Fannie Mae and "Multiple Parcels"

[Lee Lansford]

172. VALUE IN USE REQUEST FROM FEDERALLY REGULATED LENDER
Question: My client, a federally insured financial institution, has asked me to provide a value in use appraisal instead of a market value appraisal. May I do this?
Response: USPAP does not dictate the use of any specific type or definition of value. The type and definition of value must be appropriate for the intended use and intended users. For federally related transactions, federally insured financial institutions require an opinion of market value, as defined by regulations. Therefore, if you provide a value in use, you may also have to provide a market value, depending on the intended use.

Round and round we go.....

Stop it! You are making too much sense .

Suggest: Do what I did a few minutes and block seeing posts by the one who is most clueless. Life is too short to read such drivel.

 

[J Grant]

Stop it! You are making too much sense .

Suggest: Do what I did a few minutes and block seeing posts by the one who is most clueless. Life is too short to read such drivel.

What is the "drivel;", Lee? That USPAP does allow a market value opinion on multiple properties conveyed together? It is true, so what is your objection?Once again, you post personal nonsense instead of any credible defense of your position ( whatever it is at this point )
He was not responding to me, he pasted a regulation - I'd be happy btw if he put me on ignore but that is up to him.

 

[Econobot]

The opinion of market value is the value opined for the entire property ( the improvement conveyed with the lot for the whole ) Got it? So there is no conflict. There is one market value opinion.,

A value in use is for the vacant lot portion only, to address its contribution to the whole.

The only conflict I see is you and this profession... Fannie determines your scope of work, we've established that. Good luck developing an opinion of market value, "per regulations". That means HBU; Fannie Mae issues trash advice which is contrary to appraisal theory (HBU analysis). Why do you think everyone is so "on board" with it being bad advice, except for a few evidently incompetent appraisers.... You better hope Fannie Mae's appraiser expert can provide you legal defense as you show no hesitation to completely depart from your obligations.

 

[Lee Lansford]

The only conflict I see is you and this profession... Fannie determines your scope of work, we've established that. Good luck developing an opinion of market value, "per regulations". That means HBU; Fannie Mae issues trash advice which is contrary to appraisal theory (HBU analysis). Why do you think everyone is so "on board" with it being bad advice, except for a few evidently incompetent appraisers.... You better hope Fannie Mae's appraiser expert can provide you legal defense as you show no hesitation to completely depart from your obligations.

There is only so much that you can do. Some folks have a block a certain truths that go counter to what they either want to "understand" or can understand.

 

[Econobot]

What is the "drivel;", Lee? That USPAP does allow a market value opinion on multiple properties conveyed together? It is true, so what is your objection?Once again, you post personal nonsense instead of any credible defense of your position ( whatever it is at this point )
He was not responding to me, he pasted a regulation - I'd be happy btw if he put me on ignore but that is up to him.

uhhhhhh, USPAP says you might have to develop market value "per regulations" Pretty big difference in your conjecture and what USPAP actually says. Reading comprehension is lost on you JGrant, thanks for all of your wrong information and contrived interpretations of USPAP. I think you've prove to the forum that you not only have no clue what you're doing/talking about but you refuse to read and comprehend basic information when it's presented. This isn't personal but you shouldn't be posting advice on a professional forum when you clearly lack any real understanding of the profession. Keep filling in forms the way Fannie tells you and don't worry about HBU analysis, just echo what the homeowner is doing in your forms you fill in. I'm sorry if you're offended but I'm irritated that you like to hijack threads with wrong information which frankly makes a site like this worthless.

 

[George Hatch]

If multiple lots have a single APN (which is very common in Old Town), a parcel split would be needed (creating individual APNs for each lot) in order to sell each newly developed property.

In the projects I have appraised - and I've done a bunch of these projects over the last 5 years - the County Assessor simply issues a new APN, the same as they would to a new Condo unit. No "split" at the city was required.

 

[Econobot]

What is the "drivel;", Lee? That USPAP does allow a market value opinion on multiple properties conveyed together? It is true, so what is your objection?Once again, you post personal nonsense instead of any credible defense of your position ( whatever it is at this point )
He was not responding to me, he pasted a regulation - I'd be happy btw if he put me on ignore but that is up to him.

Drivel driv·el
/ˈdrivəl/
Learn to pronounce
noun

1. nonsense.
   "don't talk such drivel!"
   
   

   
   ​

   
   

   vulgar slang​

   crap
   
   
   bull****
   
   
   bollocks
   
   
   balls
   
   
   crapola
   
   
   bulldust​

   
   
   Opposite:
   

   sense
   ​

   ​
   ​
   verb
   
   1. 1.​
      talk nonsense.
      "he was driveling on about the glory days"​

 

[Lee Lansford]

uhhhhhh, USPAP says you might have to develop market value "per regulations" Pretty big difference in your conjecture and what USPAP actually says. Reading comprehension is lost on you JGrant, thanks for all of your wrong information and contrived interpretations of USPAP. I think you've prove to the forum that you not only have no clue what you're doing/talking about but you refuse to read and comprehend basic information when it's presented. This isn't personal but you shouldn't be posting advice on a professional forum when you clearly lack any real understanding of the profession. Keep filling in forms the way Fannie tells you and don't worry about HBU analysis, just echo what the homeowner is doing in your forms you fill in. I'm sorry if you're offended but I'm irritated that you like to hijack threads with wrong information which frankly makes a site like this worthless.

"JGrant" asks what is the "drivel" (aka, nonsense) in her posts .

LOL

 

[George Hatch]

The "per regulations" is one of those "assignment conditions" which contribute to the SOW decision in the SOWR.

And no, a "value in use" opinion for the 2nd parcel is not a substitute for its MV.

 

[Lee Lansford]

uhhhhhh, USPAP says you might have to develop market value "per regulations" Pretty big difference in your conjecture and what USPAP actually says. Reading comprehension is lost on you JGrant, thanks for all of your wrong information and contrived interpretations of USPAP. I think you've prove to the forum that you not only have no clue what you're doing/talking about but you refuse to read and comprehend basic information when it's presented. This isn't personal but you shouldn't be posting advice on a professional forum when you clearly lack any real understanding of the profession. Keep filling in forms the way Fannie tells you and don't worry about HBU analysis, just echo what the homeowner is doing in your forms you fill in. I'm sorry if you're offended but I'm irritated that you like to hijack threads with wrong information which frankly makes a site like this worthless.

Earlier JGrant asked me--other than me --where is it written that Market Value and consistency with H&BU are linked and cannot be separated.

I replied by suggesting that she conduct her own search of the 'net with the key words MARKET VALUE HIGHEST & BEST USE. The results (IF read and IF understood), but of course, answer her question . Likely an inconvenient truth, she has moved on...yet she continues to ask "what drivel?" does she share. Truly amazing.