Real Estate Appraisal Forum

appraisersforum.com logo
The Premiere Online Community for Real Estate Appraisers!
 Fastest Way to Find a Real Estate Appraiser Enter Zip Code:
 
 
Go Back   Appraisers Forum > Real Estate Appraisal Forums > Appraisal Review
Register Help Our Rules Calendar Archives Mark Forums Read


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 12-13-2010, 12:07 PM
jim kasparian jim kasparian is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Massachusetts
State: Massachusetts
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 62
Default Wrong form?

Doing a review in which a general appraiser did a 6 unit on the 1025 form. I know a 71b would be the way to go but what is the best way do you think to address it in the report (2000)
Sponsored Links

  #2  
Old 12-13-2010, 12:17 PM
jim kasparian jim kasparian is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Massachusetts
State: Massachusetts
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 62
Default Wrong Form

Also there is no real development of the income approach which in this market/property is driven by income.
  #3  
Old 12-13-2010, 01:18 PM
cjski cjski is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
State: California
Professional Status: Licensed Appraiser
Posts: 210
Default

I don't have a clue...

...but can a certified residential review a 6 unit property?
  #4  
Old 12-13-2010, 01:35 PM
Smokey Bear's Avatar
Smokey Bear Smokey Bear is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The "OC" in Republican Land (Oh no!)
State: California
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 12,470
Default

Quote:
...but can a certified residential review a 6 unit property?
That was my question too. Assuming, of course, that you aren't doing it in conjunction with a CG.
__________________
For God's sake, if you need to take legal action, GET A LAWYER. I'm not giving legal advice.
  #5  
Old 12-13-2010, 03:16 PM
Aprazr's Avatar
Aprazr Aprazr is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
State: Texas
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 675
Default

Would you not need the form 2000A? I am doing one right now and the lender has requested that since the OA was completed on the 1025 (2-4 Family/Duplex) that the 2000A be utilized for this purpose. (Review for 2-4 family) Maybe not though, since it is a 9 unit (?)

'Blessings'
Gregg
__________________
Some day it will all make sense.................
  #6  
Old 12-13-2010, 09:39 PM
jim kasparian jim kasparian is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Massachusetts
State: Massachusetts
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 62
Default my fault

The appraisal was done by a cert gen. Prob not used to the 71B form. I am guessing the norm would be a narritive but the bank needed something in the resi family. I can understand the appraiser's mind set but it was not correct with the boundry of resi vs commercial. It is like doing a multi on a condo form....even worse really.... the income approach is an accurate and needed approach for this property. The value is not properly developed.
  #7  
Old 12-13-2010, 09:43 PM
jim kasparian jim kasparian is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Massachusetts
State: Massachusetts
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 62
Default by the way

Yes it is on a regular field review form.
  #8  
Old 12-13-2010, 11:11 PM
David Wimpelberg's Avatar
David Wimpelberg David Wimpelberg is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamptons, NY
State: New York
Professional Status: Certified General Appraiser
Posts: 15,824
Default

Fannie does not lend on 5+ unit properties, and thus their forms are not designed to deal with them. IMHO, it is inappropriate to use the 71B form to report a review, just as it is inappropriate to use the 1025 or 2000 forms to report an appraisal.

If this is a GSE loan, just noting that the property is 6 units is all they would need, because they won't be lending on it anyway.

I have come across similar situations with lenders, notably 5+ unit properties or certain residential properties in commercial zones. All I was required to do was check facts and note the use of the property. I never got into analysis or value, since that was outside the scope of my license. I could worked with a CG and done so, but it was a non-starter since they weren't going to lend on it anyway, nor wanted to pay the appropriate commercial fee.
  #9  
Old 12-14-2010, 10:16 AM
jim kasparian jim kasparian is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Massachusetts
State: Massachusetts
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 62
Default I agree with that

But to clarify....we are doing a review on an appraisal (field review form 2000_05). The appraised property is a six unit apartment done on a multi-fam form. I am stating that it should never have been done this way in the first place. Regardless of who they get to fund the loan, given its use the appraisal doesn't consider the income approach to value. I would be guessing why the appraisal was done on this form in the first place but want to cover my bases in filling out the review.
Jim
  #10  
Old 12-14-2010, 10:29 AM
Denis DeSaix Denis DeSaix is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Northern California
State: California
Professional Status: Certified General Appraiser
Posts: 15,181
Default

In my opinion and based on what you are stating, the issue is fundamental and simple: If the report did not include the income approach, then it is not credible.

If it were me, I'd state my conclusions and rationale (original report not credible due to lack of income approach), rate it "poor", and state that since the original report is not credible as-is, it is not sufficiently credible for the reviewer to use in order to conclude an independent opinion of value. I'd add the fact that the communication vehicle (the form used) is not consistent with or designed for the property being appraised, and this inconsistency adds to the non-credibility of the report and its results.

Review conclusion: Original report is "poor quality" and cannot be relied upon for review valuation purposes; no review value conclusion possible.
Case closed.
Sponsored Links

Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump




Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
     Terms of Use  Privacy Policy
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at AppraiserSites.com

Fastest Way to Find a Real Estate Appraiser Enter Zip Code:
Partner Sites:
AppraiserUSA.com - National Appraiser Directory AllDomainsUSA.com - Domain Name Registration
DeadbeatListings.com - Deadbeat ListingsAppraiserSites.com - Web Hosting for the Professional Real Estate Appraiser
Find FHA Appraisers - FHA Appraiser Search Commercial Appraisers - Commercial Appraiser Search
Relocation Appraisal - Find Relocation Appraisers Domain Reseller - Business Opportunity
Home Security Buzz - Home Security Info Radon Testing - Radon Gas Info
My Medicare Forum - Medicare Info Stop Smoking Help - Help Quitting Smoking
CordlessPhoneStore.com - Great Cordless Phones AndroidTabletCity.com - Android Tablet Computers

Follow AppraisersForum.com:          Find us on Facebook            Follow us on Twitter


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:57 PM.

SiteMap: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93