Vintage Things That Have Disappeared In Your Lifetime?

[LizzieMaine]

My mortgage is about $60 more than I was last paying in rent, but knowing the landlord can't sell the place out from under me is more than worth the extra coin.

 

[Stearmen]

I didn't personally know anyone who lived thru the Era who was a "climber" when it came to houses. Granted, I only knew working class people, but none of them ever had any ambition whatsoever to have a "bigger or better" house. Those who owned houses generally bought them in their thirties, and kept them until they died. These were not large houses at all by modern standards -- my grandparents raised two kids in a house of about 1000 square feet, and most of the houses in the neighborhood were of similar size. They bought the houses to live in, not to profit from. The idea of a house as an "investment" was utterly alien to their way of thinking.

Funny, I have just figured out, the Queen Anne I bought is not going to work for my needs! I am lucky, and have a peace of land I bought in a pretty ritzy neighborhood, no HOA though! Talking to my friends, they are telling me what I need to build for resale, 4,000 sq ft, 4 bedrooms 5 baths, I haven't even broken ground and they want me to sell! I don't want half that size, smallest house with the biggest garage the city will let me get away with. If I build, they will either take me to a home, or out the front door boots first, either way, I'm not selling, and who ever gets the house should be great full for however much money they get out of the house!

 

[Stearmen]

The old Victorian house that I spent my early years in, was sold by my parents in the mid 60s for $18,000, it recently sold for over $600,000, and there are million plus dollar houses all around it!

 

[AtomicEraTom]

Trading up is my goal. My dad is a real-estate developer and always taught me that rent was for suckers and that for the same price as owning a house, you could be building equity. Actually, my house payment is cheaper than renting a flat around here.

I have about 65k in my house, and the realtor expects in this economy, I'd easily get 90. That's a fair profit. By the time I'm ready to sell, in April 2017, maybe the economy will be even better and I can get 100k or better.

From there, I may buy another to flip, or possibly build a home. My parents have 40 acres, which has already been subdivided. There's a lot right next to their house just waiting for me to build on it. Have a nice colonial picked up to plop on that lot.

Funny you mention about your parents. My Grandpa built the house my father grew up in, in 1953. Nothing special, ranch house, about 1100 square feet in the burbs. They lived there until 1987. All the kids were out by that point, and my Great-Grandma passed that year. They sold off, and bought a 4,000 square foot 5 bedroom 3 bath home out in the country (in a desirable township) for the two of them, and my Great-Grandpa. It always seemed backwards to me to raise 5 kids in that little house, then buy that palace.

Sometimes, it's simply a matter of taking existing equity and applying it to a property that has greater investment and resale potential. You "trade up" because a bigger home in a better neighborhood has greater resale potential and is a more prudent investment. I'm not sure that potential existed back in the Era, or that people who were raised in the Era recognized it when things changed to where it became a reality.

I can't understand why my parents insisted upon staying in the same home for all of my childhood (1961-1975) over a period of time when my father's income had risen considerably and a home in a more desirable town, with better schools, transportation, public services, etc., could have improved their financial situation.

And my mom's parents were even more short sighted, to my way of thinking: after more than 40 years of marriage they finally moved out of their tiny one bedroom apartment (which they shared with an adult son, my bachelor uncle) and "got a place of their own:" an even tinier one bedroom condo that the three of them shared. Four years later, they sold the condo (undoubtedly taking a hit on taxes) and moved back into another apartment.

Perhaps I don't understand the economics of the times back then, or perhaps people were gun-shy about investments after having lived through the Great Depression. And admittedly, hindsight is 20/20. But I'd be curious as to whether others "traded up" on homes based upon greater equity potential 1920's- 1950's.

In that same boat with you. Don't have enough room for half the stuff I have, and I'm always collecting more. No garage, too small of a lot. This ain't working.

Build what makes you happy. It doesn't pay to build to impress, especially in a ritzy area. Somebody will just show you up, anyhow. If you're happy, it doesn't matter if they feel they've shown you up.

For instance, my great Uncle built a house he was proud of. Back in the 70's/80's, it was a half-million dollar home. He thought he was top dog. Other homes started going up, his neighbor is a fairly notable local, Mr. Baseball, Bob Ueker. The other homeowners offered to buy my Great Uncle out, because his puny, crummy house was embarrassing the neighborhood....

Funny, I have just figured out, the Queen Anne I bought is not going to work for my needs! I am lucky, and have a peace of land I bought in a pretty ritzy neighborhood, no HOA though! Talking to my friends, they are telling me what I need to build for resale, 4,000 sq ft, 4 bedrooms 5 baths, I haven't even broken ground and they want me to sell! I don't want half that size, smallest house with the biggest garage the city will let me get away with. If I build, they will either take me to a home, or out the front door boots first, either way, I'm not selling, and who ever gets the house should be great full for however much money they get out of the house!

 

[Fading Fast]

I completely understand. I bought my house at 35, only after I was very comfortable on being able to make payments. Yes, my rent was as much or more than my mortgage note, but there is no long-term commitment with that.

One benefit of having waiting until being 50 and paying cash is that my maintenance (coop fees if you like - what I pay monthly to support the building's upkeep and staff) and taxes are about half of what I was paying in rent, so my monthly nut went down after I bought. Of course, I now have a lot of capital tied up in the apartment.

 

[Fading Fast]

My mortgage is about $60 more than I was last paying in rent, but knowing the landlord can't sell the place out from under me is more than worth the extra coin.

Nothing like private ownership of private - gives you a lot of control and freedom from the dictates of others. If you itemize and if it makes sense - all things that depend on your personal financial situation - you can deduct some of your mortgage payment and might actually bring the monthly cost below what you were paying in rent, but I am sure you know that.

 

[Trenchfriend]

Are there old-fashion living-coopartives in the United States, I mean, on them you are "comrade" and so co-owner by law?

I am loving my rental-flat. It's a apartment-block from 1968 (middle-aged GDR ), with seven house-entrances, 42 flats and luckily not badly soundproofed!

I would never change this running system to me. Ok, I am extra lucky, because living in the top floor, having more silence, than the other, below. Life's good...

 

[LizzieMaine]

Nothing like private ownership of private - gives you a lot of control and freedom from the dictates of others. If you itemize and if it makes sense - all things that depend on your personal financial situation - you can deduct some of your mortgage payment and might actually bring the monthly cost below what you were paying in rent, but I am sure you know that.

Didn't do me much good last year, but I only owned the house for four months, so we'll see what happens this year. I already have to itemize because of my writing jobs.

I ended up buying on very short notice last year -- the landlord decided very abruptly he wanted to sell, and gave me thirty days notice, so the choice was either buy the place or move, and the latter option was essentially impossible given how busy I was at work at the time. So I was and remain very thankful for the USDA Rural Development mortgage program, which made it possible at a very reasonable interest rate. It's the successor to the old Farmers Home Administration program, which made it possible for my mother to buy a house fifty years ago.

 

[Fading Fast]

Didn't do me much good last year, but I only owned the house for four months, so we'll see what happens this year. I already have to itemize because of my writing jobs.

I ended up buying on very short notice last year -- the landlord decided very abruptly he wanted to sell, and gave me thirty days notice, so the choice was either buy the place or move, and the latter option was essentially impossible given how busy I was at work at the time. So I was and remain very thankful for the USDA Rural Development mortgage program, which made it possible at a very reasonable interest rate. It's the successor to the old Farmers Home Administration program, which made it possible for my mother to buy a house fifty years ago.

Congratulations - I didn't know it was so recent a purchase. You and I bought months apart of each other, I closed in June of '14. I'm glad you benefitted from the gov't program. There are some great gov't mortgage programs out there, but there are also some the contributed to the housing bubble (along with the private sector banks, I am not trying to be political) - nothing is ever easy.

 

[LizzieMaine]

USDA-RD is very strict -- locked interest rate, full documentation of all sources of income, and strict income requirements. It also has to be in what's defined as a small town/rural area and the house must be "modest" in both size and price. My place, 952 square feet abutting an abandoned junkyard at the rear, is exceedingly modest. But that's all I need, and the junkyard helps scare off gentrifiers. The neighborhood has gotten a lot quieter since they closed down the meth lab up the street.

I doubt I'll live long enough to pay it off, but they also require life insurance so they won't be left holding the bag.

 

[HudsonHawk]

Trading up is my goal. My dad is a real-estate developer and always taught me that rent was for suckers and that for the same price as owning a house, you could be building equity.

This is true as long as the value keeps increasing. But as millions of people discovered a few years back, that is not guaranteed, especially in the short term. A lot of people lost everything they had with this philosophy.

 

[Stearmen]

USDA-RD is very strict -- locked interest rate, full documentation of all sources of income, and strict income requirements. It also has to be in what's defined as a small town/rural area and the house must be "modest" in both size and price. My place, 952 square feet abutting an abandoned junkyard at the rear, is exceedingly modest. But that's all I need, and the junkyard helps scare off gentrifiers. The neighborhood has gotten a lot quieter since they closed down the meth lab up the street.

I doubt I'll live long enough to pay it off, but they also require life insurance so they won't be left holding the bag.

Funny you mentioned 952 sq ft! A while back, I measured how much of my house I actually use on a given year. Even with being quite generous, I came up with only 900 sq ft!

 

[Fading Fast]

Funny you mentioned 952 sq ft! A while back, I measured how much of my house I actually use on a given year. Even with being quite generous, I came up with only 900 sq ft!

This probably belongs in the "Trivial Things that Tick You Off" thread, but in NYC, real estate brokers lie (often, always, aggressively and with conviction, but no compunction) about the square footage of apartments. It is so bad that I've seen (on StreetEasy - a real estate aggregator and information type of site - the same apartment listed by different brokers having meaningfully different square footage measurement).

There seems to be no standard, no normal method and no control or regulatory oversight. When we were looking to buy, the apartments we were looking at were on the small size and with a little effort my girlfriend and I could calculate a square footage estimate and - surprise, surprise - it was always less (and we simply did "walls in," which gives the highest square footage measurement possible). It is so bad it is embarrassing.

I work in finance and while people hate finance people (got it, understand it), the reality is our industry is significantly more regulated than NYC real estate brokers. In my field, I've met with regulators who question why a yield we quoted on a bond was off by basis points, i.e., 7.04% versus 7.06% (like many things, once you try to get very exact, many quirks pop up), but regardless of the logic of regulators worrying about 2/100ths of a percentage point, nobody seems concerned that real estate brokers regular lie about square footage by - sometimes - 20% (calling a 1000 square foot apartment 1200 square feet) about the largest purchase / investment most people will ever make in their lives. No doubt "The Boys in Marketing" are at work (although, women seem to dominate the real estate brokerage game in NYC), but where also are the government regulators who are suppose to be policing this stuff?

Okay, I'm done ranting.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Around here square footage is based directly on the figures on file with the tax assessor's office -- the broker doesn't have anything to do with it, and is therefore unable to chisel. I imagine part of the problem has to do with the sheer size of New York City -- it's easier to get away with things in a big city than in a small town.

When I bought this house I actually got out a tape measure and figured out the square footage myself. The Assessor's Office had it right on.

 

[Fading Fast]

Around here square footage is based directly on the figures on file with the tax assessor's office -- the broker doesn't have anything to do with it, and is therefore unable to chisel. I imagine part of the problem has to do with the sheer size of New York City -- it's easier to get away with things in a big city than in a small town.

When I bought this house I actually got out a tape measure and figured out the square footage myself. The Assessor's Office had it right on.

Only based on anecdotal experience and enough news stories here and there (that sneak through), I think the real estate industry is in bed with the politicians in this city. So many things happen that are questionable and that hurt the public but protect the business that there has to be a quid pro quo going on.

 

[ButteMT61]

We've been in our home for 19 years. It's a home, not a retirement plan. We paid $134k. It's valued at ~750k now. We are not moving or moving "up". Will we die here? Dunno, but we can afford it and it's in a great location. We also buy used cars. I simply don't give a rat's ass about being like everyone and competing. We took $100k some years back to do a lot of needed work. It's a 1906, so we had to. But even with that, we can afford it and likely won't move unless we have to.

 

[HudsonHawk]

Around here square footage is based directly on the figures on file with the tax assessor's office -- the broker doesn't have anything to do with it, and is therefore unable to chisel. I imagine part of the problem has to do with the sheer size of New York City -- it's easier to get away with things in a big city than in a small town.

When I bought this house I actually got out a tape measure and figured out the square footage myself. The Assessor's Office had it right on.

With a home purchase, it has to be appraised by an independent appraiser, who will go by the tax assessor's listed numbers, so there's no chance to chisel that. But I suppose someone could list their home for rent and fudge the numbers, and unless the prospective leasee were to check with the county, they'd likely have no way of knowing for certain.

 

[Stearmen]

Around here square footage is based directly on the figures on file with the tax assessor's office -- the broker doesn't have anything to do with it, and is therefore unable to chisel. I imagine part of the problem has to do with the sheer size of New York City -- it's easier to get away with things in a big city than in a small town.

When I bought this house I actually got out a tape measure and figured out the square footage myself. The Assessor's Office had it right on.

Same here! My Victorian is actually smaller by a couple of hundred, but, the 60s tri-leval that I am in is actually several hundred bigger then the county records!

 

[Stormy]

I do wonder which vintage things are next on the list for extinction. I've heard that department stores are at-risk.

 

[Stormy]

Nice use of purulent. The imagery gave me the willies.

HAHA! Likewise ...