Fannie Mae and "Multiple Parcels"

[George Hatch]

I already said that I used an arbitrary filter. But lest either of us lose sight of it, even when you picked your sales by price (and omitted the other 95% of sales data that didn't even sell for that much) you didn't come up with any that approached or bracketed the actual sale price.

It is generally accepted by appraisers that if we can find adequate data that is "more similar" overall then there's no need to expand the search parameters further. What use do you think I had for properties that were less similar? To use as a platform for adding adjustments in order to hit a target value? That ain't a plan.

I already posted examples of the separate analyses I perform for the subject's geographic area vs it's market segment - something I know most appraisers don't do. Apart from that the 1956yb home isn't going to be considered as directly comparable to the 1993yb home as the 1980-2000yb homes.

Sorry/not sorry

 

[Mr Rex]

Lee the tease, First it was a mysterious entity taking over the IL appraisal board and now its great harm the Public Trust if FNMA allows loans on more than 1 parcel.

 

[George Hatch]

Lee the tease, First it was a mysterious entity taking over the IL appraisal board and now its great harm the Public Trust if FNMA allows loans on more than 1 parcel.
View attachment 43038

How on earth do you conflate our intention of appraising properties for what they're worth with us telling Fannie they can't do a loan on multiple parcels? Or telling Fannie anything at all about what they can and can't do?

 

[Mr Rex]

How on earth do you conflate our intention of appraising properties for what they're worth with us telling Fannie they can't do a loan on multiple parcels? Or telling Fannie anything at all about what they can and can't do?

Wait, this is my question. By GOD George you are a genius!

 

[George Hatch]

If by genius you are referring to my uncanny ability to RTFM then I think we can all get there with just a little effort.

But yeah, I did frame that in the form of a question. How does appraisers telling Fannie what will and won't say about the value of 2 parcels in an appraisal report amount to dictating their internal underwriting policies to them?

 

[Mr Rex]

Can you opine a value of the subject property or not? Is it the appraiser that decides that the subject property is 1 or 2 distinct properties with distinct identifiers when the assignment is to appraise "As Is"? Fannie says as improved? That includes the vacant lot per their instructions. Again, if H&BU is not "immediate" development separately then its H&BU is not to separate or is it? Given Lee's open letter if the H&BU is currently $350k in an increasing market, what is it in the normal market exposure? $400k? Is the H&BU to separate or wait? Smarter than the market appraisers **** me off. USPAP falls way short of 10 commandments. MHO.

 

[George Hatch]

Now you're just making things up as you go. There is no such thing as "HBU=immediate development".

The vacant lot which stands by itself out on the prarie and has ZERO potential for immediate development can still have an HBU/as is conclusion of being a buildable site as opposed to the other possibilities.

I can't tell you how many land appraisals I've performed over the years where I concluded that the HBU was as built out but which remained vacant long after I appraised them. I was still correct about the HBU, though; and the comps I used were still the most similar and most comparable comps available. Of the 4 land appraisal assignments I'm currently working on only one of them is actually likely to be built out in the next 5 years. Same for most of the comparables I'm using in these assignments.

Remaining vacant after a sale is not a contradiction of that parcel's HBU.

 

[Mr Rex]

I didn't make up the "immediate" thing the OP did. Yes he is making **** up.

 

[George Hatch]

Well whomever it was they're missing the boat and you shouldn't be citing that as an argument in support of your case.

Have you appraised vacant parcels that were not subsequently developed within the next few years? I assume you have. If so, did you use just *any* vacant site as a comp on the basis that it was also not likely to be developed soon, or did you use the results of your HBU analysis to identify exactly which types of land parcels had similar potential, market demand, units of comparison and similar types of buyers for use as your comps? did you ever use a parcel that would have been built out as industrial as one of your "most similar" sales in comparison to a subject that would be built out as an SFR - on the strength that they're both currently vacant and under the circumstances were likely to remain vacant for some time to come?

That is not a rhetorical question - it's answer speaks directly to the topic of this thread.

 

[Lee Lansford]

How on earth do you conflate our intention of appraising properties for what they're worth with us telling Fannie they can't do a loan on multiple parcels? Or telling Fannie anything at all about what they can and can't do?

You ask Mr. Rex how he does such things?

Well, he is closely aligned with Andei Fin and JGrant on this issue. There you have it. and that's all that I need to know .

I didn't make up the "immediate" thing the OP did. Yes he is making **** up.

Mr. Rex, BS.

Make a logical and coherent argument.

Your nonsense with making things up is wearing thin.