Resale Homes Overstating Square Footage

aquabliss

aquabliss

Well-known member
So I think this deserves it's own thread, since it's an interesting topic and many have commented on it happening throughout multiple new community resales.

I'll start.  This home recently went pending:https://www.redfin.com/CA/Irvine/120-Stizza-92618/home/51682571

Square Footage in the listing is stating 2,776.

This home is a Beachwood Plan 3 and the builder square footage provided was 2,691.  The builder websites are long gone but you can see the details from IHB review of the tract here:http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/2013/11/07/a-review-of-the-beachwood-tract-at-pavilion-park/

Scroll down to "Residence Three".  Was the home assessed at a higher square footage than advertised by the builder?  Did the sellers use the higher assessed square footage number?  Maybe, but only they know the answer.  Is this legal and/or legitimate?  Good Question.
 
Interesting perspective for sure

It's strange though, I'm not certain if this is the fault of agents or just public records.  For example, the home I bought is on redfin for 1671 sq ft.  Trulia public records has it at 1721 sq ft.  An appraisal company that came and did an estimate was somewhere in the middle...and no funny businesses was done but still there were 3 different numbers
 
what i've heard is that the county has it's own assessed square footage assessment of each property.  it is usually higher than the builder.  the real estate agent typically goes with that number as it's more favorable to them.

the number could also come from an actual appraisal as the builder's number is just an 'estimate.'
 
I believe the builder's square footage is from the architect.  With the architectural software being used today, I would doubt that the architect's square footage is incorrect.  The appraiser comes in and does measurements.  While most appraisers try to be as accurate as possible, it is still an estimate and could be higher or lower than the builder's square footage.
 
Most new home buyers when request from builder for blue print would supply it. I got mine. So I know exactly the square footage of every room and location inside of my house. Just add it all up for a sum of total living space.

For prospective new home buyers, this might be one of your to do list when you have the final walk thru and request before getting keys from your builder
 
I wonder where the County gets the square footage then?  I've seen newer homes (last 10 years) with a 5% variance between builder and county.
 
irvine buyer said:
I believe the builder's square footage is from the architect.  With the architectural software being used today, I would doubt that the architect's square footage is incorrect.  The appraiser comes in and does measurements.  While most appraisers try to be as accurate as possible, it is still an estimate and could be higher or lower than the builder's square footage.
Click to expand...

We recently got an appraisal on our home and the appraiser's sqft was > 200 sqft more than the builder estimate for the plan. So when we sell our home would it be unreasonable or unethical to use the appraisal sq footage with the larger number? I have the appraisal that states the sqft based on their actual measurement of the home vs the builder estimate. I was just surprised that it was that off - >200 sqft is fairly significant
 
Most appraisers will measure the perimeter of the house and then adjust for courtyards, California rooms, and areas that protrude or recess in.  Some homes have second stories where a portion of the second story is recessed for elevation purposes.  The question is whether appraisers accurately account for these nuances in the home.  My experience is that this is where the appraiser's square footage can deviate from the real square footage.  If all homes were a rectangular box in shape it would make it easy to measure square footage.    I would tend to rely more on the builder provided square footage as their architect has the most accurate measurement.

I think some of the inflated square footage numbers are a result of realtors trying to justify higher asking prices.  Sometimes they are given the inflated number by the homeowner but I've seen more than one occasion where the realtor reported a higher square footage than what the owner provided.
 
irvine buyer said:
I believe the builder's square footage is from the architect.  With the architectural software being used today, I would doubt that the architect's square footage is incorrect.  The appraiser comes in and does measurements.  While most appraisers try to be as accurate as possible, it is still an estimate and could be higher or lower than the builder's square footage.
Click to expand...

Thus the square footage from the builder should be the only one used.  Appraisers essentially give an estimate and unfortunately as we have all seen, that is up to interpretation.  There should be a law in place to prevent abuse, since overstating sq footage is apparently rampant. 
 
hello said:
Thus the square footage from the builder should be the only one used.  Appraisers essentially give an estimate and unfortunately as we have all seen, that is up to interpretation.  There should be a law in place to prevent abuse, since overstating sq footage is apparently rampant.
Click to expand...

I'm taking it you are not a small government advocate?
 
Agents can enter whatever they want into MLS.  The only risk they have in over stating square footage is the appraisal coming back with a different number and putting escrow in jeopardy, but if the buyer is committed in a seller's market, it seldom matters.

Ethical? Nope. Enforceable? Hardly.
 
gasman said:
Agents can enter whatever they want into MLS.  The only risk they have in over stating square footage is the appraisal coming back with a different number and putting escrow in jeopardy, but if the buyer is committed in a seller's market, it seldom matters.

Ethical? Nope. Enforceable? Hardly.
Click to expand...
What happens if you buy the house, close escrow, and later find out the house is 300 square feet smaller? Can you sue? 
 
Bullsback said:
What happens if you buy the house, close escrow, and later find out the house is 300 square feet smaller? Can you sue?
Click to expand...

Sure. But it rarely happens, and the cost of pursuing legal action reduces any potential returns.
 
gasman said:
Bullsback said:
What happens if you buy the house, close escrow, and later find out the house is 300 square feet smaller? Can you sue?
Click to expand...

Sure. But it rarely happens, and the cost of pursuing legal action reduces any potential returns.
Click to expand...

Also, from my recent experience, aren't there 17 days (or similar) where the buyer has to remove all contingencies? (financing appraisal etc)

That assumption is that the buyer had already seen the appraisal and I assume that appraisal came back at a lower sq footage already.  Yet he already waived his appraisal contingency.  So after closing escrow they finally read the appraisal then find out it is 300 sq ft smaller?  I would assume they are out of luck, since they signed the waiver.  But I'm no real estate lawyer  :-\
 
paperboyNC said:
hello said:
Thus the square footage from the builder should be the only one used.  Appraisers essentially give an estimate and unfortunately as we have all seen, that is up to interpretation.  There should be a law in place to prevent abuse, since overstating sq footage is apparently rampant.
Click to expand...

I'm taking it you are not a small government advocate?
Click to expand...

Proposing a law to prevent people from committing these pervasive fraudulent practices should not bring into question a persons desire for small or big government.  Even the most staunch small government advocates(libertarians) believe there should be certain laws, as long as the application of these law is to protect the rights of the individual or protect against the criminal actions of those who violate an individual's rights through force or fraud.  In this case, its the latter - fraud. 

 
aquabliss said:
So I think this deserves it's own thread, since it's an interesting topic and many have commented on it happening throughout multiple new community resales.

I'll start.  This home recently went pending:https://www.redfin.com/CA/Irvine/120-Stizza-92618/home/51682571

Square Footage in the listing is stating 2,776.

This home is a Beachwood Plan 3 and the builder square footage provided was 2,691.  The builder websites are long gone but you can see the details from IHB review of the tract here:http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/2013/11/07/a-review-of-the-beachwood-tract-at-pavilion-park/

Scroll down to "Residence Three".  Was the home assessed at a higher square footage than advertised by the builder?  Did the sellers use the higher assessed square footage number?  Maybe, but only they know the answer.  Is this legal and/or legitimate?  Good Question.
Click to expand...

I know of at least one realtor who purposely and knowingly has repeatedly been listing higher sq footages than the homes stated sq footage from the builder (and not by a small percentage either). There is NO excuse for him "not knowing" what the builder's plans stated because he has them ON HIS OWN WEBSITE!

I was considering buying a resale he had listed and when I asked him about the sq footage discrepancy (he had sold multiple houses with that same floorplan over the years and only recently been upping the sq footage listed) he said, oh, the buyer said it's "something like xxx". Of course Irvine has a good number of FCB who probably don't even use an appraiser, so no one was the wiser when they sold and likely if/when the resell it, they won't know what the sq footage was on the listing they bought and probably based a value on if they used price per sq foot.
 
hello said:
paperboyNC said:
I'm taking it you are not a small government advocate?
Click to expand...

Proposing a law to prevent people from committing these pervasive fraudulent practices should not bring into question a persons desire for small or big government.  Even the most staunch small government advocates(libertarians) believe there should be certain laws, as long as the application of these law is to protect the rights of the individual or protect against the criminal actions of those who violate an individual's rights through force or fraud.  In this case, its the latter - fraud.
Click to expand...

Actually this is a very specific, detailed law that gets government into policing MLS listing. Quite the opposite of the Libertarian platform. I'm an independent, but I notice the hypocrisy of small government advocates that then recommend a new law as the solution to a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top