Re: Re(2): thoughts on domes and markets



The other day I was driving past a new "spendy" subdivision going in
near my house, and I did one of those proverbial double-takes. For
what I appeared to be a dome being built. Turns out it is a
"conventional" stick built structure with lots of roofs that you would
have to be within spitting distance to tell it's NOT a dome. If that
structure can pass the CC&R's in that ritzy neighborhood, then a dome
should NEVER be questioned ANYWHERE. (Boy, I'd sure like to see
someone go to a bank and get crap about not having comps and then say,
"Look. Right over there. THAT house. It looks just like mine. Why
can't you use THAT house as a comp?")
 
ozzyman at vnet dot net wrote:
>
> > 
> > Michael Rowland wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > I wonder if that fellow would be as spleened-out about a
> > > "conventionally-built" house that just happened to have a
> > > mutually-symmetrical 5-vaulted, compositely-gambrelled roof and no
> > > internal load-bearing walls...?
> > <snip>
> > 
> > We always tell folks to tell the bank that they are building a three
> > bedroom, two bath home (or whatever it is that they are doing) and
let
> > the bank find out that it is a dome when you deliver the plans. 
We're
> > not trying to be sneaky, but get past the first person that people
talk
> > to, who is usually there just to screen people out of the loan
process.
> 
> Yeah, and they do a pretty darn good job of it too from what I have
heard.
> 
> After pulling that little "end run" have you ever had a bank refuse
financing
> based solely(sp?) on the type of structure?
> 
> James
> 
> 
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.