Square Footage: Measuring vs. Reported

I suggest you always bring a tape when you go for a showing. Should be easy enough to get a rough calc of the carpetable square footage with a tape alone. If you want to be more precise, you can use a laser meter and get every turn and nook, draw it up, and measure the enclosed area. The broker will start tapping their foot because you're taking "too long" but really, it's your prerogative to do your due-diligence.

Reported square footage could meet a bunch of different definitions, some of which include the square footage of the exterior walls. Apples aren't always the same apples.

I seriously have a doubt whether any effort you put in to trying to calculate the actual square footage will implore any seller's broker to budge their price. (That is not to say that such effort is not immensely valuable to determine your furniture layout.) There's too many intangibles that go into pricing to solely rely on $/sqft as a pricing strategy.

In my past experience (a decade ago) looking at probably 200 apartments and combing over floorplans I found a consistent average of over reporting square feet by 8%. Aside from the overly abusive ones, a max of 12% deviation.

So I expected an 8% deviation, and when giving comps , realized I was comping against other units that averaged 8% over so I saw it as an even playing field and wouldn't bring it up during an offer.

If they were greedy, like a 12% or more, Id bring it up and make an offer per foot but now they would lose that 8% leeway others would get and offer is now based on actual footage.

Im sure that sounds silly to most but I felt the person selling doing this feels square footage is an important enough factor and is valuing their unit the same way.
Ergo, by their abuse of exaggeration they are trying to cheat, they are caught....bye bye leeway.

I have seen people who will measure what they intend on buying using some strange methodology (strip out interior walls and closets being one of the worst examples) which will understate the square footage and they compare the resulting price per sq ft to the other listing prices per sq ft without adjusting the other listings square footage using the same measure.

Three common of standard
1. Inside of exterior walls to inside of exterior walls. Used in old condos and coops. Coops really have no standard.
2. Outside of exterior walls to outside of exterior walls. Shared wall from the middle of the wall. Used by most new condos.
3. Full floor apartments. Footprint of the floor including exterior walls without substracting for common stairs. Some listing may subtract staircases.

"Three commonly used standards"

If you have accurate dimensions on a floor plan you can use acrobat to determine square footage. I learned this from an architect many years ago, it's generally pretty accurate in my experience.

https://youtu.be/5Ra4kgOGq9Q

https://helpx.adobe.com/acrobat/using/grids-guides-measurements-pdfs.html#measure_the_height_width_or_area_of_objects

This is why more listings do not provide square footage? The threat of being sued for false advertising? I just assumed units without listed square feet are generally smaller than comparable units for the same price.

I didn't include sqft in my last sale because there was a meaningful piece of private outdoor space. If the outdoor space was included in the number, some people would complain it was false advertising. If it wasn't included, other people might gloss over the listing thinking the ppsf was too high.

The floor plan had clear dimensions so anybody who cared could figure it out easily enough. I don't recall anybody ever asking.

There is no equivalent of the Loi Carrez here, so square footage is whatever the seller wants it to be, with zero repercussions for lying. Hence I don't pay attention to price per square foot as a comp.

Also you can check the property tax records and will sometimes find a much lower square footage... for obvious reasons.

zero repercussions for lying? no one tried to sue for false advertising before?

It is REAL estate. You can always get your own professional to measure before you sign contract.

I don't list square footage on my listings unless I'm forced to. Sadly, at this point the computer systems start to slot it in whether I do or not, and who knows where they get it from?

Not having footage on co-op listings is a relic from ... the 80s? @Keith, @30yrs, do you remember? ... when a big New York City brokerage was actually sued over the number.

Not using a number is problematic, though, too. Back in the day, we could all look at the same floorplan and, erm, guess at a square footage number with a possible overstatement of the same amount... so as an example, any five random brokers would all guess that a big Jr. 4 in a 1960s white brick would be 1,000 sq. feet. That kind of floorplan guesstimate wasn't as accurate as an appraiser's number, but there was at least some sense of being able to compare Property A to Property B. But then the new kids came in ... and man, sometimes their numbers don't even seem anchored to ANYTHING. Look at the many threads on this board looking for "missing square footage."

And if you're listing broker and your competitors lie...what do you say? "If Competitor X were selling this property, they'd use Y number, but I think it's really closer to Z, honestly?"

What's more, given that the standards were one thing in one decade, and then they changed a decade or so later, the seller will be like "why do you have to tell people it's XX square feet smaller than the number I was given when I bought it?" That, my friend, is a fun conversation to have.

On condos it's easier, there's a number that comes from the offering plan, and the broker can just point to it.

HOWEVER, condos can (and do) include square footage of the unit's share of the building's common spaces. So an X-square-foot (stated) coop will be larger than an X-square-foot (stated) condo in a low-amenity building (because even that condo will have its proportionate share of the elevator/hallways/lobby) and that will be larger still than an X-square-foot condo (stated) in a high-amenity building, which will also include its proportionate share of the dog spa and yoga studio.

ali r.
{upstairs realty}

Ali - interesting history there.

Ultimately this is yet another aspect of NY real estate designed by crooked brokers to take advantage of the unwitting buyer. We need a Loi Carrez: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loi_Carrez

@George - Do you feel as strongly about consumer protection in all area as you do in NYC real eatate? It seems to me that you are advocating for increased regulation to protect the too-busy/uneducated/stupid consumer of NYC real estate, and I am just wondering if you feel as strongly about this in other markets where the consumer is deemed by many of my native language to be fair game/prey?

George, You do realize that funny French law allows >6 foot ceiling to be counted in square footage? And if you take a big room and partition into two smaller rooms, will the resulting square footage be smaller?

The consumer definitely needs to be protected. The average person engages in so many different transactions of all kinds of natures over the course of their life and cannot be expected to be an expert in every subject. This is why licenses and certifications exist - so that a consumer can rely on the fact that at least something about what they are about to consume has been vetted by some 3rd party to some standard. If those license and certification systems are not working (i.e. license/certificate holders are successfully selling goods and services that do not meet standards) then something needs to be done - either enhance enforcement against those license/certificate holders who are shirking their responsibilities to the consumers or provide some addition protections.

Just look at this property: https://streeteasy.com/building/155-henry-street-brooklyn/3e The broker is very blatantly claiming that this 1-bed can be "easily converted" to a 2-bed, when in fact, the alternate floor plan they provide flat-out does not work. Can you really expect every prospective buyer to be so well-versed in the Housing Maintenance Code and various other applicable regulations that they'd be able to spot that what the broker claims is not actually possible? I think not. Think of the poor family who knows no better, looking for a two-bed, finds this "easily converted" 1-bed only to find out from their architect after purchasing that what was advertised to them would not be possible. It's the LREB that listed the property's responsibility to uphold their oath to the consumer and not advertise falsely.

Int, While it would be really nice to have statewide standards of square footage, politicians care more about rent stabilized tenants than people who are rich enough to afford to buy. The same for honesty in listings. The reason listing standards do not get enforced is that buyer has an agent to advice them, a lawyer (in NY at least) and option to get an appraiser. It is not that they are clicking on the internet to buy and they are done. Then there are condo offering plans one can read before buying to see how square footage was calculated and official number of bedrooms. By no means I am defending the false advertising. I am just making a point that real estate is different from click and buy consumer purchase.

MCR, I generally believe that one of the leading causes of wealth inequality is lack of anti-trust enforcement and lack of consumer protection. Hence companies or cartels come to dominate everything in the economy, which in real estate includes brokers whose cartel enforces a 6% fee, the title insurance cartel, the general "caveat emptor" attitude to seller's disclosures (including square footage), the lack of mechanisms for property buyers to hold building sponsors accountable for faulty building construction, coops who have de facto rights to discriminate on race/religion/etc, and even the government getting in on the act by taxing mortgages (used by the middle class and PoCs) less than cash purchases (used by the rich, mainly white people). Let's not even discuss redlining. We can debate other industries too.

300, I totally get your points - there is (theoretically) time for a buyer to do due-diligence and everyone has a bunch of professionals working on their behalf or otherwise advising them.

The problem taht I see is that. in reality and practice, sometimes a buyer has very little time for due-diligence because of immense market pressure and plenty of "professionals" are utterly incompetent at their jobs. Because of this in part, NY real estate transactions (and all RE transactions really) relies on disclosure, honestly, and good faith from all parties. If buyers demanded what would actually be considered a reasonable about of time to do due-diligence and demanded quality advice from their professionals, transactions would drag on, house prices would fall (because many more issues and assumed risk would come to light), and the cost of professional services would increase!

Unfortunately, the only people left holding the bag are the buyer and seller. Brokers, banks, and lawyers get to walk away with their checks and notes.

Int,

Square footage and floor plan due diligence takes 1-2 day max. There is far more time than that in a real estate transaction. Transaction cost in NYS are indeed higher than what you would see in other countries.

The biggest reason for that is the buyer's inability by law to collect the commission offered to the buying broker if they choose not to get one. Or no law that buyer have to pay their broker directly and seller can't pay. The current system is also contingency based which mean there are many potential buyers who are free-loaders if do not eventually buy rather than pay an upfront fee and retain a broker. It is not that George paid his NYC broker anything for the time his broker spent with him but still likes to complain about shitty brokers in NYC (saying only in good humor, perhaps George will send his NYC broker a holiday gift).

We do a calculation of square footage on all co-ops using software that gives you a pretty accurate measurement, takes all of 10 minutes. We generally assume the square footage being reported will be incorrect. As Ali pointed out, many times it's just information carried over that was posted by another broker years ago.

@george we're not part of the cartel, we charge a Max 3.75% Commission when we list, importantly we give 2.5% of that to the buy side agent. We rebate up to 67% of the buy side commission we receive to our client, and when we need to get creative to make a deal happen we can and do. What's nice about this is we absorb the financial hit, this doesn't impact the seller or the other agent. In fact it benefits them.

For the record, I've been interviewed twice by the New York attorney general's office who were investigating commission fixing in New York City. They also liked my business model, I've assisted a few people in the office with their transactions. They wanted to make sure that no one was causing any interference with us because of my competitive business model. Other than a few ignorant comments from from agents that don't understand antitrust laws and competitive business practices, I'm happy to say my company has been well embraced by the overall market.

Of course there are still complainers, but before I started you had zero choices when it came to transacting a real estate deal in New York, other than choosing one agent over another or one firm over another that were offering essentially the same services. I'm happy to report I now have competition that's essentially copied my model, including a couple with some young Wall Street types with VC money. Competition is good, it makes me work harder and better. And I'm certainly not saying we are the only way to do business, I just think it's good to have choices, makes for a healthier marketplace.

Keith
TBG

@George - Well said. Thank you for the reply.

Amen, George.

@keith - You are the only broker I am aware of who has actually followed the roadmap the DOJ Antitrust Division set up to disrupt the tacit collusion in the real estate industry.

@mcr it was easy once I discovered their website, where the roadmap is laid out pretty clearly...

@keith - Bravo and well done. I was concerned for your business when I first read about it on here that other agents would refuse to deal with you or make your life uncomfortable in other ways.

Honestly it's been the opposite, we are just as straightforward and transparent with opposing agents as we are with our own clients.

As I pointed out, we absorb the financial differential, which benefits the seller and their agent as our model creates very happy clients and adds some financial value that we absorb, which can help get a deal done.

But I will admit I was concerned as well when I started out! The misreading of the department of state's position on commissions only being able to be shared with other licensed brokers created some unnecessary headwinds and confusion.

A few years ago they updated their website after discussions with the attorney general's office. REBNY also sent out a letter to all members explaining you could not discriminate against companies that had a alternative approach to the traditional real estate model.

As you're probably aware, MCR the doj was suing the independent MLS organizations across the country forcing them to stop discriminatory policies against brokers offering alternative Commission models, the government was very successful. Previously the MLS would not allow me to become a member.

And I also want to give kudos to the attorneys in New York City that I spoke with. They were sincerely concerned with the potential harm that a violation of antitrust laws could cause New York City real estate buyers and sellers. Made me feel good about our local government!

The price per square foot game is a recent development, at least for residential real estate. The hyper-focus on that metric became self-fulfilling as real estate price shot ever higher, so now someone thinks a 100 sq ft discrepancy "costs them" $200,000. In metric system countries, they measure in square meters, and typically in round numbers. Rounding up and down is a "huge " difference in the NY mindset -- 10 sq meters = 110 sq feet. I built a new weekend house 10 years ago. I have not a clue how many square feet it is.

But buyers who want to compare apples to apples should take this into their own hands. If you have a dimensioned floor plan, it is likely sufficiently to scale for comparison purposes, even if the numbers are bloated. Buy a laser distance measurer for $40 (or better yet, a bidirectional one for $100). Measure one or two square or rectangular rooms in the unit. It will take 10 seconds (and you will never use a regular tape measure again). Adjust the dimensions for the room(s) you measured, and proportionally reduce all others. For loft buyers, this tends to be an easier game as one can fairly easily estimate walls-in square footage and subtract halls, elevators and stairs from real estate records.

I've seen a few tech solutions that are basically solving this problem. Point the phone at the corners, then stand in the middle of the room and pan the phone. In my tests, they were accurate to a couple of inches on 15+ foot spans. Matterport is also highly accurate and something every listing needs. The problem is that sellers should come with an accurate square footage measure. This shouldn't be a matter for buyers to diligence.

@Geroge, are you saying they shouldn't use the listed SF on the offering plan? (for condos only)

I think many sellers, agents are afraid of actual square footage when it comes to a co-op. And I think many buyers are blissfully ignorant of actual square footage in these co-ops. As George knows, when you look at apartments in Paris, the measurements are painfully accurate. It can be a little shocking if you're shopping for a studio or one bedroom.

Guess I'm just numb to it. I know we're going to have to do the calculations ourself to actually know what we're dealing with when it comes to a co-op.

IMO it should either be accurate or it should not be listed at all. I had a studio that was 490 sq ft and I knew much larger than some that were on the market listed as 500 or even 550! If I were to list that, what do I do? Do I list it accurately and risk being penalized when I shouldn't be? No - I am against inaccurate information - and I leave the field blank.

There is a $4+mn listing on Streeteasy where the listing address is wrong on purpose . What is worse - square footage misstatement or listing street misstatement? I am sure plenty of buyers saw it but no one posted a comment.

StreetEasy needs to ensure the integrity of what they present on their website. This is along the same lines of what is playing out in the social media field.

The conclusion I have come to is marketed sq feet usually reflects shares in buildings, as fp mentioned.

In coops shares don’t necessarily reflect marketed sq ft as shares of the exact same apartment in a line rise based on the higher the floor the more shares apportioned to the unit

Even if the lease is unambiguous, tenant can go to small claims and run it by a judge anyway. Judges have been known to ignore the law when the facts suggest that one party in the dispute acted like an unreasonable jerk. A judge will likely solicit additional facts to get an idea of the tenor of the entire relationship. For example, if the landlord were to introduce facts that the tenant was less than ideal throughout the tenancy, the judge might be sympathetic to the landlord. OTOH, were the tenant to produce evidence that the landlord had been an unreasonable tyrant throughout the tenancy, the judge might ignore the lease provision, putting the onus on the LL to appeal, which would likely cost more in terms of time and money than the amount in controversy. Judges have a tremendous amount of power.

oops - the above was meant for the “security deposit” thread.

Question for MCR, it somewhat aligns with this question about requiring brokers/sellers to provide accurate square footage. I've always felt in multiple bid situations there should be some sort of disclosure that has to be sent out by the listing agent/seller. I know I've encountered that in other markets as a buyer. Just seems whenever we get into this multiple bid situation there's so much ambiguity and distrust about the situation. I think it would go a long way if the agent had to put their signature to a disclosure regarding the fact multiple bids have been received.

Thoughts?

Keith
TBG

My two cents: Laws/regulations etc are only as good as the efficacy of the enforcement mechanism. Let’s say either the self-regulating MLS or REBNY governing bodies put something in place, how would you envision the regulation being enforced? Same question regarding any law put in place by a governing body? In theory, an action for fraud already covers knowingly false statements that induce a party to act, so I’m not sure putting in another rule on top of the one we already have (“don’t make material misrepresentations for personal gain!”) adds anything. I suppose it would make an agent think twice if they had to swear under penalty of perjury that there were actually multiple offers, but how would an enforcement action play out? What aggrieved party brings the complaint and to whom? How would the aggrieved party even know the agent lied?

FWIW, I love DC’s escalation clause system. You put in a bid with an escalation clause along the following lines: Initial bid of $1.5M to be increased in increments of $10K over any higher offer up to max of $1.75M. Avoids the whole best and final nonsense.

I have seen a lot of apartments listing that are straight up inaccurate. Don't believe what an agent says always do measurements. As someone looking for a larger apartment I find it frustrating.

Many people don't know what 700 square feet feels like vs 900 etc. Many units that are around 740- 800 sqft are marketed as 1000 etc. Inexperienced buyers won't notice the difference. They see multiple bedrooms, kitchen, bathroom etc (not the size of the bedroom etc, kitchen and what sqft is missing, closest missing etc).

As someone who lived in a large 2 bedroom with a balcony I'm very aware of what 700 sq feels like and find it annoying that listings and agents, sucker people into buying "large" apartments with bedrooms that are borderline legal.

Note that the iPhone has a measurement app. I learned how to use it just before I went to an open house and discovered a large square foot discrepancy. Also, it's best to compare floor plan measurements from comparable apartments in the same line by looking at the building's "Past Sales" or "Floor Plans" sections.