Complete or Limited Report

[David C. Johnson]

Amazing Karnak:

;-)


dcj

 

[Fred]

David,
Actually I cheated. I read the Exposure Draft table of contents.

BTW, what does that visual image of the insect symbolize?

 

[Blue1]

GEEZ Liz, Just use the URAR. Why go to all the trouble of trying to "shape" to 2055 into something it's not intended to be used for? Unless you're accepting less than a standard fee (If so, shame on you! ) Maybe a little "client education" is called for here. I have "educated" many clients (gently of course) 'cause many of them don't understand our profession, let alone the forms!! Heck, some appraisers don't even understand the USPAP or the forms!!!!! (no insult meant to the folks here at the forum :roll: ) Anyway, with a little (gentle persuasion) you oughta be able to coax your client in the proper direction. (P.S. don't do 2055 forms with interior inspections for any less than a full URAR, if you do, you're shooting yourself in the foot.....)

 

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

Blue1

You've been given a gift from FNMA. They don't want the Cost Approach. Why assume the liability for it? I bet that guy down in NC that was sanctioned by the state board for improperly developing physical depreciation, according to their high NCAB standards of course, wishes he had done a 2055, huh...

Ben

 

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

Steve,

The 2055 Certification, Item 9 addresses your question. " I have performed this appraisal as a limited appraisal, subject to the Departure Provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice..........So the client, whether you consider it to be the lender or FNMA, has agreed on a limited when Desktop Underwriter OK's the use of the 20xx form. If the appraiser decides to make it a Complete Appraisal/Summary Report format, then it better be marked as such or the appraiser is in violation of USPAP for not clearly stating appraisal type and report format. Too much aggravation for my small brain, so I just go with the "given" (limited) and I don't mess with modifications...

Item 8 on the Certification states Cost and Income Approaches were not developed by mutual agreement with the client, blah, blah, blah. They know what they want. We just insist on giving them what they don't want under the guise/fear of USPAP.

Maybe 2003 USPAP will be better????????

Ben

 

[Francois K. Gregoire]

Maybe 2003 USPAP will be better????????

Ben,

Have you, by chance, read the 42 page February 13, 2002 Exposure Draft? How about the 52 page May 7, 2002 Second Exposure Draft?

The ASB is working on clarity, but it proves to be an illusive goal.

Comments accepted until June 10. Make a few. They will be read.

-by the way, I don't miss your avatar!!

 

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

Frank,

Avatars???? I got lots of Ford avatars. Why I have one of a cartoon guy........an arched stream of water and that silly Blue Oval, but, well I can't post it here. Want it???????

42 pages? 52 pages? All that to fill out a one page appraisal form? The ASB has got to be kidding. I'll have a look tomorrow when I'm back at the office. But you already know my feelings about USPAP. USPAP for John Q. Public and FRT's. No USPAP for FHA,VA,FNMA or FHLMC (non-FRT's.) They can take care of themselves via handbooks/guidelines and specifically designed appraisal forms. That's about as clear as I need it to be. I follow instructions well. Learned that in grade school......

Ben

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

[the AF] "..practices sorcery, ergo are smarter than I." Some Frenchman said that but I forgot who...

Ben said >>Think they are trying to tell us we're not qualified to do Cost Approaches??? Hmm....that it is a job for professionals such as Architects" <<<I always liked Architects estimates. They charge a percent of the cost, therefore have every incentive to maximize your expenses.

Actually, if the cost approach is done properly it should replicate the results of the sales approach because an appraiser's cost approach, which should not be confused with an architect or engineers approach, uses market evidence to support the RCN, the land value, and the obsolescences. Granted the more complex and the older a building is, the more difficult the approach is. But you still make those same judgments about age, condition, and market acceptance that you have to make in the sales approach..or you did not do it right.

An appraiser's cost estimate is a market risk weighted estimate, unlike that of the technican.

Ter

 

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

Ter,

The URAR Cost Approach requires Reproduction Cost figures, which quite frankly, is beyond the ability of the average appraiser to calculate properly-which is probably why it's been relieved of it's duty on the 20xx forms. Is that finish flooring ceramic, marble or porcelain??? How many S/f of flooring?????. Yup, the appraiser can get into big trouble with the Cost Approach real fast. Me, I'm glad to see it go.

And if it replicates the results of the sales approach, why do the same "thing" twice to get the same answer. I'm a lazy guy....

Ben

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

My cost approach comments always states "Replacement" costs. "Reproduction" would be weeks, maybe months, of education to even begin to use realistically. The cost approach really doesn't mean much for the vast majority of residential properties.