Buyer’s remorse is fairly common, seller’s remorse not so much.
However, in Greensboro, a case of seller’s remorse has hit the front page.
Bonnie McElveen-Hunter has made her case of seller’s remorse well known, with interviews and a letter to the editor in the Friday, March 15 News & Record.
Hunter was the seller in one of the largest single-family residential transactions in the history of Greensboro when she sold her home at 710 Country Club Drive to Roy Carroll, the founder, president and CEO of The Carroll Companies, which owns this publication.
The remorse is over the fact that Carroll this week began demolishing the house that was built by Spencer Love, the founder of Burlington Industries, and later owned by Ben Cone, a member of the family that founded Cone Mills.
Hunter, in her letter to the editor states, “Never would I have sold this house had I been aware of is inevitable destruction.”
But Hunter did sell the home to an unknown buyer. It wasn’t until after the sale was complete that Hunter discovered the buyer was Carroll.
Carroll responded to Hunter’s statements about the house with a statement of his own.
Carroll said, “As we have stated, the interior of the house was built for a 1937 lifestyle with a configuration that did not meet the needs of how we live in our homes today. Many elements of the house would not be deemed adequate by current inspection and planning requirements. As sentimental as many people may feel about this home, it did not make economic sense to renovate the main house, which is most likely why it sat on the market for several years before this sale. The process of rebuilding is common in Irving Park to create a current home with modern conveniences, safety features and efficient systems.
“We appreciate that Ms. Hunter has strong personal attachments and family memories at the home. However, she knowingly decided to sell the home. She engaged with professional agents to represent her in listing and marketing the home, and ultimately signed a contract to sell the home without conditions or restrictions. Ms. Hunter made the decision to sign the sale agreement without knowing or questioning the buyer or their intentions. No representations were given by the buyer or requested as to the buyer’s plans for the home. Once Ms. Hunter became aware of the identity of the Carroll family as the buyer, which occurred after she signed the contract, she never requested nor did we share with her any plans that we had for the home. Ms. Hunter had every right prior to signing the contract to deed restrict the property to limit the potential for the main house to be torn down. She also had the ability to seek protections for the main house on the Historic Registry. Neither was done, so the buyer and subsequent buyers have the right to do as they wish with the house. It seems disingenuous for a seller to so publicly express seller’s remorse after cashing a multi-million-dollar check.
“It was a great property in the past, and we plan to create a property that will be great for generations to come.”
My grandfather’s house was purchased and leveled for the same reason several years ago. The lot was so valuable that a wealthy buyer bought the house but leveled it to build a more modern home. Was sad to see it go but in the end we moved on. It wasn’t like we were ever going back into the house again and we never lost the great memories we had in that house.
Roy Carroll bought the land and the house. He gets to do what he wants with it. The seller has her money. End of story. Preservation Greensboro should have purchased it if they wanted to preserve it
Don’t disagree
That house is where my parents, Lib & Spencer Love, lived when I was born in August 1938. I am the last living child, the fifth, of these parents. Though I only lived in that house for a couple years after my birth, I do actually have a few memories of it. Had I been older and had more memories from that time, these would have been sad years as my parents divorced around 1940.
While it was a beautiful property, I’m sure it will again be just as beautiful. Yes, time marches, on and if Mr. Carroll builds a new and modern house worthy of its location, I’m sure Irving Park will appreciate it just as much. I’m glad he has the resources and motivation to rebuild an up-to-date and fine new home there.
My next oldest brother who had a reputation as a builder of fine homes in that area of Greensboro, actually owned that property for a brief time (approximately around the 1990’s) with the intent to renovate, remodel and update it. But he quickly learned it was a much bigger task than he could handle. So best wishes to Mr. Carroll in creating something very nice there that will once again make the neighborhood proud.
Julian Love
As much as I hate the fact that the house is being demolished, unfortunately, I must agree with Roy Carroll’s comments. The Seller could have clearly prevented this from happening, but choose for whatever reason to not Deed Restrict. We will no longer point to her former house and connect the stories of the hundreds of prominent of world figures that visited its doorsteps. We should not blame the buyer for wanting to create his own vision and history for the property.
If that was the case, old Roy wouldn’t make the purchase as it would’ve thrown a wrench in his plan to subdivide the property into 3 lots….
And subdividing is a problem for what reason? Looking online, it appears to be one of the five largest “lots” in the area. It could easily accommodate three generous homes. If a person isn’t interested in Spencer Love’s tennis court, pool and pool house, well, you have plenty of acreage to add other homes. It was a beautiful home. And I have to believe Carroll was honest about the challenges to renovate. He doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy who would bulldoze an expensive, beautiful home if it could have been upgraded. Carroll is right. If Bonnie thought it was important to preserve, she didn’t lift a finger to express that or make it happen.
I just wish Mr. Carroll had put some thought into demolishing this beautiful, historic structure. He could have built a brand new castle anywhere if all he wants is to display his perceived self importance and hubris.
Carroll DID put some thought into it and as a builder, concluded to bring it up to modern standards efficiencies, spacing, etc, it would be too expensive. He was quoted in the article. If the article was correct, the house had been on the market for a few years with no buyers. I was a beautiful home. But if Preservation GSO or other interested individuals aren’t able to step up and preserve it, what choice is their? Bonnie sold it to a total stranger and apparently didn’t have a second thought about it. Too bad you felt the need to insult Roy.
Couldn’t have put it better myself. Why not just build somewhere else? Very disturbing. Shameful.
The response from Carroll is
He did put thought into it. Multi-millions of thoughts. Renovation is expensive and invasive to the community and every aspect of the property. After any renovation, the house would still have 90 year old problems and neighbors would still complain about every change.
Tradition is often the excuse used to remain stuck in the past. I am looking forward to its future look!
Caveat vendor.
Sorry, that should be caveat venditor. My Latin’s a bit rusty.
Not much call for it in 21st Century North Carolina…
Cheap shot….all original seller had do was to make it a conditional contract and the property would still be on the market.
Who knows? Maybe Bonnie tried that and nobody was interested in buying a house and having the former owner dictate what the new owner can do with it. After a few years, she collected $4.5 million and then criticizes the buyer. Very immature.
Seller’s remorse. Way to spin this to make your boss look good. Total Media bias
I look forward to seeing what Roy Carroll ends up having built. It’s his home and his business.
History is unimportant. Power is everything so you sniveling peons should keep your mouths shut.
Bingo! Hope this event does more to educate the public about freedoms we all enjoy, versus having some “do-gooders” wanting to have politicians step in and block sales like this. Bonnie could have had deed restrictions on the property if she wanted, but she thought there would be more people like her that would want the home as is. . .which were very few due to the 2-year time on the market.
Her whining is only virtue signaling to the rest of her crew, but’s let not ignore she could have prevented that, but still cashed the check. RINO’s are so easy to spot.
My grandparents (I’m 67) lived literally around the corner on Kirkpatrick (1504), so I’ve admired the house forever. Played with Bunny and A. I understand Mr. Carrolls position, and based on his track record of building outstanding properties, I expect nothing less than a work of architectural art that will lessen the sting of the loss of the previous home. Make us proud, Roy!
He’s your boss so keep printing stories, but a gentleman would let it die…..let it die. True it’s his to do whatever he wants, but he’s never really shown a lot of respect for the citizens of Greensboro. What are we supposed to expect? I just pray he respects the neighborhood and builds a deserving home that doesn’t scream, I’m on Forbes Billionaire list again and again and again. I have nothing personal against the man, but he has never come down to the Greensboro citizen level. He flaunts his money. Maybe I would too if I could pay my bills. I wonder if he will actually live ther and mingle with the Irving Park commoners.
How is Roy building a house in that neighborhood “flaunting” any more than Spencer Love, the Cones, the Richardsons, Price & Bryans and all the others? Love built his palace during the Depression while the rest of GSO was trying to get by, Get a little perspective!
Your comments do more harm and expose division in the community. Bonnie McElveen-Hunter did not do her homework and “thought” the buyer would mirror her feeling about the home. Shows she doesn’t know anything about real estate. All of the whiners about Roy Carroll need to look in the mirror and ask if they would want people to chastise them for doing the same think. It’s real estate people, not a social party.
It is always sad to see a fine old home with a lot of history demolished and removed from the landscape. I was in this home once on business and yes I can attest to the fact that it was indeed an elegant place of residence. However, even as a very conservative individual I can see the need to change some things and move on when the time comes. Roy Carol sees this need and I have confidence that he will replace this fine old home with something that the neighborhood will eventually be proud of.
The previous owner cashed the check didn’t she?
Most likely, the seller did not put restrictions on the buyer of the house because she had no idea that it would be demolished. However, the fact that the buyer used (as I understand) a buyer’s agent outside the area and because the buyer was not disclosed at the time of the contract signing (as I understand,) should have been a red flag to the seller if she had concerns about the house. Out of regard for nature and the neighborhood, it is hoped that part of the plan for the property is not to subdivide the three (3) acres. There is no compelling reason not to divide the three (3) acres. Welcome to the worry rural residents face when a developer buys land for a housing development or a school board for an unwanted and unneeded school.
I read somewhere and I can not find it again that he intends on dividing the lots and building 3 homes. Anyone else heard this?
I can’t really feel sorry for someone not doing their homework, then rolling up in a new Mercedes, an $1,100 dress, $30k worth of jewelry, Prada shoes & a Gucci bag to make a complaint about what the rightful owner did with his own property.
I do not know about your description above. What I do know, the fairest thing in life is that we all die. A person’s billions will not exempt him from the grim reaper. A person’s race, religious affiliation, political standing, or philanthropic endeavors will not matter. We will all face the same fate. For the short time we are here, live by the rule imprinted on the 12-inch ruler we were all given when first entering grammar school back in the day: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Very simple “golden” rule; a rule of ethics of reciprocity. It appears there may have been deceit by the buyer in the transaction. However, the seller had an obligation, too; lesson learned too late.
There was no deceipt by the buyer. He was never asked his intentions.
When someone sells a house, they need to understand that they don’t have any say so about that house anymore. They don’t want it anymore, they agree with another party on a price, then trade property for cash. End of story.
No one else should have any say so on what someone does with their newly purchased property, either. This could lead me into a tangent on HOAs, but I’ll stop here
Deceit is not just by direct action. When information is concealed, that is deceit also. There is a reason that the buyer apparently did not appear in person during any element of the transaction with the seller. Why? Because he did not want to divulge his intent to demolish the house; or to be asked an awkward question that he did not want to lie about, therefore, deceit.
Tom is dead right.
After you sell your house, it belongs to the new owner NO IFS ANDS OR BUTS.
He can demolish it, and that is his right.
The question has nothing to do with property rights; nothing to do with demolishing the house after purchase. The questions of deceit and responsibility are about what happened BEFORE the purchase of the house. Don’t conflate before and after.
******
Don’t conflate silence with deceit, Term Limits.
******
Well she sold to a developer. Developers have a mantra……the highest and best use…….meaning also the most profit. It is common for wealthy individuals and corporations to conceal their identity behind an agent in order to obtain the best price. Now if she was lied to about the buyer she may have a case but if she didn’t pointedly ask its most likely on her. She could be laying rhe grounds for legal action but in the end the house is already in the back of dump trucks heading to White Street. I wonder how long a time it was between the closing of the sale and the equipment showing up. I bet not long lol.
Well, Mr. Farquhar, now you know why developers are not held in high regard. Many are viewed as grifters who come to town to make a buck and leave town with a pocket full of silver, leaving counties and municipalities to deal with the increased need for schools, road improvements, and crime to name a few consequences. Most city and county governments have never met a developer they did not like, hence many housing developments and apartments are going up as this is being written.
Hi Term….I’ve personally delt with a few developers in my time and have been fortunate each time could be considered a win-win. I don’t feel in this certain instance that any development Carroll does will have much impact on the need for schools or infrastructure and hopefully not crime. But to your larger point I guess we only need to look as far as Summerfield to see the other end of the spectrum. Seems to me in this case the original owner got substantial compensation. Now the developer will build and make his couple million and everyone can go on down the road.
Support personal property rights. Apply those personal property rights to each person’s own body. You can add to, change or remove anything from one’s own property/body. Would make the world a much more peaceful place if the same rules applied.