Property Sales As of October 20, 2008
Date Buyer Seller Price Book Page
2/28/1997 Zincone, Anna M $47,000
5/17/2001 Foster, Bruce $59,000
8/13/2002 Philip C Kalf $28,000 5273 120
2/10/2006 Franklin Beyes Narciso Guzman $260,000
Source: Warren Information Group (1997 forward). Sale transactions may involve buyers, sellers, and book-pages in addition to those reported. Be aware that sales price may be affected by other properties or conditions that were part of the transaction.
My first observation is that the data is second hand from the Warren Information Group (previously the “Warren Group”, a couple of guys in a walk up office on Summer Street in Boston). I wouldn’t be surprised if they have been keeping track of real estate transactions for 100 years. There was a time, before computers, when every RE Broker carried a “mortgage schedule” booklet printed by the Warren Group. I expect they would know a transaction that “looked funny”, but they are not paid to reprot transactions. There are equally compotent city employees, “see no evil”?
I notice that “buyers” are not always named, wonder why. When Projo publishes it (wouldn’t be surprised if Warren is the source) it is included. We are left to assume the next seller is the previous buyer. Note the 2001, 2002 sales. Since Buyers are not named, and the “sale price” is almost exactly half of the previous sale price, I assume that the previous “Buyers” were partners and that P.C. Kalf was one partner who sold his half to his partner. There is a Book & Page for that one, so it would not be difficult to trace that. Perhaps that partner was Narciso Guzman, who later sold for 260K.
I wonder about the missing names for “Buyers” particularly where there is a “blank” for it. Makes me wonder if this is more of “the Providence way”. Politicians, and their near relatives, love real estate because they have tips on changing neighborhoods, city projects, new highway routes, etc; if they are buyers you won’t find that in the Assessor’s office. Have you been reading about the assessor’s office and the mayor’s brother lately? It is hardly impossible to find.
On the assessor’s records and the Projo. Certified Assessor’s records are “compotent evidence”, newspapers are “hear say”. That is why they are called news “stories”.
I also meant the wording above to say Warren is not “paid to report “funny” transactions”.
I happened to be reading a Projo foreclosure article and saw that the Projo also gets its info from the Warren Group. So, Warren supplies all of the info including buyers, or the Projo couldn’t print it. Why not the assessors? Surely it is relevant, who would they send the tax bill to?
I just realized something. If the assessors are relying on the Warren Group for info, they are sending out tax bills while relying on secondary sources. A prescription for disaster. In Mass. a copy of every deed goes to the appropriate Tax Assessor. As we said, the assessors are in a little trouble for “fixing” things for the Mayor’s brother. Maybe the “Cianci Days” are not totally behind us.
One explanation for some of the oddly incongruous historical prices might be the result of a fraudulent practice outlined in a providence urbanplanet post from a few years ago (http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/real-estate-scam-legisl-t38852.html&hl=Possible+Real+Estate+Scam+needs+legislation). Its a bit hard to explain in a sentence, but is in essence a specific mortgage fraud that involves an exchange at an inflated price, an intentional mortgage default, and the defaulting party leaving the country with cash as compensation for ruined credit.
It isn’t hard to understand. It was a favorite among second tier drug dealers. Buy a place at 1/2 the agreed price (other half in cash under the table) then sell it for actual value. You have just laundered 50% of the value. A similar game goes on with the TV car auctions. Let’s say you have a Ferrari worth $500,000. You have a friend, or two, bid it up to $800,000. He never pays you, and you pay the auctioneers fee of 25K, or so. For 25K, you have converted a 500K car to an 800K car, with the proof on national TV. A 25K paint job wouldn’t do that.
That property card is interesting. From $47K in 1997, to $28K in 2002, and back up to $260K in 2006. A 1000% markup.
It indicates the real bubble was 2002 to 2006.
Tony, the Property Card and a few observations
Property Sales As of October 20, 2008
Date Buyer Seller Price Book Page
2/28/1997 Zincone, Anna M $47,000
5/17/2001 Foster, Bruce $59,000
8/13/2002 Philip C Kalf $28,000 5273 120
2/10/2006 Franklin Beyes Narciso Guzman $260,000
Source: Warren Information Group (1997 forward). Sale transactions may involve buyers, sellers, and book-pages in addition to those reported. Be aware that sales price may be affected by other properties or conditions that were part of the transaction.
My first observation is that the data is second hand from the Warren Information Group (previously the “Warren Group”, a couple of guys in a walk up office on Summer Street in Boston). I wouldn’t be surprised if they have been keeping track of real estate transactions for 100 years. There was a time, before computers, when every RE Broker carried a “mortgage schedule” booklet printed by the Warren Group. I expect they would know a transaction that “looked funny”, but they are not paid to reprot transactions. There are equally compotent city employees, “see no evil”?
I notice that “buyers” are not always named, wonder why. When Projo publishes it (wouldn’t be surprised if Warren is the source) it is included. We are left to assume the next seller is the previous buyer. Note the 2001, 2002 sales. Since Buyers are not named, and the “sale price” is almost exactly half of the previous sale price, I assume that the previous “Buyers” were partners and that P.C. Kalf was one partner who sold his half to his partner. There is a Book & Page for that one, so it would not be difficult to trace that. Perhaps that partner was Narciso Guzman, who later sold for 260K.
I wonder about the missing names for “Buyers” particularly where there is a “blank” for it. Makes me wonder if this is more of “the Providence way”. Politicians, and their near relatives, love real estate because they have tips on changing neighborhoods, city projects, new highway routes, etc; if they are buyers you won’t find that in the Assessor’s office. Have you been reading about the assessor’s office and the mayor’s brother lately? It is hardly impossible to find.
Why am I doing this on Saturday night?
On the assessor’s records and the Projo. Certified Assessor’s records are “compotent evidence”, newspapers are “hear say”. That is why they are called news “stories”.
I also meant the wording above to say Warren is not “paid to report “funny” transactions”.
I happened to be reading a Projo foreclosure article and saw that the Projo also gets its info from the Warren Group. So, Warren supplies all of the info including buyers, or the Projo couldn’t print it. Why not the assessors? Surely it is relevant, who would they send the tax bill to?
I just realized something. If the assessors are relying on the Warren Group for info, they are sending out tax bills while relying on secondary sources. A prescription for disaster. In Mass. a copy of every deed goes to the appropriate Tax Assessor. As we said, the assessors are in a little trouble for “fixing” things for the Mayor’s brother. Maybe the “Cianci Days” are not totally behind us.
One explanation for some of the oddly incongruous historical prices might be the result of a fraudulent practice outlined in a providence urbanplanet post from a few years ago (http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/real-estate-scam-legisl-t38852.html&hl=Possible+Real+Estate+Scam+needs+legislation). Its a bit hard to explain in a sentence, but is in essence a specific mortgage fraud that involves an exchange at an inflated price, an intentional mortgage default, and the defaulting party leaving the country with cash as compensation for ruined credit.
It isn’t hard to understand. It was a favorite among second tier drug dealers. Buy a place at 1/2 the agreed price (other half in cash under the table) then sell it for actual value. You have just laundered 50% of the value. A similar game goes on with the TV car auctions. Let’s say you have a Ferrari worth $500,000. You have a friend, or two, bid it up to $800,000. He never pays you, and you pay the auctioneers fee of 25K, or so. For 25K, you have converted a 500K car to an 800K car, with the proof on national TV. A 25K paint job wouldn’t do that.