1004mc

[ucbruin]

Okay, I apparently posted confusing info....

I do take my data from "neighborhood" and not from "general" but the value ranges on page 1 does't necessarily match the top of page 2.

 

[residentialguy]

Okay, I apparently posted confusing info....

I do take my data from "neighborhood" and not from "general" but the value ranges on page 1 does't necessarily match the top of page 2.

Why would it differ? They're asking the same info - comps within the neighborhood that have taken place within the past 12 mos

 

[J Grant]

neighborhood trends ( increasing declining etc) is not the same as value range...only trend section reflects MC/competing properties for subject...I also use value range of what is around subject. (hope that is right)

The form though could be much better... millions developing CU, can't they spend a little bit and redo their outdated, awful forms?

 

[residentialguy]

The form though could be much better... millions developing CU, can't they spend a little bit and redo their outdated, awful forms?

Absolutely agree!

 

[J Grant]

Can't even fit a full borrower name on the line lol for starters.

 

[ucbruin]

Why would it differ? They're asking the same info - comps within the neighborhood that have taken place within the past 12 mos

Please specify what you mean...

Neighborhood vs General
or
Page 1 vs top of page 2/MC

 

[ucbruin]

neighborhood trends ( increasing declining etc) is not the same as value range...only trend section reflects MC/competing properties for subject...I also use value range of what is around subject. (hope that is right)

The form though could be much better... millions developing CU, can't they spend a little bit and redo their outdated, awful forms?

Again, I must be misstating what I mean...sorry.

I'm not talking "trend" but rather "one-unit housing" info on the 1004.

 

[residentialguy]

Please specify what you mean...

Neighborhood vs General
or
Page 1 vs top of page 2/MC

The data grid on the 1004MC form should match top of pg 2.
The overall trends on the 1004MC should match page 1 trends.
However, the data grid on the 1004MC form probably won't be enough data to line up with the overall trends on the form. You could have 4 comp sales in your data grid that show a decline, however, because of the lack of data necessary to show trend, it may give a false reading. Your trend box is to be the result of a full reliable market analysis, which you include in your additional comments to support the overall trend..

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

most likely the data is too small to be a reliable indicator of trends.

...rendering it "useless" usually.
Fanniespeak

"In those situations, the appraiser must complete the form with the information he or she has for the defined neighborhood/area—the lack of data may speak to what is occurring in that area.​

And the lack may be meaningless piffle. Mechanical analysis of data too limited is decried on this site when arguing against the use of statistics and MLR, but somehow is perfectly fine for analysis of the nuances of market sales subject to randomness..."Fooled by Randomness" comes in mind. ("So they look for explanations even when there are none.")

do NOT expand your neighborhood boundaries in order to include more data.​

The problem with all the above is that you, I, and a dog named "Boo" do not define the same neighborhood with the identical comparables nor vet the available sale exactly the same nor can we be expected to....or do you think we can intuitively predict what our "peers" do to define a "neighborhood"?

Which "neighborhood" is "competitive" with which? Hint - the map might look more like a donut in my opinion...

 

[residentialguy]

...rendering it "useless" usually.

It's not useless. Maybe useless to show a trend, but it's good information, regardless.