9 ms·
> why would you clean them when you're about to sell the house? So they look good and the potential buyer sees something that looks to be in good condition and
by wodenokoto 3mo ago
> why would you clean them when you're about to sell the house?
So they look good and the potential buyer sees something that looks to be in good condition and working well.
- engineer_22 3mo agoI agree. Doesn't matter what you sell, you will get a higher price if it is cleaned and tidy when presented to the market - because the kinds of people who pay higher prices are looking for clean and tidy things.
- throw0101d 3mo agoSee also "staging": * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_staging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_staging
- saagarjha 3mo agoWhy is it written like that lmao
- blitzar 3mo agoIts been "staged"
- Nzen 3mo agoWikipedia is written by various people, but likely someone with interest in a given topic. One or more realtors probably wrote or edited this post. Actually, the history of edits shows that this is contested territory where people regularly remove what they term as spam links. So, while a disinterested editor might remove a link to a listicle about how to stage your home, they might leave in the breathless tone as harmless. The drive by editors probably feel that they have no more time to rewrite it than we do, given that they watch over many articles, not just this one.
- namdnay 3mo ago> because the kinds of people who pay higher prices are looking for clean and tidy things. I'd say it's also "because the kind of people who clean and tidy things also maintain them"
- wongarsu 3mo agoExactly. "Is it clean and tidy right now" is a decent proxy for "Has this been properly taken care of in the past" Obviously it's not infallible. But even if the owner only cleaned their stuff now that they are selling it that still tells you they are the type of person to take action where it's beneficial
- williamdclt 3mo ago> "Is it clean and tidy right now" is a decent proxy for "Has this been properly taken care of in the past" I don't think so, esp at selling time, I definitely expect that the owner has just made it look pristine. But the opposite is definitely true: if you can't even bother making it look clean and tidy when trying to sell, I'm pretty sure you've not taken care of it in the past!
- DharmaPolice 3mo agoI think it's more of a negative indicator. It's like turning up to a job interview wearing dirty clothes - unless you're a savant it's probably indicative that you don't give a shit or have some sort of other problems in life. But wearing clean clothes doesn't give you points because it's assumed to be the norm in that setting.
- dd8601fn 3mo agoRight. Clean house on the market means almost nothing. Gross house means almost certainly not maintained.
- jjice 3mo agoDefinitely. On the other side, if you can't even bother to clean it before you sell it, I have no reason to believe you've put any effort in maintaining it. Cleaning in general is also usually a core part of maintaining something. Dirt and grime lead to wear and tear.
- delusional 3mo agoExactly the same reason you should probably clean the rest of the house when you're selling it. Theoretically, the price of the house before cleaning should be equal to the value if the house after cleaning, minus whatever the cleaning costs. In reality, you'll get much less for your house without cleaning it, because human emotions.
- pton_xd 3mo ago> because human emotions. If I tour a house with pet urine stains all over the carpet, it's only logical to conclude that the owner is likely not maintaining the rest of the house to a very high standard.
- rootusrootus 3mo agoOTOH, spotless carpets do not really tell you the opposite is true. Just means the realtor doesn't suck.
- switchbak 3mo agoAbsolutely - in some cases you'll see the major sins addressed, and there's a small mountain of lesser issues waiting to be uncovered.
- baq 3mo agoThat’s exactly how you get a good price though
- senderista 3mo ago"Bring your vision!"
- kevincox 3mo agoSee also why houses are often painted when being staged for selling just so that the new purchaser can paint immediately after with their preferred colour. Wasteful but it works.
- Archelaos 3mo agoI would generalise this a little: The problem with buying a complex item is information inequality. The seller knows more about it than the potential buyer. When inspecting the item, the buyer therefore looks for signs of hidden defects or for evidence that the item is in good condition overall. In this way, cleanliness becomes a proxy for the general condition of the object. Similar mechanisms are at work elsewhere too. Take job applications, for example. A sloppy application is a red flag, even if the applicant’s references are excellent.
- WalterBright 3mo ago"Information inequality" is known as "risk". Risk is inherent in any transaction. That factors into the price: one is willing to pay less the more risk there is, and will pay more for less risk.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3mo agoMuch too simple. Most "risks" have an upside and a downside. In this case, for example, the solar PV system may be working better or worse than the (potential) buyer initially comes to understand. We have huge industries based on selling "risk, but with a huge potential upside" to people willing to pay for access to the potential upside. Many of those customers are not interested in low risk in that context. So "more risk, pay less" is not a hard and fast rule, but depends on what is being purchased, the circumstances of the buyer, and more.
- WalterBright 3mo agoThe Black-Sholes equation is an attempt to calculate risk. Of course, risk is difficult to pin down to a number, and different people will assess risk differently. But that's irrelevant to my point, which was that risk is factored into the price.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3mo agoYou made a very specific claim that more risk == lower price. That isn't true as a general rule, though it may be true much of the time.
- aaron695 3mo ago[dead]
- Onavo 3mo agoAlso you don't need anything fancy when washing them, their surface is just glass.
- gib444 3mo agoA patchwork of eg new paint is a good signal they're covering something up too
- alberth 3mo agoOT: a friend of mine recently bought a house. They were surprised to learn at closing that the seller had financed their solar panels and that wasn’t apart of the home purchase. So they had to negotiate who was going to pay off the solar panel, and this all had to be completed before home sale.
- nopurpose 3mo agoI'd expect solicitors to find liabilities like that. How did it end?
- gizmo686 3mo agoThe "before closing" does a lot of work here. It sounds like the seller made the disclosure when they were legally required to. This is pretty common in large purchases. First the buyer and seller agree in principle, then they perform their due diligence. Sometimes sales fall through at that last step. If, hypothetically, the seller never disclosed the financing, then that would be an issue between the seller and the financer. At most, the buyer would need to allow the financer access to retrieve their property. The financer could then sue the seller for the buy-out cost and/or breach of contract. As an aside, at least around here (USA), if you see a house with solar panels, it is a good assumption that they are financed.
- flutas 3mo ago> At most, the buyer would need to allow the financer access to retrieve their property. The financer could then sue the seller for the buy-out cost and/or breach of contract. Nope, at least not typically. Typically in the US houses are sold as-is unless it's noted in the closing docs. Everything in or on the house when you close is yours. The seller would be the one fighting with the financing company, as (again unless noted in closing docs) they would be considered fixtures and considered part of the real estate sale.
- gizmo686 3mo agoFinancer is probably not the correct word here. The common model around here is that an installer puts solar panels on your roof, and sells you the right to their electric output in exchange for a fixed fee (with a fixed annual increase). That is to say, the original homeowner never owned the solar panels, and so never had the right to sell it in the firstplace. If the solar panels were financed with an unsecured loan, then the home buyer would unambigously own them. It is also possible for the lender to have a lien against the panels; which again would survive the home sale.
- micromacrofoot 3mo agoActually in some places panels devalue a house because some people consider them an eyesore
- g8oz 3mo agoI believe this will pass as people get used to them as part of our modern world.
- micromacrofoot 3mo ago"people get used to them" is usually just old people dying generally the markets where this happens have people who are too rich to care about electricity savings
- wodenokoto 3mo agoAnd to those people, clean panels devalue the property more than dirty?
- micromacrofoot 3mo agoall panels are bad regardless of cleanliness