• 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.

Does the 1004MC equal the Neighborhood One-Unit Housing trends on page 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by DWiley View Post

It is actually much simpler.

What data did the appraiser use to decide which of the checkboxes to indicate in the neighborhood section?

Whatever it is, include it in the 1004MC.
Click to expand...

Please help my blond brain with this.

So, find all the comparables in the neighborhood to fill in the 1004MC,
if there are not "sufficient" comparabales in the neighborhood, then extend my search for "other comparables" without regard to neighborhood to fill in the 1004MC.

Use that data to check the boxes on the 1004MC for stable, declining, blah, blah,

But,

Does that include the REO question?

If none of my comparables were REO sales, should I ignore the 90 REO sales in the neighborhood and just check no?

Does that also include the question about seller concessions?

If none of my comparables had seller concessions, should I mark the box stable, and ignore the balance of the data for "non comparable" sales in the neighborhood?

And after I've played this silly game, I can repeat the findings on the top of page 2 and on page 1 of the URAR, because now they are not separate and distinct analyzes but rather are reiterations of flawed logic to hide the true nature of micro markets??

WTF?

I must not be the only blond.

Why don't you just let the Fed issue the market conditions, how playing with interest rates keeps banks from making money on mortgages, who then seek to limit mortgages in favor of subprime auto loans where they can make money. How about you let the Regional Offices of the Fed release area down payment requirements and credit score minimums that determine the market direction, and let us deal with the all cash market, cause even though financing is considered to be equivalent to cash, we all know darned well, it is not.

.
 
I'd really like to see some sort of poll on this issue. Sadly, I have another appointment still this late afternoon. Anyone want to volunteer to form a question or two on point & post a poll?
 
DWiley said:
OK - this should help

[url]http://www.lsi-university.com/in-depth-training/reporting-market-conditions/[/URL]
Click to expand...

Um. No. It reiterates every boilerplated lender guideline I've seen. The question seeks answers not more questions. Unless I missed something, and if I did, I can always count on you to TRY and set me straight.

I did one today where I filled out the 1004MC at the request of the lender, but disqualified it as the property was a high-end, waterfront with limited market data to make any statistical analysis meaningful. It simply did not match the results (range) of my Sales Comparison Approach. My subject property is a limited market vs. the 1004MC is only beneficial (IMO) if there is ample market data.

It simply is not going to happen in every case.

P.S. If tech support from S.M.A.R.T. would answer their calls or respond to e-mails, even after you put me in touch, it would really be helpful. It's a great product, but somebody needs to be manning the office during normal business hours.
 
Marion Rhodes said:
Please help my blond brain with this.

So, find all the comparables in the neighborhood to fill in the 1004MC,
if there are not "sufficient" comparabales in the neighborhood, then extend my search for "other comparables" without regard to neighborhood to fill in the 1004MC.

Use that data to check the boxes on the 1004MC for stable, declining, blah, blah,

But,

Does that include the REO question?

If none of my comparables were REO sales, should I ignore the 90 REO sales in the neighborhood and just check no?

Does that also include the question about seller concessions?

If none of my comparables had seller concessions, should I mark the box stable, and ignore the balance of the data for "non comparable" sales in the neighborhood?

And after I've played this silly game, I can repeat the findings on the top of page 2 and on page 1 of the URAR, because now they are not separate and distinct analyzes but rather are reiterations of flawed logic to hide the true nature of micro markets??

WTF?

I must not be the only blond.

Why don't you just let the Fed issue the market conditions, how playing with interest rates keeps banks from making money on mortgages, who then seek to limit mortgages in favor of subprime auto loans where they can make money. How about you let the Regional Offices of the Fed release area down payment requirements and credit score minimums that determine the market direction, and let us deal with the all cash market, cause even though financing is considered to be equivalent to cash, we all know darned well, it is not.

.
Click to expand...

You're in good company.
 
Joyce, in your example for the waterfront property, whatever conclusions the appraiser arrives at, the conclusion requires a citation of the support.

Complex is complex...it happens...I understand.

Otherwise, I'm not seeing the problem here.
 
leelansford said:
Joyce, in your example for the waterfront property, whatever conclusions the appraiser arrives at, the conclusion requires a citation of the support.

Complex is complex...it happens...I understand.

Otherwise, I'm not seeing the problem here.
Click to expand...

Apparently you don't work on the underwriting side. Coincidently, I read your 2011 article about the 1004MC prior to completing that report just to refresh my memory as to what I needed to address as to why the median sales price was out of line with the value based on my SCA.

I am one of the few people that actually like the 1004MC, despite the flaws many people cite. When it falls in line with the other statistical data, it's a wonderful thing. That happens about 60% of the time in my market.

In short, I've always held the opinion that the UW/Analysts want to see the median price for similar properties and if your value falls outside a reasonable margin they want the appraiser to explain why. From a quality control standpoint, if I were lending my money, that's where I'd start.
 
leelansford said:
Joyce, in your example for the waterfront property, whatever conclusions the appraiser arrives at, the conclusion requires a citation of the support.

Complex is complex...it happens...I understand.

Otherwise, I'm not seeing the problem here.
Click to expand...

Do they have small lake communities by you?

We have lots of them here.

So lakefront in one community might be comparable to lakefront in an other community, however, these different neighborhoods, might require location adjustments, which, you will mistake for changes in market conditions when used unadjusted raw data in the 1004MC. And OMG! if you have 3 that are smaller than the subject and 2 that are larger, your median value is going to be one of the 3 smaller ones.

Now how is that showing the market trend for the subject?

The concept of the 1004MC was valid. The propagation of "how" to fill in the form, or even address market conditions is still being dictated in "fuzzy" requirements.

Even the APB does not come up with what defines a market that is increasing, decreasing or stable.

And yes, there are some markets that are dead, or have no market activity, which may or may not be lacking market activity over prolonged periods, and may or may not be historically the activity in the market.

.
 
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
Back
Top