Another question about multiple parcels.

[glenn walker]

One parcel on legal. Here's an update: after spending a lot of time calling, and calling, I was finally able to talk to a senior planning official with the county. It turns out that it is more probable than not in his opinion that this ~3YO house was built over a property line. The owner may have known this (she owns both parcels), because after confronting her with this information her story has changed about where the property line is. I had previously confirmed with her and a county P&Z tech (yes the same county that apparently let them build over a property line). Now I get to spend my weekend correcting this mess. Woo hoo! This is a good catch by title, because I can only imagine the number of issues that could arise out of this. I'm angry with the owner and frustrated with the county for being incompetent, and myself because I feel like I should have caught this too, and it would have saved a lot of work now.

Well you learned something- new -better than screwing up and getting sued three years later : )

 

[sputnam]

Of course you could value them together. How the subject property is financed isn't relevant to the real estate that you include in your appraisal. Lenders often want to include as much property as possible as collateral for the loan. And, they often expect the appraiser to also discover other parcels that are also owned by the borrower. If the adjacent parcel is a separate, marketable property... and if, the Lender didn't expressly request that you appraise all adjoining parcels also owned by the borrower... then I'd tell them...."Fine. However since that changes the Scope of Work, there will be an additional fee." Then charge them whatever you want. A lot of times, when you tell them they will have to pay... they suddenly discover that they don't really need that after all.

Of course, you could tell them 'No' and add comments stating that the borrower owns an additional, adjoining parcel that is not included in the appraisal.