1004mc

[Rich Heyn]

I maybe incorrect in my interpretation (not surprising if this is the case)
One Unit Housing section considers all sales in the neighborhood
And
MC considers comparable sales in the neighborhood.

That is not correct. Here is a link to a blog that you may find useful:

https://www.aciweb.com/1004mc-revis...edominant-price-and-age-rangepredominant-age/

 

[hastalavista]

That is not correct. Here is a link to a blog that you may find useful:

https://www.aciweb.com/1004mc-revis...edominant-price-and-age-rangepredominant-age/

Hey, Rich- (good to see you post)

Just to be clear....

As I read the difference in the prior and recent FNMA directions in the article, in regard to price and age:

If I'm appraising a one-unit (SFR) than the price-rancge on page 1 reflects the range of prices (excluding the odd-ball outliers) for that property type; one-unit. My subject may be at the upper-, mid-, or low-end of that price range, but the range reported on page 1 is the range of all of them.
Ditto for age range.

What I don't want to do is put different property-types into that page 1 summary. I would not include condo prices if I'm appraising an SFR.

Land use, alternatively, includes all property types (residential and non-residential).

Trends are specific to the subject's submarket within the neighborhood. These are the trends that my subject and its competitors are experiencing. However, if the market is segmented within that property type (newly constructed and larger homes in a tract development might be moving up while existing homes in the neighboring development of similar-size to my subject and with whom I compete with might be stable) I am to report the trend of my subject's submarket (existing homes that are stable) in the grid-box on page 1 but I should comment on the the trend-dynamics of the other submarket in the narrative.

Did I miss anything?

 

[Rich Heyn]

Hey, Rich- (good to see you post)

Just to be clear....

As I read the difference in the prior and recent FNMA directions in the article, in regard to price and age:

If I'm appraising a one-unit (SFR) than the price-rancge on page 1 reflects the range of prices (excluding the odd-ball outliers) for that property type; one-unit. My subject may be at the upper-, mid-, or low-end of that price range, but the range reported on page 1 is the range of all of them.
Ditto for age range.

What I don't want to do is put different property-types into that page 1 summary. I would not include condo prices if I'm appraising an SFR.

Land use, alternatively, includes all property types (residential and non-residential).

Trends are specific to the subject's submarket within the neighborhood. These are the trends that my subject and its competitors are experiencing. However, if the market is segmented within that property type (newly constructed and larger homes in a tract development might be moving up while existing homes in the neighboring development of similar-size to my subject and with whom I compete with might be stable) I am to report the trend of my subject's submarket (existing homes that are stable) in the grid-box on page 1 but I should comment on the the trend-dynamics of the other submarket in the narrative.

Did I miss anything?

I do not believe you missed anything. You seldom do. Be well.

 

[residentialguy]

I maybe incorrect in my interpretation (not surprising if this is the case)
One Unit Housing section considers all sales in the neighborhood
And
MC considers comparable sales in the neighborhood.

I totally understand what you are saying, hence why I said earlier that page one and FNMA instructions are misleading. One Unit Housing is broader than competing properties of comps on the 1004MC. Some UAD/FNMA "experts" here have skin in the game, whether it's FNMA classes they teach or they are tied to companies that sell to GSEs....and I find they may find it in their best interest to say things a certain way and not rock the hand that feeds them.

 

[Deleted member 128537]

I use to put in a 1004MC that covered all properties for the area. But I stopped doing that and just put in the Wisconsin realtor sales data by quarter for the past 10 years. It isn't the best, but at least it does show what is happening to real estate generally.

 

[CANative]

I totally understand what you are saying, hence why I said earlier that page one and FNMA instructions are misleading. One Unit Housing is broader than competing properties of comps on the 1004MC. Some UAD/FNMA "experts" here have skin in the game, whether it's FNMA classes they teach or they are tied to companies that sell to GSEs....and I find they may find it in their best interest to say things a certain way and not rock the hand that feeds them.

Jeez... why do you write such things. You sound like djd.

Page 2 and the MC need to resonate at the same frequency. Page 1 is not the same and is broader. That's because there may be all sorts of different properties in the same neighborhood. But Page 2 and the MC are looking at properties that compete with the subject AND are in the same neighborhood.

 

[Joe Flacco]

It sounds like everybody is saying the same thing?

 

[Joe Flacco]

IMO the biggest question that comes from the 1004MC instructions is what is "comparable".

 

[ucbruin]

That is not correct. Here is a link to a blog that you may find useful:

https://www.aciweb.com/1004mc-revis...edominant-price-and-age-rangepredominant-age/

Hey, Rich- (good to see you post)

Just to be clear....

As I read the difference in the prior and recent FNMA directions in the article, in regard to price and age:

If I'm appraising a one-unit (SFR) than the price-rancge on page 1 reflects the range of prices (excluding the odd-ball outliers) for that property type; one-unit. My subject may be at the upper-, mid-, or low-end of that price range, but the range reported on page 1 is the range of all of them.
Ditto for age range.

What I don't want to do is put different property-types into that page 1 summary. I would not include condo prices if I'm appraising an SFR.

Page 2 and the MC need to resonate at the same frequency. Page 1 is not the same and is broader. That's because there may be all sorts of different properties in the same neighborhood. But Page 2 and the MC are looking at properties that compete with the subject AND are in the same neighborhood.

ALL sales within the subject's defined neighborhood reported on One-Unit Housing on page 1.
Top of page 2 and MC reflects a refined sale search of only sales considered comparable to the subject located within the subject's defined neighborhood.

Is this different from Denis and Can????

 

[Joe Flacco]

The only difference is that others are clarifying that page 1 shows all condo sales if 1073 and all single family sales if 1004. Rather than just all sales. I am pretty sure everybody is saying the same thing.