Conventional Site Condo from on 1004, lender wants changed to 1073

[Doug Wegener]

And the 1004 is not misleading when you put a condo on a single family form/

 

[Kim Whiting]

pray tell where do you make the site adjustment on the 1073? Immediately renders it the WRONG form.

 

[J Grant]

pray tell where do you make the site adjustment on the 1073? Immediately renders it the WRONG form.

There are several blank spaces at bottom of grid. Fill in the site sizes and make adjustments on one of those lines.

 

[Kim Whiting]

unhuh............as if the form was intended for actual sites? if it was ....it'd have a freaking line for site!!!! always throws me too about those elevators on a ranch home...elevator to where? look....1/2 the lines on a 1073 don't apply to a single family home.....again, end of the story.

 

[J Grant]

unhuh............as if the form was intended for actual sites? if it was ....it'd have a freaking line for site!!!! always throws me too about those elevators on a ranch home...elevator to where? look....1/2 the lines on a 1073 don't apply to a single family home.....again, end of the story.

What is so hard about writing "site" to the left on one of the blank spaces on bottom of form and using that as the site line to put information and adjust?

 

[sputnam]

What is so hard about writing "site" to the left on one of the blank spaces on bottom of form and using that as the site line to put information and adjust?

It's not hard.

 

[Webbed Feet]

And the 1004 is not misleading when you put a condo on a single family form/

Just to be the peanut gallery on this one, by definition a condominium unit is still a single family residential property. Hence, a "condo form" is a single family form.

Carry on!

:new_llying:

 

[Webbed Feet]

pray tell where do you make the site adjustment on the 1073? Immediately renders it the WRONG form.

I'd lay odds you'd get really upset seeing a real estate appraisal reported on a napkin.

 

[Gregory Beck]

I think the OP is being stubborn I would put it on a 1073 and make a site line adjustment
on the bottom as every one here suggests. Just do it no laws are being broken. Except for the OP's ego.

 

[Rich Heyn]

Might be mostly a Michigan thing

I'm not sure how many states outside of Michigan have the same kind of "site condos" that we have in MI. I developed a small site condo about 20 years ago. I bought a 11 acre parcel and platted out ten, one-acre sites. Because the development took place under the condo act rather than the subdivision control act I was able to get approval from the township in about 30-40 days, rather than dealing with a dozen or so state and county agencies over a one year period. Due to the ease and quickness of development, site condos became quite popular in Michigan and in many areas, are treated by the market the same as traditionally developed subdivisions.

The individual sites are improved with detached, single-unit dwellings and are owned by the individual property owners in fee simple. In this example, the private road with turnaround and tiny park with gazebo were the (only) common elements. There is a property owners association and the owners kick in an agreed-to amount every year for snow removal and long-term maintenance.

Bottom line is that properties in these types of site condos walk and talk much the same as their traditional subdivision counterparts and the 1073 is a poor platform on which to communicate assignment results. That said, nothing prevents reporting on a 1073.

If the client insists on a 1073, I wonder if it might be more efficient to complete a 1004, clone it to a 1073, stuff in a bunch of "N/A" or "see attached" entries to the 1073 and then incorporate the 1004 as an attachment.