Change in GLA from Plans & Specs

[Mike Kennedy]

Regardless of terminology what is the client looking for?

from OP: the assignment

final inspection with a recertifiction on a plans & specs appraisal report I completed in 01/2008. Only one additional more recent comparable sale was required for the recert.


* i.e. subject AS described in the orig report, one addtl. comp SIMILAR to 3100sf orig dwelling w/additional amenities stated in original report.

___________

• 900 SF unfinished attic as identified in the original report was a finished u/s level with 2 bedrooms, den and bathroom. Also there was a 20 x 30 workshop in the back yard not noted in the original report.

1. called the lender to inform her of the change in GLA and workshop and was told to base the final and recert. on the original appraisal report since no additional value was necessary for loan purposes:Eyecrazy:

• I told her I should perform a new assignment since the GLA changed significantly (from 3100 SF to 4000 SF) and will have an impact on market value.

i.e. Recert of Value = equal to but not LESS than original OMV for the subject described and NOW COMPLETED per OAR.

{my add: not only the GLA, but BR+BA utility, and additional workshop amenity must be addressed)

2. “at the request of the lender, no value will be given to the 900 SF finished upstairs area which was listed as an unfinished attic in the original appraisal report"

3. “She was hesitant about the statement but told me to do what was necessary.”

Comment: with GOOD reason - PER POSTER new comp search done indicated INCREASE in value for the AS-IS ** new ......subject improvements.

client instruction in #1 results in a misleading description of the subject and a misleading opinion of value for what WAS built.

 

[Richard Carlsen]

If....if....if....if....if....

With enough "if's", all of Paris can be put in a bottle.​

*******************************************​

This post is the intellectual property of the poster.. You may quote, copy, transmit, scan, plagiarize, read aloud, add musical accompaniment or modify it to your hearts content.

:new_all_coholic:m2:​

 

[Webbed Feet]

<.... snip.....>The methodology (industry standards) are contained in the original report and the update is made by reference, all in compliance with USPAP and with the assignment conditions of the secondary market.<.........snip.....>

Mr. Carlsen,

The above is right were you and I depart ways. Some of your other statements are just fine. The above is not for me. The "industry standards" for the second "new assignment" appraisal are not contained in the prior, and different, real estate appraisal report. An "Update" is not an extension of a prior real estate appraisal report or analysis. That is exactly why no appraiser is going to get away with trying to tell any appraisal board that the prior signed certifications in some "referenced" appraisal report comply with the requirement to meet minimum signed certifications for the new appraisal assignment. Nor are they going to get away with attempting to say they incorporated what is now later an incorrect market analysis, incorrect time adjustments, incorrect or lack of bracketing of the GLA by the comparable, for a completely new real estate appraisal, that was supposed to meet a "Summary" standard of reporting per USPAP.

Maybe appraisers should be recognizing that this is really a determination of a minimum value based on a prior benchmark, that benchmark being their own prior opinion of value. Not "based on an update." Planning on incorporating a bunch of data and analysis that no longer applies to the current market, as if it does and representing it that way, would be causing the new assignment to be misleading. So those appraisers would be very well served in stating loud and clear exactly what data and analysis they are incorporating, and exactly what data and analysis they are not incorporating from the prior real estate appraisal. The stuff they are not incorporating, if required by USPAP or contractual obligations or administrative rules, they had better be satisfying Standard One development and Standard Two reporting (Summary) fresh and new.

If you think you can meet that task all on that one page 1004d form.. go for it Griddley! This feathered guy will take a pass on that challenge.

Webbed.

 

[Jo Ann Meyer Stratton]

Reviewing current market data is NOT a recertification. When current market data is considered the appraiser is completing an Update assignment. That update can be reported to the client in various ways. That new assignment can either be reported verbally, on the upper part of the 1004D (or paper napkin if that is what you want to do), or a complete new 1004/1004C. Regardless of how it is reported, Standards 1 and 2 have to be followed.

If the lender/client does not want to know if the value has changed but only wants to know if what they said they would do is what they did then then value is not taken into consideration, whether it is current or outdated it is not an appraisal because no opinion of value has been offered or developed. Only a reporting of facts--yes the ceramic tile got installed and yes there is at least 1,200 square feet because they built that and more.

A recertification would only be applicable if the appraisers writes a sentence (or paragraph) similar to this: "Yes, on January 1, 2007 I did say the value was $1,000." If current market data is considered is no longer a recertification.

 

[Richard Carlsen]

The "industry standards" for the second "new assignment" appraisal are not contained in the prior, and different, real estate appraisal report.

I think industry standards was your phrase or someones and I only regurgitated it. What I should have said was "methodology".

But enough of this: Do it your way on a 1004 and I'll do it mine on a 1004D. We can agree to disagree on that at least.

Have a good day because I have an inspection to get ready for tomorrow FHA reverse mortgage), after which, since I will be near one of my favorite trout streams, I plan on doing some cold water therapy on my legs and play with some brook trout for about 4-5 hours.