Qc Audit

[J Grant]

Why the house has two electrical meters?
- One was for the main house, the second one was for a stable. (no living space just the horses), no office, no commercial and nobody lives in the stable just 4 horses.

Why a detached mother in law suit was included in the GLA?
- The old lady lives in the mother in law suite connected to the house, they share all utilities and the area is attached to the house just that it has a separate entrance. It is included in the county GLA, the blue print of the house and the area is not detached. The appraiser disclosed all this in the report.

Why a comparable was labeled to have a negative location?
- Because it was backing the interstate. Also in the report.

Give a detail of how the quality of construction adjustment was obtained?
- I reviewed the appraisal and he showed how he compared a regular builder construction with a custom builder quality product and how he did the adjustment. I do not know what else they want.

and to provide evidence that the comparable properties used in the report also have separate entrance to their accessory units.

The above may be fine except mother in law suite- if it has only a separate entrance and no access into main dwelling (whether attached or not- ) it is not typically combined with GLA of the main dwelling despite the fact that on county records it is included in GLA.

Regarding custom construction quality adjustment, were any of the comps similar custom construction needing no quality adjustment?

If is frustrating to address items already explained in report.

 

[hastalavista]

While every point may have been addressed in this specific report, here is what I see...

No one knows the property in the lending-chain as well as the appraiser who inspected it. Sometimes, in our writings, it is clear to us what we mean but not always clear to the client/intended user. In other words, we write (especially when under deadlines) with the frame of mind that the client/intended user understands the background as well as we do; consequently, what we did explain makes perfect sense to us but not to the users.
It is a writing skill to be able to take a complicated situation and distill it down to a clear picture. From what you describe, this was a bit of a complex assignment with some moving parts:
1. ADU unit (detached) included in GLA
2. Quality of construction differences (IMO, one of them most difficult to analyze and credibly adjust)
3. Two meters, yet one identified living unit

The original report may have addressed all these points clearly; if so, then the reading comprehension issue is on the other side of the table.
But complexities that may be clear to us (and solved in the report) may not be as clear to the client/intended users. We need to ensure that what we write bridges this gap.

My lender-client will never know the property as well as I do. What I have to do in my report is convey what they need to know so what I did make sense. The more oddball/complex/or unexpected things from the norm, the more I have to be clear in what existed and how I dealt with it.

Shocking to some ( ...yeah, right! ) is that I tend to write more than less. When I have a somewhat complex concept and explain how I addressed it, I may have several sentences to walk-through that story:

"The subject has a dwelling unit that blah, blah,blah.... "[THIS MAY BE FEW SENTENCES UP TO A COUPLE OF PARAGRAPHS]​

But then I'll add:

"In other words [or, "in sum"], the subject has X configuration and I treated it as Y in my analysis."​

I've given them the detailed explanation of how I approached the issue and then summed it up in one sentence. If they don't understand what I did and still question it (as opposed to disagreeing with it), either they have a big comprehension problem or I cannot communicate in an appropriate manner.

I would not hesitate to address a request from the client that was due to a QC audit.

Good luck!

​

 

[residentialguy]

Shocking to some ( ...yeah, right! ) is that I tend to write more than less.

 

[J Grant]

My perspective on length of narrative (whether in addendum or elsewhere)- it should be as long as needed to explain the reasoning or complexities/anomalies or describe features/defects, but not padded just to impress. Some people naturally write more succinctly than others.
An underwriter or reviewer for a lender might get exasperated by overly long narrative if the same thing could have been conveyed more efficiently, whereas a private party, this appraisal might be the only one, or one of a few they see in years and thus they tend to savor narrative ...

I have no idea if the QC issues was due to lack of narrative or not. Narrative, no matter how well written, will not make up for bad comp choices or other deficits in an appraisal ).

A good appraisal can be enhanced by more narrative, but a bad appraisal is still a bad appraisal no matter how much narrative is there. No matter the quality of an appraisal, a specific problem issue may or may not be resolved with narrative

 

[Dublin ohio]

a bad appraisal is still a bad appraisal no matter how much narrative is in there

Yep. If you cannot amaze them with ability. Baffle them with bs.