Doncaster. This has to be a mistake

No!

Was that the one with the asbestos walls and ceiling, on the old council tip land, beside the fish market, on the main road next to the level crossing, where the overhead power lines cross? :p
 
http://realestateview.com.au/propertydata/vic/doncaster/index.html

Apparently a house in Doncaster with land of 771 sq meteres sold for $234,000.
Surely there is a typo. If this sold for $234,000 i wish i was at the auction. Wouldn't of mattered if I didn't had finance organised. I would of bidded to $250,000 to get this property. Would of worried about finance after the bid.

It is obviously a mistake as it was quoted $550K+

I would pay $250K even if it was vacant land, hahaha...
 
It is obviously a mistake as it was quoted $550K+

I would pay $250K even if it was vacant land, hahaha...


Assuming that the property is in Doncaster and is around 771 square metres and is in the address that it says it is, I would pay $400,000 for that property (even if vacant land).
 
Doncaster

Me thinks 774

Just a typo see them all the time just because it beams up on your computer screen dont mean its true little buddy (as the skipper from gilligan's island would say)

My 2 cents
 
Saw some of these improbable values in my last rpdata report - up to $200k too high or too low. Has anyone had any success "challenging" such a report - getting the provider to investigate or correct the data? Or do you just flag them as outliers and exclude them from your research? It's really annoying when you're investigating a small suburb that doesn't have a lot of sales to begin with :(
 
Top