• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Curious How You Would Handle

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lee SW IL

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
Illinois
Subject property is a typical 1 story ranch, with a covered front porch. The roof is supported by two post and the garage. The garage is 4ft further out from the home. The porch continues with the same roof line. The roof appears to be sagging, the post that is located furthest from the garage appears to be the problem. I have multiple photos of the sagging roof line.

Should I state this is an extraordinary assumption or a hypothetical condition? And appraise "as is" or "subject to" ? and subject to what?

I have completed the report, but I have deceided to hold it until I hear thoughts from other professionals.

Thx
 

wyecoyote

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Gvmt Agency, FNMA, HUD, VA etc.
State
Washington
Personally I would appraise it "subject to" an inspection by an engineer. Who knows what damage a sagging roof line can cause. The extra stress on the support walls or pulling of the roof trussess. Could simply require jacking up the affected area and installing a new support or worse case senario possibly new roof trussess and repair of some structural walls.
 

hal380

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2003
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
Connecticut
What Ryan said

Hal
 

Travis McGee

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2004
I wouldn't make it subject to an engineering report. I'd disclose the porch roof and posts's condition on the front page under repairs, and deduct value for it under condition on the sales grid. Some lenders want a cost to cure. If it was a sale, I might recommend an inspection. But that is how I would handle it , would like to see other's comments.
 

Richard J. Glesser

Junior Member
Joined
May 16, 2002
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
Michigan
I agree with "subject to" mainly because until I get a professional opinion of exactly what the damage or cost-to-cure will be, I would not want to merely adjust the subject for the roof problem. Ex.: I adjust for the cost of a couple extra support beams which would be minimal only to find it needs a whole new roof (worst case scenario, but possible). I'm not usually one to shy away from a problem, but in this case, I just don't know how much of a problem I'm dealing with until I get a professional report. :usa:
 

Mountain Man

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
Georgia
I agree with "subject to" mainly because until I get a professional opinion of exactly what the damage or cost-to-cure will be, I would not want to merely adjust the subject for the roof problem.

A BIG DITTO on this one. I see more problems, especially with REO's, where the appraiser wayyyyy under estimated the cost of repairs. Sorry, but if it's an area where I have no experience or knowlege, I'm making it subject to a professionals opinion.

Of course this changes if I have other sales with the same or similar problem. Then I just say, hey..... look at the market data. ;)
 

Tater Salad

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
Missouri
I had a similar problem with a home this past winter. The porch slab was settling away from the house, and pulling some of the decorative brick off of the front. I appraised it "subject to" an engineer's inspection, as I didn't know if the settling posed a problem for the rest of the house. I was assuming that the slab needed to be mudjacked and the bricks reattached.

Well, it turned out that the homeowner had a problem with the porch roof sagging due to the settlement, and had the posts replaced (with slightly longer ones). The engineer said that if they just mudjacked the slab, the new longer posts would have pushed the roof up high enough to damage whole structure! They needed to replace the posts prior to correcting the settlement.

If I had just done a cost to cure and suggested the mudjacking, I would have been buying someone a new roof--maybe more. Be careful about diagnosing these things. "Subject to" is your friend!
 

Jim Bartley

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
Virginia
I agree with Jo Ann.

I think its the client's call whether it's "subject to" or "as is". If they want it "as is" then just estimate the market impact the condition has. If you feel you need more info (engineer report etc...) then you should contact your client and inform them so. But in the end, it's their call.
 

Lee SW IL

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
Illinois
I am making the report "subject to" a structual engineer's report, as I do not feel I could give an accurate cost to cure. There is no way for me to tell if the roof trussess are strained. The roof diffently slopes, not sure if jacking the post with a proper foundation is going to fix this problem.

I went by and looked at the post again today. The post is not on a concrete porch, but rather than on the ground. It appears to me the original porch and walk were replaced with bricks and gravel. I believe the fondation for the post probably does not go below the frost line.

Thanks for the replys
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Top

AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks