Is it just me?

[Tom4value]

I am sure most of you have seen this revision request.

Perfectly acceptable- "Per UCDP findings the condition adjustment for comp 2 is smaller than peer and model adjustments, please advise"
Never been acceptable appraisal practice- "Hey Joe! Wadda ya give for a condition adjustment?"

 

[Artemis Fowl]

Ask them to send you "The List" of adjustments.

 

[Tom4value]

Ask them to send you "The List" of adjustments.

Nah.
1. We both know they don't have access to any "list".
2. Asking for a "list" validates adjusting by what others say and not by doing your own work.
This was my response. "Can't comment on UCDP findings or peer or model adjustments. However, support for the adjustment was made using matched pairs from each of the other three comparables that are C4 and reconciled that $15,000 was the most supportable."

 

[glenn walker]

Nah.
1. We both know they don't have access to any "list".
2. Asking for a "list" validates adjusting by what others say and not by doing your own work.
This was my response. "Can't comment on UCDP findings or peer or model adjustments. However, support for the adjustment was made using matched pairs from each of the other three comparables that are C4 and reconciled that $15,000 was the most supportable."

Yeah as long as their matched pairs that statement is rarely supported by the comparables used.

 

[Surf Cat]

"Per UCDP findings the condition adjustment for comp 2 is smaller than peer and model adjustments, please advise"

Dear Slipshod AMC,

"The condition adjustments applied within the sales comparison approach were developed using paired sales analysis. Specifically, comparable sales with similar characteristics, differing primarily in the feature being adjusted, were identified and analyzed to quantify the market's reaction to that specific attribute. In instances where direct paired sales were limited or required further validation, the analysis was further refined and supported by the findings of a market survey, which provided insights into local buyer preferences and market trends regarding condition of the comparables utilized in this report. This integrated approach ensures the adjustments are well-supported by both direct market transactions and a broader understanding of buyer behavior within the subject's market."

 

[Bobby Bucks]

For the last few months I'm seeing more revision requests similar to that one. I've concluded that many of them aren't from the run of the mill unlicensed reviewers, but are coming from frustrated licensed staff being "demoted" to reviewer status due to budget cuts and they have an axe to grind. I can tell by the verbiage that they consider themselves high and mighty by citing Fannie and USPAP but it's clear they know next to nothing about the real appraisal world. My favorite one was where the subject had a 6 stall horse barn and one of the comps had a 7 stall horse barn and I was interrogated for not making an adjustment per stall. The "reviewer" even referenced the MLS # of that comp and the description. I didn't bother to explain the 6 stall barn might actually be larger than the 7 stall barn if the former was for Clydesdales and the latter was for Shetland ponies.

 

[glenn walker]

For the last few months I'm seeing more revision requests similar to that one. I've concluded that many of them aren't from the run of the mill unlicensed reviewers, but are coming from frustrated licensed staff being "demoted" to reviewer status due to budget cuts and they have an axe to grind. I can tell by the verbiage that they consider themselves high and mighty by citing Fannie and USPAP but it's clear they know next to nothing about the real appraisal world. My favorite one was where the subject had a 6 stall horse barn and one of the comps had a 7 stall horse barn and I was interrogated for not making an adjustment per stall. The "reviewer" even referenced the MLS # of that comp and the description. I didn't bother to explain the 6 stall barn might actually be larger than the 7 stall barn if the former was for Clydesdales and the latter was for Shetland ponies.

Those come from the Fannie notes when the Underwriters run the system. Not typical from the reviewer.

The list may say something like GLA or Condition adjustments not similar to what others in area are using.

If yours is at $50.00 GLA and 80% in area are adjusting using $100.00 yours is flagged. Then you may be asked WHY your adjustments are so different. Their actually using hundreds of your peers adjustments in the data base.

Our experience was the mostly older appraisers were using extremely low GLA and Condition adjustments often the same ones used 25 or more year's ago like at $35 GLA when $100.00 was the realistic one.

 

[Fernando]

Each neighborhood has different adjustments.
I have thousands of appraisals so when I get one to clone, I have most of the information including starting point for adjustments.
It works for me.

 

[glenn walker]

I never used the term matched pairs. The reason why is most have seen only a few real matched pairs in their career and when challenged they choke.

Always use terms and labels that are hard to be challenged like "sensitivity analysis " or proprietary regression analysis and get me confused enough as the reviewer to just say F it. I place the appraisers bull**** in the file and move on. Rule #1 never get yourself into a corner.

 

[NC Appraising]

I never used the term matched pairs.

What is the correct term when you use two sales that varies in 2 or more features?

True book definition of match pairs is when they only vary by one feature or attribute.

I call it group data analysis or paired data analysis.