Lender Requesting Commentary to be removed

[Dublin ohio]

Again, HIGHEST AND BEST USE. The issue you keep ignoring in favor of hurling insults at me.

What insults. You did what you did. No one is ignoring HBU. The original contract included both lots. The new contract doesn't. Has nothing to do with HBU

 

[Dublin ohio]

"the new appraisal". Please explain. Are you saying this requires a new appraisal due to a contract change? That happens all the time.

Changing concessions or even the purchase price is not the same as changing the property being purchased

 

[Paradiddle]

What insults. You did what you did. No one is ignoring HBU. The original contract included both lots. The new contract doesn't. Has nothing to do with HBU

Answered.

 

[Paradiddle]

Changing concessions or even the purchase price is not the same as changing the property being purchased

Answered.

 

[Paradiddle]

If your analysis changes then that's a change. Even if the process of considering that change happens in less than a minute it's the mental part that makes the analysis different, not whatever changes you make to the verbiage.

Answered.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Wasn't talking to you. For that matter, please stop responding as you have taken this off course.

Meh

 

[George Hatch]

Changing concessions or even the purchase price is not the same as changing the property being purchased

In counterpoint I would say the appraisal problem itself includes more than just the subject property attributes
Definition of value
intended use
intended user
effective date,
assumptions/limitations
SOW
etc.

The assignment amounts to baking a cake; if you change any of the ingredients in that recipe then it becomes a different cake regardless of its other similarities.

 

[George Hatch]

My analysis was ALWAYS one lot one house. Nothing changed except the contract.

Did you consider the contract as part of your analysis? Because you were supposed to.

Lookit, I'm not going to argue with you because IRL appraisers revise their reports all the time without disclosing changes to their analyses and nobody is going to call them on that because they don't care. So you can do the same in this situation and you will almost never get any pushback from it, and even if someone wanted to know why this report looks a little different from that report they're not going to escalate that line of inquiry by sending you up to your state board.

But if this was a test then there would be a correct answer and an incorrect answer.

 

[Paradiddle]

Did you consider the contract as part of your analysis? Because you were supposed to.

Lookit, I'm not going to argue with you because IRL appraisers revise their reports all the time without disclosing changes to their analyses and nobody is going to call them on that because they don't care. So you can do the same in this situation and you will almost never get any pushback from it, and even if someone wanted to know why this report looks a little different from that report they're not going to escalate that line of inquiry by sending you up to your state board.

But if this was a test then there would be a correct answer and an incorrect answer.

Answered.

 

[Tom D]

Just forget that separate lot, the agreement has been amended, it's gone. Lenders and owners don't know this excess/surplus land use nonsense. So the lender now won't put a lien on it, they don't need it. If the lender, or seller, knew this nonsense originally they would have left it off. The owner didn't know, thought they probable had to make it a non removable part of the house sale. It is a separate removable lot. Forget the highest and best use, it should have never been part of the original appraisal.

He did the appraisal as if the extra lot wasn't part of, It didn't affect anything but the agreement of sale, now it's official gone. This thread should now be official gone with some of these posts. Of course you can just put a new inspection date with a new picture of the front of the house with a new file number if you want to. That's your business decision. But as far as surplus/excess, you did it the right way the first time.