Bad advice from Fannie--"Multiple Parcels" from Dec. 2019 'Appraiser Update'

[George Hatch]

The point is not whether or not it's okay for Fannie to ask the question or to use their own criteria for making a loan decision. It is. They can certainly ask the question and we can certainly answer the question.

The point under discussion is the wisdom and propriety of telling appraisers to call than answer MV when that may be the case only some of the time. As in, not "never" and also not "always".

 

[J Grant]

The point is not whether or not it's okay for Fannie to ask the question or to use their own criteria for making a loan decision. It is. They can certainly ask the question and we can certainly answer the question.

The point under discussion is the wisdom and propriety of telling appraisers to call than answer MV when that may be the case only some of the time. As in, not "never" and also not "always".

It is indeed of earth shaking importance if the few assignments in a decade combo lot assignment an appraiser MV might be - meanwhile thousands of appraisals a week are data dump with a signature to meet a fast turn time and keep the "scorecard" up, as non appraiser "data collectors" take over the inspection process. What a joke....

Shows the head in sand denial on the part of academics-

 

[djd09]

one can easily pull up all the the threads from the early 2000's to now about this topic. the concerned appraisers either live in a bubble or are being disingenuous at best.

 

[Lee Lansford]

one can easily pull up all the the threads from the early 2000's to now about this topic. the concerned appraisers either live in a bubble or are being disingenuous at best.

Might you be a bit specific?

 

[George Hatch]

It is indeed of earth shaking importance if the few assignments in a decade combo lot assignment an appraiser MV might be - meanwhile thousands of appraisals a week are data dump with a signature to meet a fast turn time and keep the "scorecard" up, as non appraiser "data collectors" take over the inspection process. What a joke....

Shows the head in sand denial on the part of academics-

I have never - not once - advocated that appraisers take shortcuts. I didn't need to inspect the property we've been talking about in order to identify the potential question or to recognize it as being worth looking into.

 

[J Grant]

I have never - not once - advocated that appraisers take shortcuts. I didn't need to inspect the property we've been talking about in order to identify the potential question or to recognize it as being worth looking into.

You never advocate for it, yet refuse to acknowledge the reality that imposing tighter and tighter turn times leads to shortcuts.

Anyway, back to topic--

Most have (finally, ) agreed that an opinion of market value can be opined for these combo properties. However, the fact that in most markets such few sales exist make it harder to get a pattern to compare market value to. Market value is a concept. Much of the results in appraisal development are measured by comparison. With such few sales of similar properties to compare to, how is the appraisal problem solved? Some offer better ways to solve it than others.

 

[Andrei Fin]

The point under discussion is the wisdom and propriety of telling appraisers to call than answer MV when that may be the case only some of the time. As in, not "never" and also not "always".

Wait, what? Are you saying HBU might not "always" equal MV? Lee, what do you make of this?

The newsletter discusses loan eligibility for a subject property. "To be eligible for Fannie Mae... parcels must..." If it's not eligible then "If the criteria is not met, contact your lender for next steps". You know that a five unit building is not eligible for Fannie Mae so you inform the client and it's over, same thing.

They say the property must, not the appraiser must. The only time they instruct the appraiser is "you must determine if the additional parcel is excess or surplus land". Oh the horror.

 

[George Hatch]

You never advocate for it, yet refuse to acknowledge the reality that imposing tighter and tighter turn times leads to shortcuts.

Anyway, back to topic--

Most have (finally, ) agreed that an opinion of market value can be opined for these combo properties. However, the fact that in most markets such few sales exist make it harder to get a pattern to compare market value to. Market value is a concept. Much of the results in appraisal development are measured by comparison. With such few sales of similar properties to compare to, how is the appraisal problem solved? Some offer better ways to solve it than others.

That's untrue and you should know better. I acknowledge it. I have never - ever - not acknowledged it. And I always criticize the appraisers who *choose* to say one thing and do another.

With that said, a lender who says they only need x and the appraiser who meets that x is not taking a shortcut so long as they actually do the same thing they're saying. This is the point the 1004 Cult refuses to concede.

The "house+extra" is just another example of that. It's fine to do it, just don't call it something that it isn't.

 

[Andrei Fin]

I don't think you are calling it something it isn't, if you acknowledge and disclose that the HBU is NO. If you find true comps then yes, but in our Carmichael example your comps weren't true comps.

I am also going to agree with Lee that the last line in the newsletter is poorly written.

 

[George Hatch]

I'm done squabbling with you about the Carmichael property because my resources are extremely limited. I know I brought to your attention elements which you obviously never considered, so that's all I intended to do in the first place.

If you want, I can teach you how to write an HBU summary for your SFR reports. It's not hard.