Home of a Hoarder

[Farm Gal]

I generally call such an excess of personal possession "a substantial excess of personal property". Some is just excessive clutter some is a great deal more. I agree that there is a sliding scale of 'excess'... if the excess precludes 'reasonable observation' of the REAL PROPERTY which you are there to appraise, I define what I was able to observe, and opin a value based on the observable area, along with a LOT of pictures, and clear explanation that there may be other issues.

I am surprised that no one has mentioned the possibility of structural issues: some hoarders have piled up paper (or other) products weighing just slightly less than rocks, piled up to the point of floor loads well in excess of code and/or design. Many homes are based on an average floor load of around 40 lbs PSF. Most homes have the capacity to safely support a uniform live load of at least 40 psf. But keep in mind that the design live load 'average' is theoretically spread uniformly over the entire floor from wall to wall throughout the entire house, and was not designed to carry that load over every SF in an average room. Fail loading for most code designs is 1.5 to 2 times the average code design. So in theory if a given room is 3/4 (or more) full of 'stuff' which exceeds 40 LBS/SF the entire dang floor can fail!!!

If the carpets or flooring or walls are damaged I make note of that and state that if conditions in the unobservable areas contrary to the OBSERVED areas are different that it can affect the value. If I think there may be structural loading concerns I DEFINITELY mention that.

If there are sanitation concerns I mention THAT.

I think whoever made those comments at FHA :glare:had best be mentioned by name rank and serial number if you want to quote them in a report - because that sounds like another personal opinion issue rather than offical policy... I wouldn't want that to sound like MY opinion - the poster mentioning legal actions wasn't too far off base and liberatarian views indicate it tain't MY bidness anyway... that said:

Agreed that we are neither code nor sanitation police, however we ARE the 'lenders eyes on site' and if there are conditions which may impact value or the three S'es to the point of affecting collateral value (inclusive of structural or sanitary soundness/marketability) it is best to be a disinterested 3rd party reporter of condition and value.... and let the LENDER make the calls as to how to handle THEIR lending problem.

IF there are children involved, and you believe they are 'at risk' I think it is best to make a quiet report to the appropriate authorities.

 

[Webbed Feet]

Right out of Appendix D

Webbed .. come on ... you mean to tell me that I cant produce a credible report using Extraordinary Assumptions, FHA aside????
I dont know what inspection standards cannot be met per FHA guidelines, either I missed them or they were never disclosed in the OP.

If unable to visually evaluate the improvements in their entirety, contact the lender and reschedule a time when a complete visual inspection can be performed.​

When something on the order of 70% to 90% of the interior of the improvements cannot be visually evaluated when there is a SOW requiring an interior viewing by the appraiser... then that is exactly what I am saying. Using an EA to skirt the requirements coming from the intended use to that degree would result in the final analyses lacking credibility for the SOW agreed to. And I believe FHA has been very clear what the appraiser is to do in that situation. Clearly, FHA has NOT said to EA it.

 

[PropertyEconomics]

When something on the order of 70% to 90% of the interior of the improvements cannot be visually evaluated when there is a SOW requiring an interior viewing by the appraiser... then that is exactly what I am saying. Using an EA to skirt the requirements coming from the intended use to that degree would result in the final analyses lacking credibility for the SOW agreed to. And I believe FHA has been very clear what the appraiser is to do in that situation. Clearly, FHA has NOT said to EA it.

Can you not CB4 an FHA report?

 

[Abester]

For those that say it can't be done - don't do it. But don't cry when someone else does it. If the personal property has damaged the house, it's a real estate issue (even if the personal property is gone). If you have to test some outlets, offer to help clean a while so you can test because personal property is not a real estate issue. You cannot see everything in a house that's completely empty, so clearly the FHA guidelines allow somethings to go "unnoticed" when not readily accessible. Next thing you know, the appraisers will claim the grass needs to be cut another quarter inch or someone may trip over a sprinkler head and impale themselves on the garden rake.

 

[Jay Faustini]

Thanks for all the input. Especially to Webbed.
Initially, I was going to issue a subject to report with my analysis based upon an EA that the unobservable areas are in average condition. This is what the FHA appraiser at the FHA hotline suggested to me. (He also mentioned that a “subject to” junk removal appraisal would also be necessary due to safety issues).

But upon further consideration, I believe that Webbed is right, you cannot EA away FHA inspection standards, even in a “subject to” appraisal.

A “subject to removal of junk” appraisal with an EA of average condition of unobservable areas might work for a non-FHA appraisal but not here.

So I’m going to issue a short narrative report with pictures stating why an FHA appraisal cannot be issued until the entire interior is observable. This approach also addresses the issue of the wasting of my time and the clients money issuing a “subject to” report that has conditions that are likely never to be met.

Also, in response to Property Economics:

Of course I’m not going to mention the psychological state of the borrower. I know I’m not an expert. Just mentioned the show because it made me realize that this is a serious psychological disorder and that getting her to clean up is not likely.

 

[Webbed Feet]

Can you not CB4 an FHA report?

P.E.

Sorry, it just does not add up in keeping with hardly anything in Appendix D. It is a bridge too far versus the intended use and inspection standards. Any typical home and a few unobservable areas are to be expected. But not damn near the entire interior of the house. At that point, for an FHA intended use even CB4 just doesn't work. I'll quote...

Appraisers are reminded not to recommend inspections only as a means of limiting liability. The reason or indication of a particular problem must be given when requiring an inspection of any mechanical system, structural system, etc.

Requiring an inspection for a specific reason being that pretty much the entire interior cannot be observed would directly violate our mandate to accomplish the following.....

Existing construction must comply with HUD’s Minimum Property Requirements (HUD Handbook 4905.1). ​

There is no way possible, or allowable, that we should be EAing away almost the whole MPR part of an FHA assignment by requiring a following inspection to uncover such a large chunk of what we are supposed to credibly know before we opined value. Again, the intended use, demands of the SOW Rule, and what FHA has already published makes these extreme cases fall under exactly what I have already posted. And I am a bit suprised as it seems the FHA appraiser at the FHA hot line had his/her head up their kister on this one.

If unable to visually evaluate the improvements in their entirety, contact the lender and reschedule a time when a complete visual inspection can be performed.

​

The above is exactly what is to be done in such extreme cases. Not EAing it all away. That FHA hotline person should have been all over this one quoting the above regarding an extreme case of lack of ability to inspect the interior of the improvements.​

My hat is off to Mr. Faustini. His choice is not the easy route allowing the appraiser involved to claim they delivered the assignment and should be paid the entire fee. But I will maintain that the high ethical road here is to not use an EA to arrive at a questionable result, a resulting opinion that could be a USPAP violation due to the intended use, and then dump it on the client.​

​

 

[Abester]

And I am a bit suprised as it seems the FHA appraiser at the FHA hot line had his/her head up their kister on this one.

Appraisers are funny that way...

 

[Abester]

4150.2

If unable to visually evaluate the improvements in their entirety, contact the lender and reschedule a time when a complete visual inspection can be performed. This includes access to the crawl space and attic. The appraiser is not required to disturb insulation, move personal items, furniture, equipment, plant life, soil, snow, ice or debris that obstructs access or visibility.​

 

[Functional Obs]

I think my HO knows your HO:

 

[Jay Faustini]

Rick,

That place looks immaculate compared to my HO's place.

BTW. I don't think you should be posting an interior photo on the web.
Could be construed as a breach of confidentiality.