Do you really WANT to sell the house?

It's been a rough market for both Buyers and Sellers. Sellers have been having a difficult time selling homes, and Buyers have been having a difficult time getting financing and then finding a home.

I always try to prepare my tours the night before a client and I begin our search. I gather listings, contact the agents and gather required information. Recently, I've noticed a trend of home sellers requesting 48-hours notice prior to a home being toured or active listings in the MLS system requesting that the home not be toured during 'the holidays'. First, if a Buyer takes a day off from work to view homes, are Sellers now requiring them to take an additional day off JUST to view their listing? Second, how are prospective Buyers supposed to know what holiday you're referring and how long that holiday lasts?

The key to getting a home sold is availability. If a ready, willing and able Buyer is ready to take a look at your active listing at a reasonable time, why not make the home available? Asking a Buyer to come back at a time that works best for you could cost you an opportunity to sell your home. When opportunities like these are lost, the end result could be more days on the market for your home and a growing anxiety that the Realtor is not doing enough to sell the property.

Sellers, think back to when you were purchasing your home. The energy that you had back then, is much like the energy of today's Buyers. An active listing that a Buyer can't access wastes everyone's time.

Yahoo! - "Seattle Welfare Recipient Lives in Million Dollar Home"

 Today I received a telephone call from a friend. She said, "You have to read this article on titled, "Seattle Welfare Recipient Lives in Million Dollar Home". Upon viewing the video, I couldn't help but to be especially startled by the comment, "It's a plush address. It should raise a red flag." The focus of the newscast seemed to be more about the possibility of voucher recipient residing at a "plush" address than the possibility of someone committing fraud. In this situation, it seems that the voucher system worked as designed. It is designed to allow voucher receipients to live where they want as long as the landlord accepts the voucher. If a person qualifies for a housing voucher, what difference does it make if a landlord has an available property in what some might consider a "plush" neighborhood? The focus of this news report is all wrong. Is there a designated area where voucher recipients are supposed to live? Again, the focus of this report is all wrong.

This report is irresponsible and two words come to mind: Fair Housing. Take a look at the write-up from the link:

According to the report, the program is supposed to help low-income families move away from housing projects, yet the correspondent seems to be focused solely on the "type of home the benefits recipient is living in." The report mentions that the recipient is receiving disability income and receives foodstamps. Does receiving these benefits disqualify a person from experiencing life in a neighborhood of their choosing? There simply isn't enough information about this situation to warrant a newscast. Admittedly by King5News, no charges have been filed. As of right now, there is an appearance of wrong-doing.

King5News has definitely made one thing clear to the public: Voucher recipients should not have access to housing with a "plush" address. How shameful.