years, and compare that to what you're describing for California. Our market has not been anywhere near as cyclical.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vodkajim/housingbubble/seattle.html
Real estate is local.
Check out what the prices for the Seattle area over the past 20 years, and compare that to what you're describing for California. Our market has not been anywhere near as cyclical.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vodkajim/housingbubble/seattle.html
Selling A Home
Stating a discriminatory preference in an advertisement for housing is illegal. If you think this content is discriminatory or otherwise inappropriate and feel it should be removed from Zillow, please let us know by completing the information above.
We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.