Smokers' houses harder to sell

As tobacco has become less socially acceptable and home buyers are more aware of indoor air quality, houses that reek of cigarette smoke are becoming a harder sell, experts report.

"It definitely is a major turnoff," said Michael Wilson, a real estate agent with Prudential Fox & Roach Realtors in Brandywine Hundred. "Buyers immediately think about what they'll have to do to eliminate the odor. It's a real drawback and a real negative."

Hahahah well I am glad you got your asking price, but even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while, and a broken clock is right twice a day...

You can play devils advocate all day long, but it won't fly. I fix and sell houses, I know dozens of others that do as well, and in fact know one who does 4+ a month... and they are can tell you the same thing... a house that smells of smoke and has tinted walls won't sell, except in hottest markets, quickly or for the same as a non smoking house.

No house that smells or is visibly dirty, regardless of the reason will sell for top dollar or as quickly as one that isn't. If you managed to keep your house this way good for you, Kudos.... I can tell you from experience the vast majority do not, and they don't sell fast or for as much either.

Westinghouse Scholarship grads come out of some the worst inner city schools, doesn't mean the schools aren't statitically inferior because they get a jem out the door once in a while either.

You are correct many things affect valuation.. however when you compare apples to apples, same location, same ammenities and same sq ft... a house with a defect will always sell slower and for less than a house without one... unless you are in an insane market say Silicon Valley circa 1999.

And the fact remains that most smokers don't have white walls after linving in their houses for years, and don't have houses that don't smell of smoke when you enter... Same is true for the people who own multiple cats that don't use the literboxes!

That's just the reality of the situation... I know some people want to take exception that I dare suggest smoking causes phyisical damage to a property, but it does, I've seen it with my own eyes, and have had to fix it. I have had to FIX the smoke stench and layer on the sealer and new paint to get a home smelling remotely fresh again... I have to do this for Smokers, I've had to do it for Cat and Dog Urine an poo.... Believe me, anything that affects a house in any physical manner impacts its value and price.

I know some smokers here want to take objection to that fundamental reality, but that's the way it is.

This article is just another tactic of the anti-smoker community to try to further dehumanize smokers by inciting normal, average people to believe this malarky, since the message is that if smokers' houses really do sell for less, then that would pull down all valuations within the neighborhood because houses are normally valued on like sales.

Very good point. And a further extension of what I was trying to say before being side tracked with snide, nasty, and obnoxious ad hominem attacks.

dar29oh - great link to Dr. Vincent-Riccardo Di Pierri's book. Lengthy excerpt as you said. I liked closing especially on that page:

NOTE: Antismoking fanaticism is so widespread and acute within the medical establishment that there is now a considerable potential for iatrogenic effects regarding the treatment of those who smoke (e.g., standard of care, refusal of treatment). A simple action that smokers can take, particularly in the hospital setting, is to request a physician not suffering from an antismoking fixation.

Gabz, and others. Thanks for the post - lively exchanges / view points.

BUMP

Your absolutely right.

This problem can cost a seller 10 to 20 grand off the price opposed to the same house that does not have smoke filled carpets, drapes and walls...It may take 3 times longer to sell also...There is an easier solution than replacing everything. Painting makes since, even a non-smoking house may want to do that before listing it. Cleaning the carpet also. An ozone machine properly placed in the home along with the proper cleaning and fumigation may be expensive but, I cannot see it exceeding 5 grand, if that. It beats spending thousands on new carpet and furnishings that may not be recouped in the sale...Otherwise the seller can always advertise to smokers only. But, then again be prepared for a low ball offer.

Thanks for the link. You should also look at this book, Clean Living Movements: American Cycles of Health Reform (Praeger Press), by Ruth Engs, an Indiana University professor of applied health science and expert on reform movements, as well.

The book by Engs, her fifth on addictive behaviors, is titled Clean Living Movements: American Cycles of Health Reform (Praeger Press). It addresses the clean living movements of the past two centuries and notes their cyclical nature. She said the Civil War and World War I halted the momentum of the first (1830-1860) and second (1880-1920) clean living movements, respectively. Now the war on terrorism will do the same for the clean living movement that has been underway for some 30 years and would normally be expected to last another two to four years.

I believe that the current anti-smoking movement is a product of material excess. According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, people first need to fulfill their physiological needs such as the basic essential of life such as food, water, shelter, safety, and security. Having achieved those, then individuals need to fulfill their psychological needs such as belonging and building their ego. Higher on the scale is self-actualization, where individual require to get a sense of fulfillment or self-worth. America today has a substantial amount of the population who have easily surpassed the state of foraging for those those basic needs and are "empty" in terms of their own self-worth. Anti-smokers rationalize that their actions to self-actualize to find their value as human beings is that they believe they need to control others' habits to save us from ourselves. Very condescending, eh? Anyway, the above book I linked to shows that human conditions are anything but static. World wars tend to push us back to trying to satisfy basic human physiological needs, so scarce resources can't be wasted away on frivilous activities such as behavioral control practices of these "health movements". We shall see soon enough.

As difficult and time consuming as it is to train a new puppy, it is far easier than trying to train these mindless sheeple anti-smokers!!!

I've had dogs all my life, so I am used to the routine of up in the night, etc and the cleaning up, etc. - but a new puppy and a 5 year old child - oh my goodness, talk about a challenge!!!!!! And I won't even get into the attitude of the 10 year old dog!!!

But all kidding aside, a home with pets can be just as clean as one without. The same as the homes of smokers or non-smokers.

I'm not a Martha Stewart clean freak (my ex husband used to run the vaccuum a minimum of 5 times a day) but my house is clean, my kid is clean, my dogs are clean - and we are all happy. The prissy anti-smokers don't like that I smoke - they can stay out of my house. You guys will always be welcome.

I am glad you love your home, but I have rehabbed several 100+ year old properties. In fact many of them were built before the modern cigarette was ever invented... so that is really not a relevant argument.

The fact a smoker lived in the property is not what causes the houses to sell any slower... the fact is that far far far more often than not (despite what some people here may want to believe) a smokers property is not in pristine condition when put up for sale.

Buyers want PERFECTION or as damned close to it as they can afford. They will settle for less than perfection if the price is right, but few, very few are going to pay top dollar for a property they know going in is going to need work. Buyers also buy with EMOTION, a typical home buyer, is not making a logical decision, they are making an emotional one. If they fall in love with a home they will pay more for it, sometimes more than it is even worth...

However if a home has a noticeable flaw, appears dated, dirty, functionally obsolete, smells, etc this drives down the demand and the price the property will fetch. And believe me I look at far more properties in a week than most out there, and by and large it is not difficult in the least to know if the sellers are smokers. The evidence hits you the minute you walk into the door more often than not and the visible evidence is on the walls far more often than not.

Now for me, I like things that smell bad, or look crappy, because I know right from the get go, I'm going to get it cheap... because I know the houses that get me excited largely wouldn't even get on the radar of the typical home owner. Because the only emotion these house are going to evoke in 99% of the buying public is disgust... which is good, because that means I'm going to get em so cheap that even after I spend 10-20k or more to fix them up nice, I'm still going to have some great equity/profit left.

When the walls suck up 3 coats of sealer/primer and 4 coats of paint before the obvious spots where the pictures were hung are no longer visible, you aren't talking about a MINOR issue... when the only option you have is to throw away the existing carpet completely .. you aren't talking about a minor issue. particularly in the more modest income brakets.

Paying 75-150k for a house that you will immediately need to spend 5k on to replace the carpets and fully repaint just isn't an option for most people in that market... they are far far far more likely to just go buy a house at teh same price that needs no work. That's the way it is.

If you buy a new house, the little lady will want new paint, new carpet (or tile), and a complete redecoration.

I know - I'm the little lady doing all those things!!!!!

But you're right, it is absurd. None of the people claiming that houses previously owned by smokers will always go for less are willing to acknowlege that I sold my house for exactly what I wanted.

They all want to believe their little bit of PC bigotry, by ignoring they can possibly be wrong.

I know some smokers here want to take objection to that fundamental reality, but that's the way it is

Remember, the smokers here have no idea how much their homes reek from smoke. They think that a quick airing out takes care of the smell. They think that nonsmokers are exagerating the effect their smoke has on the smell of everything it touches. They simply are clueless because their habit interferes with their sense of smell.

Its like trying to explain an what ugly is to a blind person.

Yeah, it's going to be a long road. People have the right to think as they see fit, and there are always issues coming up now and then that need to be worked out. The anti-smoking article review was a hoot. Lots of good observations. I hope the current anti-movement doesn't take that last step. Anyone seen the Whoopi episode tonight? She got a ticket fer smokin in NY and gave the judge heck. My theory is, she knows what it's like to be a certain type of "person", and she sees the correlation with the smokers' situation. Nip it in the bud or pay hell. Anybody notice that this thread started with an article posted in a delaware rag?

When the walls suck up 3 coats of sealer/primer and 4 coats of paint before the obvious spots where the pictures were hung are no longer visible, you aren't talking about a MINOR issue... when the only option you have is to throw away the existing carpet completely .. you aren't talking about a minor issue. particularly in the more modest income brakets.

Surely you jest. Either that, or need to stop shopping for wall coatings at the dollar store. ;) For landlords such as yourself, I can see trying to get the maximum wear out of carpets, but as a new homeowners go, new carpets are normally part of the sale, either installed before or after. Many sellers who you characterize as slobs simply want to let the new homeowner pick out the decorating features rather than buy something the new lady of the house may not like.

You keep denying the reality I keep telling you. So don't preach to me about denying reality.

I got exactly what I asked for my house, which was more than the previous selling identical townhouse unit in the community that was owned by non-smokers. That is REALITY.

When you address what I have said to you, without all of your holier than thou platitudinal excrement, I will reply to the rest of your bravo sierra and even might ignore your bigotry.

Denial is not a river in Egypt, but what you are practicing my your refusal to address my points of REALITY.

Your using myth to make argument. Assessments have nothing to do with home values. Assessments like appraisals are just what someone subjectively believes a property would sell for. The only thing that determines the true value of a property is when it sells, everything else is pure conjecture.

What some government assessor says a property is worth has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with what it will sell for. Same is true for an appraisal.. an appraisal is an OPINION, sure its by a trained professional but its still an OPINION... I can (and have) had different appraisals appraise the same property at the same time and get different results.

Oh I will agree there are slobs who smoke and slobs that don't smoke... don't think for one minute that I think there is no such thing as a non smoking slob... or that I think all smokers are slobs. I have never called a smoker a slob.. I am not suggesting they don't wash their clothes, or bathe regularly or clean their kitchen.... but by and large the one thing they don't do is clean their walls, or steamclean their carpets and frankly most tenants and home owners are guilty of this. They don't give their walls ceiling to floor regular and thorough cleanings. Sure some do, but by and large most do not, both smoking and non smoking.

Oh, and for the record, you have nice textured plaster walls, like most of the old homes around these parts do, I don't care how much scrubbing you do, you aren't getting the nicotine and tar off them, no matter how much or how often you scrub.

Combine that simple fact with the fact that smoking by its very nature gets more crap on the walls, in the carpet, etc in the first place you wind up with a very demonstrable fact. Smokers on average leave bigger messes to clean than non smokers... smokers homes when sold tend to look dingier, and smell more on average than non smokers.

I am telling you, I have looked at HUNDREDS of homes for sale over the last few years, and by and large whether people smoked in the home is blatantly obvious, and its not because you see an ashtray on an end table. There are obviously exceptions, but by in large, you can tell the minute you walk in the door, if not before (just like you can tell if they owned a pet etc).

Oh I fully agree it affects price, I am the one trying to make those arguing the other way (that it doesn't) that they are wrong.

How can you say I am wrong???????

You are the one not accepting REALITY.

It may affect price in some cases - I am giving you one where this article is totally bogus in the state where this article is about.

How much experience do you have in real estate in Delaware? Not in real estate in general, but real estate in Delaware specifically.

Again, being the anomaly does not create a greater reality. I'm glad you got your asking price, but your 1 sale does not prove a trend or fact.

I work with people who buy and sell houses in the hundreds per year.. and some that rehab and sell retail for all cash at 4+ a month. Believe me when they talk they know about whats going on in the greater market. There are always cases outside the trend, and I am glad you got your asking price... however it doesn't prove the fact that buyers don't penalize homes that smell or look of smoke. Which they most certainly do.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.