But, there are others that would feel just the opposite, and prefer not to have the condo association (like some don’t like HOAs). So breaking it out would be helpful to them.

I agree that a category for “townhome” wouldn’t remove the confusion. Most consider a townhome attached and more than one level. But some have a unit under or over as well. Some are not attatched at all. Some are condos and some are single family.

There are very tall and skinny single family homes built on 2,500 square foot lots in Seattle. No one ever called them “townhomes”, yet…they kindof are…aren’t they?

How do you define “townhome”?

As to Kary not liking them, well, it’s a matter of amenities and afforability more than “like”. Not everyone can afford a nice single family home and nice townhome vs. crappy single family home is a good choice for many.

I don’t know that a new category would be any less confusing though – perhaps we need a search function for “Resale Certificate” or “Public Offering Statement” if new construction?

I’m not 100% against the single family townhomes, I think there are some quality builders out there doing some of those projects. As usual, there are some not doing a decent job too.

Townhome on Eastside is usually a condo. When it is NOT a condo, and there are a few that aren’t, then I think the agent should be able to list them in both Residential and Condo as long as the PUBLIC remarks note this and why and indicate the true legal status of the property.

Townhome in Seattle is most often a SFR, particularly in the area noted above, so showing it as “condo” is not appropriate in my opinion.

When the property is other than the norm for an area, then two postings would be warranted. When the property is the norm for an area, than duplicate postings should not be permitted.

Same as when a home is on the border line of two areas, such as 380 and 390. Showing in both is appropriate. But NOT when it is nowhere near the cut-off between to the two areas.

To the best of my knowledge ALL duplicate postings must be approved by the MLS and entered by the mls. So yes, it is a NWMLS issue.

And yes it is an NWMLS issue. If they had a category for them, you’d list them there (and possibly still do a dual listing as condo). You’re right that it’s state law that makes it a condo or not, but that doesn’t mean the NWMLS couldn’t have a category for them.

Some of them actually have good CC&R’s, but many don’t.

A buyer simply has to be cautious and diligent about his research when buying these. Inspections are critical!

Why should the NWMLS come up with a category? So that people can search for what they want. Personally I’d never own a townhome, but then I wouldn’t own in a small condo complex either. It’s more the size of the complex that turns me off. But others might prefer no condo association–they should be able to search just those listings.

Why should a seller list a townhome as a condo, even though it isn’t? Because people searching residential are mainly looking for houses, and would be unlikely to want a townhome. It’s sort of like listing a 3 bedroom house as a 4 bedroom house–potential buyers are going to be disappointed. If you list one of these as a condo, the potential buyers seeing it are less likely to be disappointed.

BTW, the HOA with dues would only take care of part of the problem. It wouldn’t address the exterior walls, roof and structure, because those aren’t common areas.

Walks like a duck and all that, but they aren’t ducks. Personally, I think these need HOA’s with dues, but that will have to be up to the homeowners in the group.

In 3 – 8 years, when they aren’t new & pretty any more, it will be interesting to see the ‘mood’ of the resale opportunities.

Between listing these things as condo and residential, I think the seller is best served with condo–even though they’re not condos.