Pacaso brings Sonoma home on its website
All is quiet on the eastern front of the war between property company Pacaso and neighbors Old Winery Court; especially now that the Sonoma home is no longer listed on Pacaso’s website.
Pacaso spokeswoman Martha Thomas said the home was taken down from the website as part of “standard practice” in real estate, but the property’s neighbors believe it’s a sign that their relentless campaign forces Pacaso to change its business strategy.
“I think they found they had made a huge mistake trying to buy a middle-of-the-road residence in neighborhoods like this,” said Carl Sherrill, one of the residents of Old Winery Court which organized against Pacaso. “I think they’re just very arrogant to think they could just pull it off.”
As part of the neighborhood group StopPacasoNow, they’ve been monitoring the property for nearly a year and have developed a website to garner support for their cause: to get Pacaso and its “vacation home” business model out of their neighborhood. Regular monitoring of Pacaso’s website revealed the removal of the Sonoma home from its listings.
Sherrill partner Nancy Gardner said Pacaso’s listings looked “pretty bleak” as properties remained on the website’s available listings page for months, including the property on Old Winery Court.
“Things aren’t moving,” Gardner said.
Pacaso bought the home for $4 million in May 2021 — a rate of 133% of the $3 million asking price — and has sought to bring in “co-owners” who will use the property as a second home, staying anywhere. where from a few days to a few weeks. Pacaso’s business model aims to make second homes more affordable through co-ownership, where up to eight buyers share a property and pay Pacaso a fee to manage it.
Yet since August, when the first co-owner named Alfred Miller visited the house for a few days; rarely did anyone stay overnight on the property, and never more than two days, Gardner and Sherrill said. Most of the visitors were pest control or maintenance workers, they said.
“Rodents will move in if no one is around,” Sherrill said. “There was activity at the start. But since the beginning of the summer, we haven’t really seen anyone.
In response to these allegations, Thomas said that Pacaso does not disclose details about the co-owners, but that he “retains some ownership of the property”, although she did not provide ownership details.
“We will offer the remaining ownership shares for sale at some point in the future,” Thomas wrote in an email, but declined to elaborate on when that would happen.
But to find out more about the “common practice” of taking a property off the property market, the Index-Tribune contacted local property expert, estate agent Jeannette Fung, who has more than 40 years’ experience in the property market. ‘real estate.
“Sometimes it’s easier or safer to take it off the market because it doesn’t look like they’ve been trying to sell this thing for x number of months. And it’s not moving, so something’s wrong,” Fung said.
By reintroducing the property later, a plot that was struggling to sell can get a higher rating and “look fresh,” attracting new buyers, Fung said. However, Fung said Pacaso’s issues selling the property at Old Winery Court were unlikely to be resolved as simply as having the property relisted.