Adjustment for pool after the review

[PropertyEconomics]

When these things happen and there is no market data ,,, I almost always mention it in the final reconcilliation of value ... I would say something like ...

Sale 1 sets the upper limits of value as adjusted, however, the appraiser notes this sale has a superior pool by comparison with that found within the subject. While there is a lack of imperical data with which to extract a market derived adjustment, this factor leads the appraiser to conclude the market value of the subject lies below the adjusted indication of Sale 1.

You have recogninzed it, stated you cant measure an adjustment .. but considered it in your final value estimate.

For what its worth .. thats how I handle features like that when I cant measure a value difference.

 

[hastalavista]

If I thought the pool was superior and it would have more value in the market, I'd consider increasing the value.

Did you do paired sales analysis to extract the adjustments of your pools in your original report? I don't do them on every report.

In the same neighborhood, I've seen pools add $25k to $75k, depending on what kind of amenities (rock waterfalls, infinity pools, wading pools with their own beaches, saltwater pools) . And I've done paired sales analysis to justify an adjustment difference (I doubt if I hit it right on the mark, but the point I made was the superior pool added more value to house A than the standard pool added to house B).

One size pool adjustment for significantly different pools in a neighborhood that values pool amenities may not be correct.

I agree with PE that you don't have to make an explicit dollar adjustment; you can make an implicit adjustment by considering it in the point-value placement of your subject within your adjusted range; you can weight the value toward the higher end (just make sure you note your method in the report).

And finally, to answer your direct question: If I thought the reviewer was correct, I'd make the adjustment in a heartbeat. If I thought the reviewer was incorrect, I'd change nothing.

Good luck!

 

[bart nathan]

In the Lending industry jobs when its slow you gotta make yourself look busy otherwise there is no need for your position.

 

[James Andreas]

I'll identify exceptional water features or hardscape in the grid. In SoCal this is typically adjusted in all but entry-level neighborhoods. IMHO

It sounds like Comp 1 was weighted and the reviewer discovered the superior pool and is pulling loose threads. Perhaps you did recognize the difference and simply overlooked the comment, but it was fully considered in analysis and reconcilliation -- provide an explanation without revising the report.

 

[CURT VAN HOOSER]

Since the reviewer wants an adjustment for the superior pool, I'd give it to them -- but it would be more of a nominal adjustment, in the $5k to $10k range.

Hey Rockie, watch me pull an adjustment out of my hat!

 

[Terry Caldwell]

Adjustments for pool size, paver vs. concrete decks, disappearing edges, waterfalls and spa's would, in many cases, be speculative or just misleading. If you see no market support for adjustments, don't make them.

While it would be appropriate to comment on the impact of this pool and its affect on the final analysis and opinion of value, why stick you neck out for a reviewer without hard facts? Make a comment about no market date supporting adjustments if you see none, and move on.

 

[c w d]

What Terry said. If you can't derive an adjustment because of the lack of market data then perhaps, God forbid, there isn't any adjustment to be made. Go figure. Putting in an arbitrary adjustment to appease a critic does not make it "more better".

 

[Mike Kennedy]

My waterfall is bigger than your waterfall? sheesh. A pool is a pool, a depreciating amenity which may or may not have ANY market value. Often they must be removed to sell the property. If the market indicates typical pools range $20-30k and Mr. Mine-is-Bigger.....decides to create a "masterpiece" with imported grecian sculptures, hand-laid, marble fascia etc......... or a 200' waterfall....... the market will decide its' contributory value. Excess size, waterfall, quality contributes nothing. As long as the report addressed market reaction to any F.O.S.A. , the Appraisers' job is done. Underwriters "fishing" for additional value to support loans - have no business re-writing an opinion of value that is supported.

 

[Lee Lansford]

When these things happen and there is no market data ,,, I almost always mention it in the final reconcilliation of value ... I would say something like ...

Sale 1 sets the upper limits of value as adjusted, however, the appraiser notes this sale has a superior pool by comparison with that found within the subject. While there is a lack of imperical data with which to extract a market derived adjustment, this factor leads the appraiser to conclude the market value of the subject lies below the adjusted indication of Sale 1.

You have recogninzed it, stated you cant measure an adjustment .. but considered it in your final value estimate.

For what its worth .. thats how I handle features like that when I cant measure a value difference.

I agree.

Not everything in the market can be measured.

I might add in my comments for the reconciliation of the sales comparison approach that "the property with the superlative pool has lesser weighting accorded it than..."

Just a thought.

 

[Lee Lansford]

Adjustments for pool size, paver vs. concrete decks, disappearing edges, waterfalls and spa's would, in many cases, be speculative or just misleading. If you see no market support for adjustments, don't make them.

While it would be appropriate to comment on the impact of this pool and its affect on the final analysis and opinion of value, why stick you neck out for a reviewer without hard facts? Make a comment about no market date supporting adjustments if you see none, and move on.

Again...I agree with Terry's approach to the problem!

Case closed, yes?