Fannie Mae and "Multiple Parcels"

[Mr Rex]

Back to the Q. Two lots - one improved , one vacant sold as one economic unit. Otherwise no difference. The HBU - as if vacant and available for its highest and best use - is identical for each lot. "As is" one is improved and one lot is not. So when we all talk about HBU...what is left out of the discussion is that lenders want to know if the bare lot is worth more than if improved. That isn't a full analysis of HBU as is and as if vacant.

If a significant number of sales over the years included extra lots, then you can call it plottage if you like, you could call slumgullion if you want. But its HBU as vacant is the same. Its value is the same. A second lot is not invisible. It is not surplus (which normally means it is an oversized lot.) It adds more than mere marginal utility of more space around or adjacent to a house.

What I think I am seeing are people appraising an improvement with land instead of appraising the actual underlying property (land) with an improvement. I will do what I've done for 30 years. Value the lot at market to add to the improved property value while examining whether or not it detracts from the improved property. That is rare indeed. Same with farmland. Be it 1 tax card or 20, I appraise it as an economic unit, not the sum of 20 disassociated parcels.

But, but, but... here is a former member of the IL state board inserting his perturbance as a former board member as if it makes a tinkers damn in the whole scheme of things. Can it be appraised "As Is" ? Is there any larger danger in doing it "AS IS" to the lender (with public backing via the former GSEs etc) or the public trust? "As is" versus a "HC HBU"? No. Hell No! 'So WTF is the problem other than some antiquated Appraisal Edicts than ran their course about the time the dinosaurs died. And as Terrell and others have said, these are State Appraisal Board Members that tinker with folks livelihood. My GOD, no wonder the profession is in danger of failure.

 

[Carnivore]

But only because of that. And even then, hopefully you would have the decency to not s hare without their permission.

I get your overall point and I would have no reason to share it, other than if I felt it was necessary. That's why I would contact my POC first. But that's just me.

But I have to say this, I have not encountered anyone at FNMA who was not willing to help me with an issue. Quite the contrary...

Whats interesting about this issue is that it has existed for a long time, Since it came out with the new format and even before.

If you recall when the new format cane out we had another issue with the certifications and limitations. When that was discovered the issue exploded all across our industry and emails, phone calls flooded FNMA. They finally relented.

I have a feeling this current issue(which has existed for a long time) will grow legs. What surprises me is it took this long to come out in the open.

 

[Lee Lansford]

But, but, but... here is a former member of the IL state board inserting his perturbance as a former board member as if it makes a tinkers damn in the whole scheme of things. Can it be appraised "As Is" ? Is there any larger danger in doing it "AS IS" to the lender (with public backing via the former GSEs etc) or the public trust? "As is" versus a "HC HBU"? No. Hell No! 'So WTF is the problem other than some antiquated Appraisal Edicts than ran their course about the time the dinosaurs died. And as Terrell and others have said, these are State Appraisal Board Members that tinker with folks livelihood. My GOD, no wonder the profession is in danger of failure.

What are these "Appraisal Edicts" that you assert as being antiquated?

 

[Carnivore]

Lee Brought this out in the open for discussion. GH pointed out it appeared to be an Expediency.

I was aware of it also, as did many many others here, but because of my business model it was not really an issue for me. AND for some odd reason I never have had this problem in a Mtg Transaction type appraisal, that I can recall.

I enjoy the banter. It keeps me on my toes.

 

[alebrewer]

Whats interesting about this issue is that it has existed for a long time, Since it came out with the new format and even before.

Agree 100 %

 

[J Grant]

You confuse one's desire to mortgage multiple parcels with the proper way in which to appraise a property for its MV. The two are not the same and your interest as an appraiser is not the same as though you were a mortgage broker.

Get beyond platitudes, what is the "proper way" to appraise this, other than decline the assignment? Describe it please. I already described how I would approach it. Your turn.

You also never answered my question, if you mark the NO box HBU on page one, what is the "other use" ?
Note, I answered all your questions , but when I ask a question, you do not answer it, instead respond with platitudes or lectures.

 

[Lee Lansford]

But, but, but... here is a former member of the IL state board inserting his perturbance as a former board member as if it makes a tinkers damn in the whole scheme of things. Can it be appraised "As Is" ? Is there any larger danger in doing it "AS IS" to the lender (with public backing via the former GSEs etc) or the public trust? "As is" versus a "HC HBU"? No. Hell No! 'So WTF is the problem other than some antiquated Appraisal Edicts than ran their course about the time the dinosaurs died. And as Terrell and others have said, these are State Appraisal Board Members that tinker with folks livelihood. My GOD, no wonder the profession is in danger of failure.

As to my "perturbance" , you may want to conduct some additional research to gain understanding on this issue.

Suggest: Open your copy of the current USPAP.

Accompanying USPAP are the "USPAP FAQs".

Turn to #176 VALUE IN USE REQUEST FROM FEDERALLY REGULATED LENDER,

See #211 APPRAISING TWO LOTS AS ONE

BTW, if it matters, yes, I have had conversation with the person who was primarily (understanding that these things don't pop-up based upon one person's whims) responsible for the writing of #211.

Or, are these more "Appraisal Edicts"?

 

[Lee Lansford]

Get beyond platitudes, what is the "proper way" to appraise this, other than decline the assignment? Describe it please. I already described how I would approach it. Your turn.

You also never answered my question, if you mark the NO box HBU on page one, what is the "other use" ?
Note, I answered all your questions , but when I ask a question, you do not answer it, instead respond with platitudes or lectures.

SEE post #67 for some important required learning on this topic.

The other use? For the vacant parcel (following from my example) to be developed with SFR improvements.

 

[J Grant]

SEE post #67 for some important required learning on this topic.

The other use? For the vacant parcel (following from my example) to be developed with SFR improvements.

The HBU qesion on page ne is for the entire property that is the subject of appraisal, ( subject is a house AND adjacent lot ). You still have not answered the question for it.

We've discussed the HBU issue of vacant parcel for pages now. That is not the question I asked

I asked since you indicate you would mark NO on page one, what is the other use then ?

 

[J Grant]

SEE post #67 for some important required learning on this topic.

The other use? For the vacant parcel (following from my example) to be developed with SFR improvements.

You still have not answered, what would be YOUR "proper" way of appraising this? I stated how I would approach it in the other thread.