Obligation To Take Future Offsite Conditions Into Account

[Mr Rex]

Panoramic is <180 degrees in humans. Some narrow headed dogs are +/-290 degrees. Some narrow headed humans are less than 10 degrees and drive with their blinker on all the time just in case.

 

[Howard Klahr]

How many miles of open space across how many municipalities do you call to check on?

As many as are necessary

It's a witch hunt and the lemmings fall right in line.

Beyond the scope of the assignment. Not too worried about that which I can not control

 

[bodenstein]

State of New Jersey property seller's disclosure.



View attachment 31195

http://www.marybajwa.com/IS2/Data/AgentSites/64976/property disclosure.pdf

Responsibility of the buyer.



Wrong again.

They are part of the Pocono's which are the oldest mountain range on the North American continent.

But hey, why let facts get in the way of your opinion?

.

I guess the definition is not hard and fast, but what generally distinguishes a mountain from a hill is a stone peak above the timberline. By that definition there are no mountains in New Jersey, whether or not they may be part of a range. You might have mistaken me for 45, Sean Spicer, or Kellyanne Conway.

 

[Meandering]

I guess the definition is not hard and fast, but what generally distinguishes a mountain from a hill is a stone peak above the timberline. By that definition there are no mountains in New Jersey, whether or not they may be part of a range. You might have mistaken me for 45, Sean Spicer, or Kellyanne Conway.

Bad news for you.
This is not religion.
It is not contingent upon your "beliefs" in meanings.
This is appraising
and is contingent upon what is written and we are mandated to follow.

I have not given any consideration of you, hence I have not mistaken anything about you.

I will say that,
apparently you lack some training in what you are trying to portray you are undertaking, based upon what you have presented to this forum.

So,
If you want helpful advice,
Give us the details.

How far from the subject is this elevated parcel of land that is the premium view?
How far from the subject was this condo built?

At what elevations are the condo, and subject? How many stories are each?

What cities, townships or Boroughs are your subjects?

Actually, just tell us how long it was between the time the subject was purchased and construction began. You do know when the construction began,
don't you?

.

.

 

[hastalavista]

So,
If you want helpful advice,
Give us the details.

How far from the subject is this elevated parcel of land that is the premium view?
How far from the subject was this condo built?

At what elevations are the condo, and subject? How many stories are each?

What cities, townships or Boroughs are your subjects?

Actually, just tell us how long it was between the time the subject was purchased and construction began. You do know when the construction began,
don't you?

I agree; while you may not be able to give specifics in terms of city/township, etc., a distance/proximity of the condo project in relationship to the subject would, at a minimum, be helpful.

 

[Meandering]

I agree; while you may not be able to give specifics in terms of city/township, etc., a distance/proximity of the condo project in relationship to the subject would, at a minimum, be helpful.

Thanks D.

Also time frame I think is important.

It's one thing if the project started construction a week or two after the subject was purchased.

A totally different story if nothing started until a few years after the subject was purchased.

,

 

[hastalavista]

Yes- the time frame would be meaningful as well for the reasons you state.

 

[bodenstein]

Bad news for you.
This is not religion.
It is not contingent upon your "beliefs" in meanings.
This is appraising
and is contingent upon what is written and we are mandated to follow.

I have not given any consideration of you, hence I have not mistaken anything about you.

I will say that,
apparently you lack some training in what you are trying to portray you are undertaking, based upon what you have presented to this forum.

So,
If you want helpful advice,
Give us the details.

How far from the subject is this elevated parcel of land that is the premium view?
How far from the subject was this condo built?

At what elevations are the condo, and subject? How many stories are each?

What cities, townships or Boroughs are your subjects?

Actually, just tell us how long it was between the time the subject was purchased and construction began. You do know when the construction began,
don't you?

.

.

First off, I very much appreciate your help. Second, you started down the path of facts versus opinions, or perhaps in the current parlance, alternative facts. Calling something a fact doesn't make it a fact, just like calling something a mountain doesn't necessarily make it a mountain. I was attempting to be humorous in my response, I often fail at that. No offense intended. Third, I have none of the details you requested, although they are good questions. We are just trying to help an attorney we work with, this is not anything we are undertaking in any direct sense, and we are not at this point privy to that level of detail. We can probably get some or all of that info, but I really don't think it's necessary to get quite that deep in the weeds on this for the purpose at hand. While it's not entirely clear cut, this seems to boil down to the fact that the appraiser should definitely have reported the pending development if he knew of it, and that there might be issues of competency if he didn't know it, but reasonably should have been expected to discover it in the course of his due diligence. This is a great resource, and I really appreciate the level of knowledge and nuanced understanding you and so many others here are willing to share. Thanks!

 

[BarrySW1963]

Well, IANAL, but I do have an opinion on this.

I'm not even remotely buying the assertion that the buyer, seller and agents (any or all) didn't know about the project if the development was so imminent that the appraiser should have known but that none of the parties to the transaction would have known.

Too many people witch-hunt appraisers to compensate for their own lack of due diligence.

If the buyer signed the seller's disclosure that didn't disclose anything about the planned development BUT WARNED the buyer to do their due diligence about the area, and the buyer having signed that disclosure (i.e., acknowledged they had been put on notice to investigate on their own) and didn't bother to do their expected/required due diligence, then the buyer shouldn't be able to claim they were harmed by the appraiser, which is a separate issue IMHO to what the appraiser's obligations were to the lender.

In other words, if the claim is that the appraiser should have known, then the buyer, sellers and the agents should have known as well.

 

[Meandering]

First off, I very much appreciate your help. Second, you started down the path of facts versus opinions, or perhaps in the current parlance, alternative facts. Calling something a fact doesn't make it a fact, just like calling something a mountain doesn't necessarily make it a mountain. I was attempting to be humorous in my response, I often fail at that. No offense intended. Third, I have none of the details you requested, although they are good questions. We are just trying to help an attorney we work with, this is not anything we are undertaking in any direct sense, and we are not at this point privy to that level of detail. We can probably get some or all of that info, but I really don't think it's necessary to get quite that deep in the weeds on this for the purpose at hand. While it's not entirely clear cut, this seems to boil down to the fact that the appraiser should definitely have reported the pending development if he knew of it, and that there might be issues of competency if he didn't know it, but reasonably should have been expected to discover it in the course of his due diligence. This is a great resource, and I really appreciate the level of knowledge and nuanced understanding you and so many others here are willing to share. Thanks!

While I can appreciate you trying to help an attorney you work with,

I believe you are leaving with the wrong understanding;

While it's not entirely clear cut, this seems to boil down to the fact that the appraiser should definitely have reported the pending development if he knew of it, and that there might be issues of competency if he didn't know it, but reasonably should have been expected to discover it in the course of his due diligence.

This is not correct.
As it misses the reason this thread has gone 8 pages.

Even if the appraiser KNEW about a pending development. There isn't any obligation to report it, unless the development would impact value or marketability of the subject, in the mind of the ORIGINAL APPRAISER.

In a mixed use neighborhood with other apartments and SFRs, there is no obligation to individually report any and all new planned development of SFRs or apartments.

You need the facts before you can answer the attorney's question correctly.

Off the cuff generalizations do nothing to help you, the attorney, the homeowner, nor the appraiser that is going to get sued.

Competency is a different issue, which I would not try to determine based on this singular question.

Unless of course you are reviewing the OA and then you should have all the details.

.