We are having a disagreement in our office over what is the proper procedure when using checkbox 4. Background: REO duplex, 48 years old, possible mold, however we are not mold experts, severe wood destroying insect damage and Add-on has "slab foundation" that tapers out over the grass to about 1 inch and you can't see any other part of it. For all we know it is only 1 inch thick! And 100 other various "this thing is falling down around my head" problems. One of us says that when you give a cost to cure and you use checkbox 4, you dislose everything you see, but only price out the things that you can such as a price to replace the moldy/damaged sheetrock, tape and paint. A cost to replace eaten up wood then paint etc. HOWEVER, since check box 4 is based on the assumption that the condition or defiency needs no repair you do not adjust for the underlaying issue since you are requiring an inspection and you do not give a price to address the underlaying issue such as the mold or termites. It would then be prudent to reserve the right to adjust your final opinion of value based on the outcome of the required inspections. This opinion would seem to be reinforced by the assumptions and limiting conditions #5. Others here in the office say that when you give a cost to cure, you give a cost to cure for all of it regardless of if you used checkbox 4. That you should be enough of a professional to address the underlaying cause of the visible defects. This group says that checkbox 4 means that after you have adjusted for everything it a assumed that nothing else will be found and nothing other than what you adjusted for and gave a cost to cure for needs correcting. Example, you would give a price determine the source of the water leading to the mold, a price to remediate the mold and then a price to repair the mold damaged items. Anyone have an opinion?