"growth" Checkboxes On Gse Forms

[Ahhhh Yeahhhh]

Line number from USPAP to support that assertion?

It falls under "Thou shalt not mislead".

Just like we must define "Value" we must define any abstract or subjective notion so that the reader understands our perspective. For example.... Suppose you mark the "growth" box as slow. The reader may assume that growth is still occuring but at a lower rate than the surrounding areas from which you compare it to.... However, you might have meant that the growth is slow because the area is simply built up and no new construction is going on but they just opened a few new marijuana depots and an influx of 20000 hippies are buying the old houses and rehabbing them.

If you don't clarify your rationale you leave the reader to make assumptions which may be incorrect thereby misleading them which is a clear violation of USPAP.

Pretty much everything in this entire section of the 1004 needs to be defined within your report and your rationale explained. Its real simple to do so, just define your definition of location, built-up, growth etc and put it in every report. You should also explain your rationale for One-Unit Housing trends... Especially the first line where the form incorrectly wants to know the "value" trend. One cannot simply state a "value" trend, but you can provide a "price" trend. If you don't clarify this, the reader might assume that "values" are increasing or decreasing which means that you just provided both a current and historic value on each and every property within the market area. BTW, the URAR doesn't define this value so what does it mean? Is it my opinion, Zillow's opinion? or is it based on the 1004MC which is based on "prices" instead of "values". If you don't define and clarify these items on page one you are setting the reader up for complete failure and asking them to read your mind.

 

[DWiley]

It falls under "Thou shalt not mislead". ...

What you wrote fails to recognize a key concept. USPAP does not a report to be understandable to anyone who happens to read it. The standard is meaningful and not misleading to the intended users. So, there is no need to explain concepts that the intended user already knows, or is reasonably expected to know.

Many people do miss this concept when, for example, that prepare an appraisal report for an individual rather than for a lender.

 

[Meandering]

You are assuming someone reads those reports.

rehabbing is not growth of development. It may represent some growth in values, if you hold to the thought that one bad one in a neighborhood drags all values down, so rehabbing the bad one grows all values in the neighborhood.

I just want to know why,
after all these years,
this is now a question?

Has there been a dispute with a homeowner or a client over the neighborhood growth rate being check boxed as stable, when it was actually slow? Has any lender been mislead as to the nature of growth in a neighborhood by a check box?

How silly can more parsing of pre-printed crap be??

Saying page one reflects the 1004MC and your subject is 30 years old, so,
no, we have no growth of 30 year old homes?????

We can parse it all day, but the sad truth is the forms are outdated, everyone believes that changing the pre-printed language is "too expensive" even though real estate is one of the remaining largest industries in the country, we can't possible afford to change pre-printed crap at this time, so,
appraisers are left to explain everything.

Yes, page one reflects the 1004MC, but no, there is no growth of new comparables for the subject, but there is new construction on-going in the neighborhood which tend to be larger homes than the subject and the comparable sales.


Two freaking sentences, not the end of the world.


.

 

[residentialguy]

Especially the first line where the form incorrectly wants to know the "value" trend. One cannot simply state a "value" trend, but you can provide a "price" trend.

say what? A price trend. What do you think market value is? The most probable PRICE....

If you don't clarify this, the reader might assume that "values" are increasing or decreasing which means that you just provided both a current and historic value on each and every property within the market area.

So? You have a problem with that because..?

 

[Ahhhh Yeahhhh]

Line number from USPAP to support that assertion?

It falls under "Thou shalt not mislead".

Just like we must define "Value" we must define any abstract or subjective notion so that the reader understands our perspective. For example.... Suppose you mark the "growth" box as slow. The reader may assume that growth is still occuring but at a lower rate than the surrounding areas from which you compare it to.... However, you might have meant that the growth is slow because the area is simply built up and no new construction is going on but they just opened a few new marijuana depots and an influx of 20000 hippies are buying the old houses and rehabbing them.

If you don't clarify your rationale you leave the reader to make assumptions which may be incorrect thereby misleading them which is a clear violation of USPAP.

Pretty much everything in this entire section of the 1004 needs to be defined within your report and your rationale explained. Its real simple to do so, just define your definition of location, built-up, growth etc and put it in every report. You should also explain your rationale for One-Unit Housing trends... Especially the first line where the form incorrectly wants to know the "value" trend. One cannot simply state a "value" trend, but you can provide a "price" trend. If you don't clarify this, the reader might assume that "values" are increasing or decreasing which means that you just provided both a current and historic value on each and every property within the market area. BTW, the URAR doesn't define this value so what does it mean? Is it my opinion, Zillow's opinion? or is it based on the 1004MC which is based on "prices" instead of "values". If you don't define and clarify these items on page one you are setting the reader up for complete failure and asking them to read your mind.

 

[residentialguy]

It falls under "Thou shalt not mislead". .....

Why did you just re-post post #31?

 

[Ahhhh Yeahhhh]

say what? A price trend. What do you think market value is? The most probable PRICE....
So? You have a problem with that because..?

There is no definition for this "value". What value is it? How is it determined? You are correct, value is "the most probable price" but the data you are analyzing is based on sold price not most probable price. Suppose you have a house that was worth 2mil that sold for 1 mil. If you look at the "value" trend you would need to include that property at 2mil instead of 1mil... but if you are looking at "price" trend you will include it at it's sold price of 1 mil.

There is a huge difference. If you don't understand that simple concept then your days of appraising have all been as a fraud.

 

[Ahhhh Yeahhhh]

Why did you just re-post post #31?

I fugged up. Kiss my ***.

 

[residentialguy]

I fugged up.

We've come to expect nothing more from you

 

[Meandering]

OUCH

But back on topic.

Where's Danny?

The blanket statement that page 1 agree with the 1004MC needs a re-visit, as old homes that are subject properties, can't be reflective of growth, which would be for new homes.

We can't grow more old homes so this portion of page 1 can't reflect the 1004MC unless the subject is also a new home.

.

.