While we are on the discussion of divorce appraisals, I have a "case study" to throw out to the forum on an appraisal performed 2 years ago to members to receive their input.
Subject: 30 yrs SFR , zoned R3-W (multi-family) on direct (sailboat) access canal. Entire street except this one property is either duplex or condo. Pool cage gone via hurricane, tile roof needs replacement and in an area where "tear downs" occur. COMPLEX ASSIGNMENT! Plaintiff's attorney orders appraisal. 2 month experience trainee does inspection. Superviser signs off marking "did not inspect" All comps (zoned R1-W, single family) were drawn from one mile radius in single family area neighborhoods and not similar neighborhood but (trainee could not think outside of the "box" and go beyond one mile radius to similar neighborhood). Trainee puts effective age same as subject, 30 yrs, makes $25,000 landscapping (negative) adjustment on subject across the grid, marks inferior for location while comps average but makes no adjustment. Comps all the $600K+ range. Values subject at $585K. Defendant knows appraisal is way off and on advice of attorney decides not to get another appraisal where you have "dueling" appraisers. Attorney says that judge will make decision for house to be sold with proceeds split according.
So, case goes to trial. 1st day of trial, plaintiff's attorney subpoenas trainee as expert witness and appears(in Florida a trainee is not considered an appraiser!) Defendant's attorney ask for dismissal of trainee since the trainee is not an appraiser and judge grants it. Second day of trial approx, 30 day later, supervisor appears as expert witness (remember, he checked the box, "..did not inspect" . Again, defendant's attorney ask for dismissal of attorney based on this fact and judge agrees. Judge and both attorneys kind of laughing in the fact (in their mind, how can an expert witness be if he did not inspect the subject). Trial conclues and judge renders decision to put martial residence on market to sale.
Defendant via attorneys, makes offer of $375,000 since be wanted the residence to built a duplex and split into two parcels based on market price of vacant land since in his opionion of "highest & best use", the subject should have been appraised as vacant. Plaintiff rejects offer and residence placed on market (in a declining market of 1 1/2%/ per month, offer received 90 days later) Receives best offer of $385,000 (less $2,000 in concessions and real estate commission netting out less than defendant's intial offer) This was not a distress sale as defendant was willing to wait as long as it took to received best price.
Oh, and one further note. In a subsequent hearing a year later in regards to defendant paying a portion of the respondent's legal expenses, the judge awarded a ruling of payment by the defendant (to the plaintiff) of $1,000+ towards the plaintiff's appraisal expense that had been paid.
Q1: Would you appraise this as "highest & best use" as vacant land (less demo cost) and value according?
Q2: Would you appraise subject based on comps with similar zoning (they do not exist on direct access canals but do exist on indirect canals (bridge clearance requirred). These comps would be 2-4 miles from subject.
Q3: Please site the USPAP violations of the appraiser if any. If in violation would you file a complaint with the state on the appraiser(s) trainee or supervision, or both?
