Waverly Auctions is conducting a "Tag Sale" of an unnamed 25 room Tudor Revival house in North Avondale on June 13 and 14. The house is going to be stripped to the bare walls  All the furnishings and fixtures are for sale, including doors, woodwork, floors, leaded glass windows, etc. The Location will be disclosed Friday

 

The removal of these items will render the house worthless for restoration and Cincinnati will lose another architectural treasure. I have sent emails to Waverly Auction advising them I will not attend this Tag sale, nor will I EVER patronize any of their auctions or advise my clients to patronize their auctions.

 

I will not support the "Architectural Rape" of historic structures, clearly NO ONE advised the owners of the estate that selling the fixtures, while it may generate more money initially, will drastically reduce the value of the house when they go to sell it and basically render it worthless for restoration.

 

I urge everyone to call or email them and express your outrage over the stripping of architectural details from historic property. MAYBE if enough people complain maybe this practice can be stopped and this house kept intact.

The house has gotta be 965 burton Ave. It was on the market FOREVER (at $100k) and isn't any more.

 

and it happens to have 25 rooms.

 

While I agree that it will be a shame to strip an old house of its fixtures, no one is going to rehab that place in the near future if ever. The neighborhood is a nightmare and the house itself has lost a lot of the roof. It would take TONS of money to make the place livable

 

It appears as if someone bought the place to do exactly what is being done and tear it down.

Ooops - I'm wrong. It's 4008 Rose Hill.

http://waverlyhouseauctions.com/June13photos.aspx

I wouldn't call it "architectural rape" given this statement from the auction web-site --

The owner has asked us to show details of the doors, windows, and other fixtures in this home,  as his intent is to modernize much of the home and he is interested in selling these items.  Waverly House is selling the removable content and personal effects in this home ONLY.  Anyone interested in speaking with the owner about the items attached to the home, can send us and email or call and we will put you in touch with the owner directly.

 

Only the furnishings and items that have no attached value to the house are being sold. Surely one cannot expect items such as clothes and furniture to remain if the owner is wishing to modernize the house -- whatever that may entail whether that is full restoration or complete gutting.

I read that to mean that he wants to sell everything attached to the home, but Waverly isn't handling it for him.  Doors windows, floors, etc.

I recieved the following email in response from waverly auctions:

 

"We have only been hired to sell the personal effects and contents of the home.  I agree that the home is beautiful and I have inquired as to the reasoning behind changing and "updating" so much of the home.  The owner only replied that he intended to modernize the home and to make it more energy effecient by replacing the windows with modern, as well, he explained that due to the old wiring, many walls and floors were going to have to be severely damaged and/or removed, and because he is intending to "update" the home, he thought there would be buyers that have historic homes that could use these items, or people who would like to add historic architecture to a new structure. We agreed to show photos and to promote his wishes on the attached items and architecture.  Anyone who wishes to purchase them items are dealing directly with the owner.  I am only hoping that whoever purchases the architecture will enjoy it for years to come. "

 

Their Point taken, HOWEVER, no one at their company has apparently made any effort to tell the owner that "remuddling' the house will result in serious loss of value. Auction houses deal with Historic houses every day and THEY know the ramifications.

 

The owner has alternatives and this makes me wonder about the "level of skill' of the contractor he may be dealing with. Reputable contractors know there are alternatives to replacement windows such as magnetic "restoration friendly" storms that preserve the original windows.

 

Additionally ANY experienced electrical contractor routinely runs wiring by "fishing" or small 'chase runs' that do minimal damage to interior details. In fact many things are now done wirelessly such as intercom and security componets and internet hookup greatly reducing the damage.

 

I sent am email to Margo Warminsky at CPA ( she is the one who originally informed me about the issue) that maybe she can set up a meeting with the owner through the auction company to advise him that there are alternatives.

 

This type of thing would not happen if Cincinnati had more restrictive preservation districts like many cities do now that restrict changing of windows, Change of facade, that sort of thing.

 

Clearly, Something "else' is going on here. We either have a seriously misinformed owner who is being fed a line by a 'hack contrator', Or the plan is to convert this property to some other use (like a nursing home or office use?)

4008 Rose Hill Avenue

 

An outstanding example of the Jacobethan Revival style, the house was built in 1906 for C.H.M. Atkins, proprietor of Warner Elevators, one of the nation’s leading elevator manufacturers. It was designed by Werner & Adkins, a distinguished architectural firm who designed many other fine buildings in the neighborhood.

 

The house is part of a proposed historic district encompassing Rose Hill and Beechwood avenues. The district nomination is currently under review by the Ohio Historic Preservation Office.

 

 

My wife is a real estate agent who has sold several houses on Rose Hill.  A couple of years ago, she was representing an elderly lady in the first Queen Anne style house on Rose Hill next to the Belvedere.  There was a beautiful stained glass window on the stair landing, as well as a lot of other fixtures and ornamentation.  She also never threw anything away and the house was a major project.  The client had a shady contractor whispering in her ear telling her that she could make more money selling the house off piece by piece.  My wife had to disabuse her elderly client of this notion, and was ultimately successful.

 

Ultimately the house was sold to a good guy (even tho he's a west sider) who has lived in it and worked on it ever since, and it looks great.

Just received the following email from one of my neighbors:

 

I've  gotten e-mails through the block watch list regarding the estate sale.  Per one of the responses to those e-mails,  the statement that the owner intends to modernize the house is a bold face lie since the house is scheduled to be sold at foreclosure auction on June 18. The owner at this point is basically the bank. I doubt they plan on doing any modernizing, but they should be interested in anything that would de-value their and prospective purchasers interest in the property, such as removal of valuable fixtures. 

Update: I forwarded information to Margo at Preservation this morning regarding the sherriff's sale. US BANK is the note holder and the property is set for sale on the 18th, minimum bid 140K. People are at this moment contacted the attorney for the bank to let him know of the owners plans in the hope he will get an injuction from Judge Luebber.

 

I posted additional details on my blog http://victorianantiquitiesanddesign.blogspot.com/

 

with links to the court case and the sherriffs sale.

 

I also contacted the auction house conducting the tag sale Waverly Auctions to let them know as well that the "owner" may have misled them. There appears to be real questions as to actually 'owns' the estate after the owners death. They have not responded back yet, but if they do I will update everyone.

 

Hopefully this can be stopped!

I signed up with Waverly as a future auction bidder, and this is the email I just received from them:

 

We regret to inform you that due to a legal issue with the estate in Cincinnati, not previously disclosed to Waverly House, we have chosen to discontinue this sale whichc was scheduled for June 13th - 14th.

 

We apologize for this huge inconvenience.  We learned of this dispute last night and are working to let as many people know so that we do not waste any of your valuable time.

 

We appreciate your patronage.    Any new information, or future sale date of the content, if attained,  will be posted here.

 

 

 

 

SALE CANCELLED

I had a feeling when I sent the court info to Waverly Auction that this was coming. MAYBE preservationists win this one?

 

It would appear that based on court records, ONLY the Sherriff and USBANK have ownership interest and therefore would be the ONLY ones with any legal authority to enter that house.

 

I hope the neighbors keep an eye out and if someone starts yanking things out . They should Call the Sheriff immediately!

Good job making everyone aware!

I am "cautiously optimistic" at this point. We should not lose sight of the fact that this house will be offered at sheriff's sale with a minimum bid of only 140,000.00 which is a bargain in that neighborhood. Asuming no one bids the bank will likely market if for even less at foreclosure which brings that house into the price realm of people who may have the money to but it, but not be able to afford to properly maintain it. You run the risk of types of uses incompatable with the neighborhood.

 

So I dont think this property is "out of the woods' yet. Hopefully someone will come along who will be a good steward of this classic home.

Wow ... this has certainly been an interesting story to follow.

 

Although it's worth mentioning that the potentially illegal actions have nothing to do with preservation. It's illegal for a mortgagor (the owner) being forclosed on by a mortgagee (the bank) to try and sell-off any fixtures. It wouldn't matter how historic or un-historic they are. Fixtures are part of the house and therefore the property of the mortgagee.

 

However, when someone buys the house at auction, the new owner could still rip out all the historic details if he wanted to. Even if Rose Hill is declared an historic district that would probably - at best - restrict what can be done to the exterior. So an owner could be forced to save the windows, but that's about it. I'm not aware of anything that would prevent even a total interior gutting if an owner were so inclined.

So let's make this the first UrbanOhio rehab project!

Sounds good Dan but I have a 1871 Second Empire Cottage in a 'challenged' neighborhood I have to restore. Maybe I should buy a lottery ticket!

With no rights to sell contents of mansion, did auction house do so anyway?

http://www.building-cincinnati.com/2009/06/with-no-rights-to-sell-contents-of.html

 

It has been reported – though unconfirmed – that the contents of a North Avondale mansion have been auctioned off despite the auction house having no legal standing to do so.

 

An anonymous commenter on both the Building Cincinnati and Victorian Antiquities and Design websites says that Jerry Ball of The Auction Gallery went ahead with the sale of furniture, fixtures, architectural details, and other items left behind by the estate of Evelyn L. Baskin.

 

It was revealed late last week that a "new owner", who planned to strip the 17-room, 7,870-square-foot Jacobethan Revival mansion at 4008 Rose Hill Avenue and modernize it, had no legal standing as heir to the estate.

 

It also was reported through several sources that U.S. Bank had foreclosed upon the property and planned to sell the property at sheriff's sale on June 18, and that the planned estate sale by Waverly House Auctions had been canceled.

 

The sheriff's sale is still scheduled, with a minimum bid of $140,000.

 

The Hamilton County Auditor website also lists Baskin as the owner of 2315 Reading Road (1918) and 338 and 342 McGregor Avenue (1911 and 1915) in Mount Auburn, all scheduled to be razed.

I recieved an email from Jerry Ball that they were proceeding with the sale under the other auction company. His "claim" was that they were only selling off personal items and not fixtures.

 

I have no idea under what "legal theory" he is operating under. In his email to me he said he informed "glenn" the person whom contracted him for his services that they would not sell those fixtures. But no one knows if this "glenn person' was there selling items personally.

 

I can find no ownership rights by this "Glenn person" in court documents NOR would this person have any legal authority to even sell ANYTHING inside of this house at this point.

 

ANYONE who may have been at this sale or knows someone who was, let us know what went on.

 

When I spoke to the Sheriff's office on Friday they said it would be illegal for anyone to be removing "attatched items' from this house.

 

It doesn't appear to me that anyone other than USBANK or the Sheriff's office even has the authority to be in this property based on the order of Luebbers Court. So how you conduct a sale is beyond me!

Whoever you talked to at the HCSO either didn't understand the situation or does not know what they are talking about.  The bank can ONLY secure the house if it is found vacant AND appears to be abandoned before the 30 day redemption period has been completed.  And that doesn't start until the auction date has passed.  Before that time frame the home is STILL owned by the defendant in a foreclosure.

 

I don't like this idea of people dictating what other people can or can't do with their own homes only b/c certain items in the home are a certain age.  If you want to go and dictate what goes on in these houses, then go buy them.  If there really is a buyer out there that wants to strip this house down and modernize it, what's it anyone elses business?  It might look better than it does now.  Who knows.  Just b/c things are old doesn't mean they always look good.

The property is in estate, the owner died, apparently without a clear will or an heir. Therefore it isnt a question, there was no 'defendant'. She died in March, the bank made every effort to find a heir with a legal right. The only defendant would be an estate.

 

There appears to be no one with a legal claim to the property , NOR, were there any family members or supposed heir, who stepped forward to resume the repayment of any of her debts. So the property meets the legal definition of abandonment. The bank has a legal right to protect property put forth as security of a debt and the reasonable expectation that the collateral provided ( a house) will be kept in reasonable condition that the appraisal used to secure the note was based on.

 

In this case, as I said, there is no one with a legal claim to the property such as a legal heir as determined by a court of law. You can't have a society where anyone who feels like it can go into the house of someone who died and just start 'selling' things!

 

There was no "buyer" for  this property, in fact there was no legal "owner" of the property which is why teh court ruled in favor of eth banks interest. There is also a secondary mortgage and liens from both treasurewrs and auditors offices. 

RC - It almost seems like when you're posting, you come up with your own conclusions to how you think things are and then run with it.

 

No estate has been filed yet.  That doesn't mean there aren't any heirs.  It also doesn't mean there isn't a will.  Finding heirs can take a while if they don't surface right away.  Legal notices have to be posted, etc. and ran for several weeks.  There is always a defendant, whether the lady is dead or not.  Banks foreclosing on a property do not make efforts to find an heir, they just fight to proceed with the foreclosure.

 

I've never heard of family members stepping forward to pay delinquent mortgage payments for a deceased person.  They usually just let the process continue, unless there is a large amount of equity or other reasons... like maybe they want to keep the property, etc.

 

The property does not meet any legal definition of abandonment based on what you just said.  A house can be vacant and still not considered abandoned.  Banks only step in to protect properties in foreclosure if they are found to be vacated.  Meaning the former occupants have moved out and left no personal property behind or personal property of any reasonable value or use.  And when a bank steps in, all they do is rekey & winterize.  They don't remove personal property or any number of other things.  They're not the legal owner so they can't do anything.  That's what the foreclosure process is for, so a bank or lending institution can gain legal rights to the property.  Can you name one case in USA history where a bank has ever dictated to one home owner that their home wasn't being kept "in reasonable condition"?  I've never heard of that before.  If that was a common practice I doubt there would ever be run down homes anywhere.

 

You're making assumptions that some stranger showed up to claim the house and sell off its parts.  Whoever sold the personal items is probably one of those missing heirs you don't think exist.

 

The only reason that auction house cancelled is b/c CPA and apparently you sent letters throwing fits over this house.  They probably just didn't want the bad publicity.  I doubt it had anything to do with anything not being handled in a legal manner from whoever they were dealing with from the family.  As far as a buyer wanting to modernize the interior of the home... that's none of your business whether it is true or not.  You don't have that right to tell someone what they can or can't do with the interior of their home.

 

As far as ruling in the bank's favor, all that means in a foreclosure process is that the bank can continue with the lawsuit.  It means nothing more than that.  It's done all the time.  After auction, taxes and county fees are paid first, then remainder goes to 1st mortgage.  Any other debts will be cleared unless it sells over and above 1st mortgage.

The Sheriff's sale is today. If there is a buyer I am sure everyone with a passion for historic preservation , including myself, and the residents of Avondale are happy that whomever buys this property will be buying a house. Not a windowless shell.

 

That is an ongoing problem with Historic properties. People buy things often that they cant afford and think its OK to strip them before the bank takes them. This activity negatively affects everyone. Neighborhoods, Property Values, the taxpayers whose tax dollars go to cut lawns and board up abandoned houses.

 

Fortunately Banks are now starting to do things like sue when property is trashed. Maybe if we all take a little more interest in our community we might all be better off.

 

And for the record I didnt "throw a fit' nor did CPA. The auction company was made aware of the fact that the property was in foreclosure and given links to both the court case and the sheriff's sale information. This was information they did not know. Ive worked a lot with auction companies and they often get blindsided because they are 'misled" by people.

 

Just an FYI many historic houses (not in this case) have protective covenants attached to the deed that prevent the removal of attached historic features. This type of covenant is becoming more popular as is a "historic easement of view' which prevents the exterior with such a designation from being changed on the exterior. Many owner of historic homes are now adding these covenants and requiring them as a condition of sale in an effort to see that the homes they have maintained and been good stewards of , will be protected in the future.

 

This person who hired them "claimed' the house was going to be 'updated' with new windows and rewiring. Yet we know from the court documents that was not the case, that there was an impending sheriff's sale, and this person was not infact 'updating or rewiring" the house. In fact this person could not be the "buyer' because until today there is no opportunity to buy the house.

 

Where is your "outrage" that this individual was deliberately lying to the Auction Company. What if they had sold this stuff and the Banks lawyer went after them?

The property sold today at Sheriffs sale. There were multiple bidders and the final bid was 190,000.00 and it was the bank that made the high bid, which may indicate there was a substancial mortgage against it.

 

The bank will now likely empty the house the rest of the way, secure it completely, winterize it and then list it with a local realtor. I suspect for considerable more than the amount they paid today at the sale.

 

One person reported the solarium had been boarded? So we dont know what that means, either the bank secured it or windows are missing?

 

Any nearby resident who could 'confirm' this? If they are gone I hope the bank criminally prosecutes ALL the people involved.

 

Due to the "high profile" of this property, residents should be vigilant on keeping an eye out.

This property showed up in MLS today.  Listed at $219,900.

 

http://cincy.rapmls.com/scripts/mgrqispi.dll?APPNAME=Cincynky&PRGNAME=MLSLogin&ARGUMENT=%2B7A%2BzGSaAFhGNe4ivHlvRUJ3bUfBA7r9EKePZjoxBXg%3D&KeyRid=1