Here is the paragraph from the guide note. Overall guide note is analyzing market trends. Would imagine possible solutions to the secondary risk are tied to intended use(s), and also those risks are likely dependent on market forecasts and/or future property rights change(s).
There are two risks inherently associated with any appraisal that are of particular concern to the intended user. The first is the risk that the reliability of the value conclusion may be adversely impacted by a lack of quality data. The second is the risk that the value might not be sustainable over time. A well thought-out and clearly presented reconciliation process can assist the intended user with these risks.
In the reconciliation process, the appraiser must consider the quality as well as the quantity of data, and how those factors might have impacted the quality of the value opinion. In a slower market with fewer transactions, there are fewer sales available for analysis in the sales comparison approach. Also, when there are fewer transactions, there is less market evidence available for selection of capitalization and discount rates.
The reconciliation process may indicate that more research is needed or that new analyses must be performed. It may reveal conflicts or unresolved questions that need to be answered.
When necessary, the appraisal report should include a discussion of evidence that the value conclusion may not be sustainable into the foreseeable future. This is potentially a controversial and challenging conversation to have with one’s client, but it may
be a critical issue to highlight."
We used to do an extra form called Adverse Factors Summary.
It was one page and went in front of the appraisal.
Basically I copied the relevant comments, usually some kind of ob, from the appraisal to this page.
It also had 4 check boxes for overall risk rating.
Seemed like a useful thing for the underwriter.
Ahh, the good old AFS.