1004D completion on report from 12+ months ago

[Tacoman]

I tend to do what the report is asking for.

View attachment 70966

Yeah me too but I think the problem is the form is vague. Yes, the original requirement is completed but the conditions have changed. The report was subject to completion of some work which is done, but one could argue that other conditions have changed which would affect the estimate. Imagine an extreme scenario that I mentioned above where you go back to see that a bathroom is done and they've just removed an exterior wall and it's just plastic sheeting now. Isn't there an implied condition that everything else is basically the same?

Ultimately, I'm leaning towards yes and then an addendum so they are aware of what's going on.

I know I'm overthinking, but the form is pretty bad. The intended use saus requirements or conditions, and then it says reqs and conditions then back to or.

 

[shrubberyvaluation]

I don't get how you can say it is complete. Yes, the bath condition is complete, but now you have a house where the original kitchen is torn out and on inspection date there is no longer a functional kitchen . Now the house has a big fat repair issue/defect that it did not have before (regardless of that in they are renovating for a new kitchen )

I'd put it on hold and ask AMC how to proceed or mark no not complete and explain why wrt a defect exists now that was not present in original appraisal ( and take photos and comment the original kitchen was removed because of a renovation in progress)

Well the original conditions are complete...yes or no...I would mention the kitchen and put in CMA verbiage that the valuation is based on the property on the effective date + the hypothetical conditions.

 

[Tacoman]

I don't get how you can say it is complete. Yes, the bath condition is complete, but now you have a house where the original kitchen is torn out and on inspection date there is no longer a functional kitchen . Now the house has a big fat repair issue/defect that it did not have before (regardless of that in they are renovating for a new kitchen )

I'd put it on hold and ask AMC how to proceed or mark no not complete and explain why wrt a defect exists now that was not present in original appraisal ( and take photos and comment the original kitchen was removed because of a renovation in progress)

Just to clarify, it's some walls that came down. The kitchen is still otherwise functional, and they are still using it. Of course, that could change if they rearrange but at the time I saw it, that's how it was.

 

[J Grant]

Just to clarify, it's some walls that came down. The kitchen is still otherwise functional, and they are still using it. Of course, that could change if they rearrange but at the time I saw it, that's how it was.

You did not explain that until now - it kept changing

Ok, so the latest info is the original kitchen is still functional so now I would state yes it is complete and mention the some interior walls are down for an ongoing renovation

 

[Tacoman]

You are valuing it on the effective date with the hypothetical of the repairs/alterations being complete stated in the report. It is clear as day from a reporting standpoint, but I would put in CMA verbiage as if litigation would happen they may not understand the value is still for the effective date, and not the current date.

This makes sense. the OA was "on this day, if bath is hypothetically complete, estimate of value is X" So today, bath is complete, so estimate of value on historical date is X. No one can rely on that value since it's over a year old anyway.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Yes, the original requirement is completed but the conditions have changed

But it refers to the original report time after time.

 

[Tacoman]

But it refers to the original report time after time.

I agree with you and I'm being extremely critical of the form but I think it's a valid point...the conditions in the original report have not been satisfied because one of the original implied conditions was that there was a C3 kitchen. Now there is a hole running along the ceiling and floor where walls have been removed. The conditions were: bath is completed and kitchen looks like this, beds look like this, roof like this, etc.

 

[Dublin ohio]

I agree with you and I'm being extremely critical of the form but I think it's a valid point...the conditions in the original report have not been satisfied because one of the original implied conditions was that there was a C3 kitchen. Now there is a hole running along the ceiling and floor where walls have been removed. The conditions were: bath is completed and kitchen looks like this, beds look like this, roof like this, etc.

I think you are conflating the conditions at the bottom of page 2. With the condition of the property on page 1. For a completion certificate. You are addressing the conditions at the bottom of page 2

 

[CGinMN]

Nonesense. There is is no "technically" anything here. There is nothing to unsee. Mention it, yes. anything the borrower after your effective date has no bearing on your work

If your position is that it needs to be reported, then you have expanded the scope. Simple as that.

I agree with you and I'm being extremely critical of the form but I think it's a valid point...the conditions in the original report have not been satisfied because one of the original implied conditions was that there was a C3 kitchen. Now there is a hole running along the ceiling and floor where walls have been removed. The conditions were: bath is completed and kitchen looks like this, beds look like this, roof like this, etc.

The intended use of this certification of completion is for the lender/client to confirm that the requirements or conditions stated in the appraisal report referenced above have been met.

It is my interpretation that this is a reference to the HC Checkboxes 2 and 3 on the bottom of Page 2 of the URAR.

 

[Overimprovement]

I agree with most here--PER WHAT IS BEING ASKED, those items have been completed. I also agree the kitchen situation should at least be mentioned. This is to cover yourself.

This may need a 2nd look at intended use though--is this for a GSE loan? Has the lender kept this loan on hold for 2 years? Can't see a situation where the entire process wouldn't need to be started over. If it is not for an origination loan, what IS it for exactly?

Or was the loan made and closed and this is just for some bookkeeping, audit purposes perhaps? If so, maybe no mention of other current conditions is even warranted...

Quick mention/question to client could alleviate a lot of angst, IMHO.