• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Bad advice from Fannie--"Multiple Parcels" from Dec. 2019 'Appraiser Update'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Finally. Thank you

I never ignore sales history or the example it sets. But, we're looking for most probable as demonstrate by the group, not the one. And don't forget, the broker in the 2016 sale was smart enough to list both properties separately so they were at least *considering* the alternative that you are so casually dismissing.

Anyways, in addition to your subject's sale history, if you're doing an appraisal, what will all your best comps in the SCA look like? A or B?
 
Finally. Thank you

I never ignore sales history or the example it sets. But, we're looking for most probable as demonstrate by the group, not the one. And don't forget, the broker in the 2016 sale was smart enough to list both properties separately so they were at least *considering* the alternative that you are so casually dismissing.

Anyways, in addition to your subject's sale history, if you're doing an appraisal, what will all your best comps in the SCA look like? A or B?

Another Profound Statement above.

The Broker was essentially conducting a HBU on both Properties! The question: Why was the Broker Doing this? First reason is the Broker has a Fiduciary Responsibility to the Client! They also know and respect the Seller wants and needs. Why would the Broker recommend the different ways to market the properties. I think the Broker is doing this so they would be able to expand the Exposure to the widest range of potential buyers simultaneously The Broker recognizes the Seller may or may not understand that an SFR sells rather quickly in comparison to Vacant Land. Another reason the Broker has explained all this is because they want the Seller to be well Informed(Component of the common Definition of of market Value in the URAR).

So the Broker provides the Clint/aka seller (intended user of the Broker services). Three BPO's; House and its site,; The Extra site and finally the SFR, & extra Site combined. In the BPO summation the Broker spells delineates the Time it will take to sell in each BPO.

1. House and its site exposure 15-30 days
2. The Extra Site by itself will sell in about 60 days exposure because demand is relatively high for New Builds sites.
3. Thirdly the Combined House and extra site will take about 365 days exposure because demand is very low for Double Lot SFR's.

So the Brokers goes on to explain in depth to the Seller, their Client the current market. The Broker explains to the seller Jeff Bezo's is moving Amazons 2nd Hq's here because the area has changed from a Cotton Mill Industry predominate employer to a Service Based Employer and most of his employers are Young College educate crowd who value free time in the form of Mountain Biking, Hiking, hiking on the weekends. They don't want a lot of Yard Maintenance, and the Lawn Care Companies are expensive. "Sir, your HOA is strict on Grounds keeping and this extra cost equates into $20,000 less in Home Purchasing power with the two sold together.

Seller Responds lets sell both in the Shortest reasonable Time that maximizes my net. No point waiting for my money and also it leaving money on the table!

Broker says sign here on the listing agreement and I will a sign in both yards. This will be in MLS tonight so I need to have a Universal Lock Box on your front door.

Seller: Lets Do It!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question for anyone: Do you see the word(s) Federally Regulated Lender anywhere in the below Definition?

"The most probable price (in terms of money) which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: the buyer and seller are typically motivated; both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best interests; a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; payment is made in terms of cash in United States dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale."

How about this one: Determining Fair Market Value (IRS Guidelines) Fair market value is the price at which property would change hands between a willing buyer and a willing seller, neither having to buy or sell, and both having reasonable knowledge of all the relevant facts

Is this germane to our assignment?


Value-in-use is the net present value (NPV) of a cash flow or other benefits that an asset generates for a specific owner under a specific use. In the U.S., it is generally estimated at a use which is less than highest-and-best use, and therefore it is generally lower than market value.

------------------------------------------

So my 2nd question to anyone: Where is the Market Value entered on the Standard URAR 1004. and Why is it entered there and what Market Value Definition are you using to support you answer?

---------------------------------

Are Federal Banking Regulations important in this discussion as it pertains to the Bottom of Page two of the URAR?
 
Last edited:
This is an Excellent Resource. Its Canadian but 'meh' The fundamentals are the same.

Something caught my eye around page four. The reason it did was because in the last twelve months I had a couple of Fee Quote Request where the Subject Improvement was a SFR, but zoned for business. The Client/AMC did not know that... Why I did not quote was because I wasn't sure how much time it would take to develop the Appraisal. In other words the Use would be continued as Residential because growth and change was very very slow.


Common Errors
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Someone already posted this but here it is again:
value in use. The value of a property assuming a specific use, which may or may not be the property’s highest and best use on the effective date of the appraisal.
From the Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, 6th Edition


So what?

I take it that you are trying to make a point, so...what's your point?
 
Fannie can ask for Value in Use, but by definition VIU is not MV.

Fannie isn't allowed to lend on VIU - that limitation having nothing to do with the appraisal profession. Moreover, their form has MV hardwired into it, so the value conclusion on the bottom line is fully intended to reflect MV, not VIU.

Now, hypothetically, Fannie COULD be allowed to lend on VIU and if/when that occurs appraisers would have no problem answering that question instead. But as a practical matter some changes would have to be made on their form in order to enable it.

They'd have to add the definition for VIU and swap out all references to MV. There is no using a different definition of value in an appraisal without clearly identifying what that value is supposed to mean. "If you really loved me you'd know what I meant without me saying it" only applies when people are married to each other. That is not how professional appraisers are supposed to act.

View attachment 43255

You're going over his head.

Seriously.
 
One last Comment and Question: For all you naysayers of what Message Lee and George are conveying.

Can any of you naysayers tell me what you will in report the applicable Cost Approach.

I will take it a step further: Lets say your Subject is a Duplex/triplex. and you have the extra site that can have another duplex/triplex.

What will you opine in the Income approach to value.?
 
One last Comment and Question: For all you naysayers of what Message Lee and George are conveying.

Can any of you naysayers tell me what you will in report the applicable Cost Approach.

I will take it a step further: Lets say your Subject is a Duplex/triplex. and you have the extra site that can have another duplex/triplex.

What will you opine in the Income approach to value.?

That's an excellent point. I wish I'd said that.

Although most assignments on an existing SFR don't require the development of the other two approaches to value, they often CAN be developed even if using indirect means to identify depreciation and rates of/on return of investment capital. The fundamentals of appraising don't suddenly cease to exist just because it's an SFR.
 
After Andrei answers the "best comps" question that answer will trigger several more questions to follow; each being triggered by the response to the one before. I'm about 4 moves ahead of him at the moment. I'm going to march him straight into a corner.
 
One last Comment and Question: For all you naysayers of what Message Lee and George are conveying.

Can any of you naysayers tell me what you will in report the applicable Cost Approach.

I will take it a step further: Lets say your Subject is a Duplex/triplex. and you have the extra site that can have another duplex/triplex.

What will you opine in the Income approach to value.?

The CA has an improvement replacement value and a land value. Obosuly the larger worth of the 2 lots would be reflected in the total land value. estimate in the CA

The duplex/triplex question : if the extra site CAN have another duplex or triplex (but on eff date is vacant ), the income approach only applies to the existing duplex/ triplex. Just as income approach on a single site duplex reflects only what exists, not some imaginary not yet existing addition. Same as a vacant site CAN have a house built on it, we don't include the value of the not built house for vacant site value.

There is no answer for bluster such as post 736, "You're going over his head. Seriously. ". If one resorts to bluster, may be because USPAP allows a single MV opinion for two or more properties sold together. And one of those properties might be below it 's HBU if sold alone. That is part of the appraisal analysis.

Some can not reconcile even though the parcel might have a different or higher value if sold separately, the MV opinion is for the lot sold with the improvement, and the lot's contribution may be the same as, or less than, or more than, the $ market value opinion for the lot if lot were sold alone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top