Profile picture for SoCal_Engr

SoCal_Engr's Advice

Contributions are sorted newest to oldest.

  • 7340 Contributions
  • 81 Best Answers
  • 5892 Helpful

SoCal_Engr wrote:

Dunes Tavern & Conspiracy Center

Response
wehhhhhhhhhl...and I guess "that's the name of that tune"...At least, it's not like I have to worry about things changing in between visits. Same issues, same questions, same soapboxes.A few fave sayings as I exit-stage-left..."It's mind-over-matter, if you don't mind, then it don't matter.""Be most excellent to each other"Catch you all in a few...BTW...Just as a if-you're-ever-looking...I decided to go with a chair, made by Steelcase, called the "Gesture". Probably the "best advice" I found was that, by definition, "ergonomic" will change from person-to-person, so you just have to start kissing frogs to find your prince.Also, when looking, try finding a dealer (one who does large office layouts) vice a retailer. I lucked into one, because the "normal retail" outlets didn't even know about the chair, much less had one in stock. The dealer was easily 10%-15% less than the other retail outlets.
5 days ago
(1)

Sellers refusal to receive inspection report

Answer
Interesting...If your true issue is that the quality of inspectors is variable/suspect, then there is a simple solution. Hire your own inspector who is able to refute, and provide the factual basis for their findings, any issues in the original inspection report.If, on the other hand, you're hoping that "ignorance equates to innocence", you're likely going to discover that this will be a poor defense (seeing as how your ignorance of the contents of the is intentional).
July 13
(2)

Dunes Tavern & Conspiracy Center

Response
@Wetdawgs, Pasa, and anyone else who may care (or, is tangentially interested)..."The Great Chair Safari"...Went out today with "the boss" and made a final decision.I have tried, and really like, the Aeron. Especially the mesh-structure, as it is very conforming and just-the-thought of air being allowed to flow makes me feel cooler.However, in my various "test sits", I discovered something that had not ever "clicked" before.Many (most?) chairs, have a "fixed geometry" between the seat pan and back. Even the more expensive chairs (e.g., the Aeron, Embody, etc.), do not have the back moving completely independent of the pan. For me, this has two effects...#1 - When I sit "normally" (slightly leaned forward as I type on a keyboard), there is an air gap between my back and the chair's back. This means that, no matter how ergonomically the chair's back is designed/built, it's a non-factor for 75%-90% of the time I'm in it. My recent chair shopping put an '!' on this observation when, as I pointed out my observation whilst sitting in a chair, the salesperson offered that putting a pillow behind my back as a potential solution (on a 4-digit chair?).#2 - The "fixed geometry" causes the whole chair (i.e., back and pan) to tilt when I lean back. The emphasis here is on "tilt" vice "recline". I have found some chairs (at multiple price points), where the back reclines independent of the pan. Not only does this feel more secure, but I have also discovered that "tilt back" is likely the cause of much of my discomfort with longer sessions. When the seat pan tilts up, the pan's front edge cuts into the back of my legs. This is not as pronounced in some chairs, but still discernible if one is aware of the movement.So, I am likely to go with an ergo chair that has "all the typical adjustments", but where the back moves independent from the pan. In my initial test-drives, this has done two things...#1 - It allows the seat back to be tilted further forward when un-occupied. This means that, even when I am in my lean-forward-to-type posture, the seat back is in contact with my back and provides some level of support.#2 - It allows me to actually recline while leaving my feet firmly connected to the floor. A small change...with significant results.As a side note, my typical "recline" is of the eyes-closed-fingers-pinching-bridge-of-nose-what-do-we-do-to-resolve-this-next-issue variety. So, it's not "that often", but it's important to be able to do so comfortably.
July 12
(1)

Dunes Tavern & Conspiracy Center

Response
@ DebbieR - I actually enjoy going to car lots. Admittedly, it is a somewhat perverse "enjoyment", as the whole experience, to me, as akin to pulling wings off of flies. Anymore, there is enough information on the Internet about both product and pricing that it is possible to walk onto the lot knowing pretty much what your out-the-door price is going to be.On my last new car purchase, I believe I actually took the sales staff by surprise when, after negotiating fairly firmly on the price, I then agreed to purchase an extended warranty and service agreement. I then proceeded to negotiate the price of both (as the dealership overprices these, too).My favorite sales approach in the new paradigm is when the sales staff (after a brief period of discussion and or initial negotiation) says, "Okay, it's obvious you've been doing your own searches on the web. What deal are you looking for?" Cuts right to the chase, and avoids wasting both of our times.
July 12
(1)

Buyer agent who is willing to rebate part of the commission in Jacksonville, Florida area

Answer
Funny...but sad. An old post is dug up, and nothing gained other than empty, throw-away sound bites.If it is true that "discounted prices = discounted services", then it should follow that "higher prices equates to better services". Both statements are glib throw-aways.A savvy consumer should know what services they require, and be willing to pay for those services. However, it is not in the consumer's interests to pay for services they do not require, or will never use (unless there is some financial incentive to purchase the services as a package vice a-la-carte).The OP specifically stated what services they did not need from a REA. IMO, a REA should then determine how much time/effort/cost those services would equate to. Also, on the chance that the potential client actually does end up requiring these services, there should be an escalation clause to address these extra services/costs.There, that took only marginally longer to think about and type than "discount prices = discount services".
July 12
(3)

Dunes Tavern & Conspiracy Center

Response
Anyone wandering through have a comment (of course, you do...but, wait for it)......on office chairs? I've decided to exchange some of my accumulated labor hours for a more comfortable place to park my arse (I've just always found that particular word to be strangely interesting, and "park my arse" just seems to flow effortlessly) whilst accumulating more labor hours.I've been spending the last few days parking myself in various chairs (e.g., Herman Miller's Aeron, Mirra and Embody; Steelcase's Leaf and Gesture; Haworth's Zody; and a variety of others. Any opinions, either on office/task chairs, or on what features are important to you?
July 11
(1)

Can someone please explain why sellers should subsidize what ought to be the buyer's responsibility?

Answer
"While I sincerely appreciate everyone taking the time to contribute... I am fascinated that nobody seems willing (or able?) to provide a straight-forward answer to straight-forward questions around here."Let me start off by saying I'm just another consumer (albeit an opinionated one), and not a RE pro...With that said, let me re-phrase to match the direct question you asked.A seller should subsidize what ought to be the buyer's responsibility if that is what is required to meet their (the seller's) objectives for the transaction. The same can be said for any of the seller's actions involved in marketing the property, negotiating price and terms, and conducting the transaction.The cynical (realistic?) perspective is that this is all a process of self-interests.-- The seller has objectives they want to achieve, and selling the property is a means to an end.-- The buyer has objectives, and typically is looking for best "value" for their money.-- The REAs would like to get paid, and this doesn't happen unless a transaction is closed.As a seller, you take actions in the process to further your self interests, to achieve your goals, to allow you to move forward to "the next thing". If you believe an action is necessary to achieve your goals, then you should act on it. If not, or if you think the action inhibits achieving your goals, then don't.The reason I answered with the original phrasing is that it sounds like you are asking for some justification of the potential buyer's request...and that's purely in the buyer's mind/arena/yadda-yadda. What one person thinks is reasonable, another will not.Cheers...
July 03
(4)

Can someone please explain why sellers should subsidize what ought to be the buyer's responsibility?

Answer
My $0.02...who cares?As a seller, you should have already determined what you need out of the deal, and whether or not you can reasonably expect to get it. And, while there is usually a $$$ threshold that you want/need to clear, often there are "other things" can you are also after. It could be a quick sale, a clean offer, etc.As for the buyer's side, all you should really care about is "Will their offer allow me to walk away with what I need?". Everything else will just give you headaches, or ulcers...or, more likely, make the whole transaction overly stressful as you worry about the "other side's motivation/benefits/etc.".We all want to get "the best deal" we can. Unfortunately, too many have no idea what constitutes "good enough" going in...and the only way to "know for sure" is in hindsight, if even then.
July 03
(3)

Aren't there conditions where bankruptcy is preferrable to cash-out refi?

Answer
"I get what sunnyview is saying but if you promised to pay someone shouldn't you try to pay them? "Yes, I agree, you should. The questions then becomes "at what cost?" and "under what conditions do you exercise a valid, legal option?"I'm watching friends do everything they can "to be honorable and live up to their promises". So far, they've trashed their retirement savings, and then someone "helped" them into a 125% loan to literally "mortgage their future" to "live up to their promises". And, it is not unreasonable to project that the new loan is just delaying the inevitable...at which time I seriously doubt the mortgage holder is going to give credit for "having acted honorably with their other creditors".At some point, it simply makes sense to make the same sound, personal finance decisions that a business would make. Cut your losses, save what you can of the core business, and roll up your sleeves to rebuild.BTW - Why is it "smart" for an individual to organize to isolate the ramifications of "promises" they make as a business entity, but it's "dis-honorable" if an individual chooses to exercise similar options with unsecured business transactions?
July 02
(1)
Aren't there conditions where bankruptcy is preferrable to cash-out refi?
With property values rebounding in some areas, the "cash-out refi to consolidate debt" adverts are popping up again.In some conditions, wouldn't a bankruptcy be better? Especially if the cash-out refi essentially converts unsecured debt to secured debt?
July 01
(1)