Fannie Mae and "Multiple Parcels"

[Meandering]

I don't want you to take this the wrong way, but I think one of the reasons for some of the pushback you're getting are the constant references to who agrees with you - aka the appeal to authority. I think your explanations of the reasoning - which also motivates other people to agree with you - is sufficient to the task.

Appraisers don't tend to have a whole lot of respect for authority figures. IMO

Oh,
and Fannie's AIR requirement?

No one influenced the development or reporting of the appraisal???


I just undervalued a second lot, as if, it were just surplus land,
because
Fannie said to.




.

 

[CANative]

Market Value in Use is Not an Oxymoron - Counselors of Real Estate

In real estate appraisal, "Market Value in Use" assumes the property is sold in combination with other assets as a group. A special-purpose property will only bring its market value in use if it is sold together with other assets as part of a going concern.

www.cre.org

 

[alebrewer]

Market Value in Use is Not an Oxymoron - Counselors of Real Estate

In real estate appraisal, "Market Value in Use" assumes the property is sold in combination with other assets as a group. A special-purpose property will only bring its market value in use if it is sold together with other assets as part of a going concern.

www.cre.org

thank you for sharing. Great article.

 

[Lee Lansford]

Market Value in Use is Not an Oxymoron - Counselors of Real Estate

In real estate appraisal, "Market Value in Use" assumes the property is sold in combination with other assets as a group. A special-purpose property will only bring its market value in use if it is sold together with other assets as part of a going concern.

www.cre.org

Interesting.

For use in a Fannie form, merely strike the definition of MV that is integral to the form and insert this definition of value.

That'll work .

BTW, I understand that you are not suggesting that be done. My comment is for those who will not understand that the one definition is not the other definition of value.

 

[J Grant]

Interesting.

For use in a Fannie form, merely strike the definition of MV that is integral to the form and insert this definition of value.

That'll work .

BTW, I understand that you are not suggesting that be done. My comment is for those who will not understand that the one definition is not the other definition of value.

Lee, we understand it.. What we are saying/I am saying is that the MV opinion is for the two properties together , the value in use is the opinion addressing the second vacant lot as it contributes to the two

The dictironay of RE does state though that MV and value in use can be equal ( equal in $ amount ). Which still remains,as you said that one definition is not the other definition of value. It means market determines the $ amount value either definition applied when appraising a property

 

[CANative]

One of the problems is determining the contribution (I don't like that term in this instance) the excess land would have on the sale price without comparable sales of similar as a direct method. And that's a tough one because it is a rare occurrence. Which means indirect methods methods would have to be used, such as DCF. How many residential appraisers have a solid understanding of DCF?

 

[Carnivore]

Just as a reminder to everyone: References are made to the Current USPAP.

Specifically The two FAQ in Question that addresses the Issue.

On Jan 1, 2020 those will be incorrect

 

[alebrewer]

How many residential appraisers have a solid understanding of DCF?

See, why do you have to do this? You are denigrating residential appraisers without ANY basis for doing so. This statement has absolutely no purpose other than to make a snide comment about a subset of all appraisers. It contributes absolutely zero to the discussion.

 

[Carnivore]

See, why do you have to do this? You are denigrating residential appraisers without ANY basis for doing so. This statement has absolutely no purpose other than to make a snide comment about a subset of all appraisers. It contributes absolutely zero to the discussion.

It wasn't meant to denigrate. I don't do that. It is situational and assignment specific. There are different ways to skin a cat.

Additionally, i might point out that some will write letters or e-mails in response to that FNMA newsletter. They will cite references. Dependent on the Date of the Letter or E-mail their USPAP citations will be incorrect.

 

[alebrewer]

It wasn't meant to denigrate. I don't do that. It is situational and assignment specific. There are different ways to skin a cat.

Not sure I understand what you mean by situational and assignment specific? Do you mean that commercial appraisers use DCF more often than residential appraisers? If so - why wouldn't that be the statement made, instead of inferring that residential appraisers don't understand DCF? Again - the statement offered absolutely zero to the discussion. Have no idea what you mean by skinning a cat?...