C5 to C4 as "Subject To" appraisal condition

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Conv purchase assignment with an Engagement that requires itemized repairs needed to bring C5 to C4 and corresponding "Subject To" appraisal conditions for each of the issues to be remediated. Questions:

--The SFR is in C4 condition but various additional improvements, e.g., covered patio, detached workshop, storage shed are C5 or C6. So.... just describe as such as estimate expenses to demolish/remove the C6 factors?
--Is a UAD condition rating affected by a dozen totally junked out cars that I can remediate with a C2C based on towning/disposal?
--If I require a roofing cert for the C4 dwelling unit because of obvious damage to the interior of the DU, would the reqiured C2C be based on an EA of what I "think" might be wrong???
--and just in general, do the lending industry standards that require C5 to be improved to min C4 always require a corresponding "Subject To" appraisal condition--which in this scenario presumably will be so extensive/expensive that the buyer will balk, although that's beyond the SoW of my involvement.

 

[Airstream]

If there are numerous junked cars (and I have seen it all in rural areas with little zoning enforcement) then I state there is a possible environmental hazard due to leaking oil and other car fluids. Make it “subject to” removal. Now if it is just one or two that’s a tougher call. If the place is a junky mess then I would be more strict about the junk in general since that is a marketability issue.

As to your other issues..sometimes a tough call; especially with old farmsteads and someone builds new or completely remodels a house on it. But if some of the outbuildings are in tough shape and purport to be useable I would bring attention to it and call for their removal or repair and give it a C5 if you think it warrants it. I’ve had this with some old barns. It is a safety issue IMHO.

If repairs are needed to be C4 then “subject to” unless the lender doesn’t care.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

If there are numerous junked cars (and I have seen it all in rural areas with little zoning enforcement) then I state there is a possible environmental hazard due to leaking oil and other car fluids. Make it “subject to” removal. Now if it is just one or two that’s a tougher call. If the place is a junky mess then I would be more strict about the junk in general since that is a marketability issue.

As to your other issues..sometimes a tough call; especially with old farmsteads and someone builds new or completely remodels a house on it. But if some of the outbuildings are in tough shape and purport to be useable I would bring attention to it and call for their removal or repair and give it a C5 if you think it warrants it. I’ve had this with some old barns. It is a safety issue IMHO.

If repairs are needed to be C4 then “subject to” unless the lender doesn’t care.

Possibly the most succinct, helpful response7 to any question I ever asked. Thank you.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

...and now before I even alerted the lender to the condition factors, the lender wants to add a rental survey. If so, are the "Subject To: factors that will be identified in the Opinion of Market Value pertain to the rental analysis, i.e., should I seek rental comps that reflect the subject's current condition, or the condition after the Subject To issues have been remediated????

 

[Dublin ohio]

...and now before I even alerted the lender to the condition factors, the lender wants to add a rental survey. If so, are the "Subject To: factors that will be identified in the Opinion of Market Value pertain to the rental analysis, i.e., should I seek rental comps that reflect the subject's current condition, or the condition after the Subject To issues have been remediated????

If the appraisal is "subject to", your rental comps should be compared to the repaired subject