Sale settled post Effective date, prior to report date

[J Grant]

Thanks to all for the quick responses. So is it proper to leave the sale as pending in the SC and leave the AV as currently written with a detailed note such as:

NOTE: Pending Sale #6 settled for $X on Y date. As the sale was not settled at the time of the original report, it was not considered in the final reconciliation. Had it been settled, it would have been granted most weight. Users should be aware of this new data point.

Porch was not deemed to contribute value as Bla Bla Bla.
Suggested sales 1-5 were not utilized as they are dissimilar due to Bla Bla Bla.

Ugh... this just sits poorly with me. If I had written the report a day later, the AV would have been different (lower) ad Iron-Clad. Am I being misleading by not including the Sale as closed and issuing a new AV, or is acceptable to state the Valuation is as of the effective date , with sales closing after the ED no being considered.

What was the pending sold price and what was your OMV ?

Imo, unless there is a vast difference, I would not comment on the pending sold price since, it is normal practice to have it as a pending on the eff date. You are under no obligation to comment about it closing afterward and found out now... - though if it closed before you prior original signature date perhaps it could have been noted then...but we are not perfect...

 

[SteveSpy]

responding to a revision request or ROV does not make it a new appraisal, it is a continuation of the original with a new , updated signature date...

It is up to you to reconsider your own value when you re open a report.... I doubt I would but it is your appraisal if the pending that closed lower makes you want to revisit your value your call.

OK... that is more in-line with the UW.

What was the pending sold price and what was your OMV ?

Imo, unless there is a vast difference, I would not comment on the pending sold price since, it is normal practice to have it as a pending on the eff date. You are under no obligation to comment about it closing afterward and found out now... - though if it closed before you prior original signature date perhaps it could have been noted then...but we are not perfect...

Newly settled sale is 11% below my AV and 19% below the subject PP. I feel it is significant.

I think I'm going to discuss the 'issues' in a dated addendum that includes the communication from the client. I will disclose the newly settled sale stating that it remains pending in the SC grid as this is a continuation of the original report, not a new assignment. Inform the reader that the listing was considered under the theory of substitution in the original report but not included in the final reconciliation as it was not settled. Had it been settled, it would have been deemed a strong indicator of value given similarities ion location (sale project), finish level, size, condition and amenities.

 

[Russ Kitzberger]

Did you read that the pending sale closed 1 day after eff date a a LOWER price than his appraisal value> So the agent does NOT want it as a closed sale lol ( suddenly it is not the BEST data since it does not support a higher value, which is all they care about )-

Well, when you reopen the case, you find new evidence.

I think I'm going to discuss the 'issues' in a dated addendum that includes the communication from the client. I will disclose the newly settled sale stating that it remains pending in the SC grid as this is a continuation of the original report, not a new assignment. Inform the reader that the listing was considered under the theory of substitution in the original report but not included in the final reconciliation as it was not settled. Had it been settled, it would have been deemed a strong indicator of value given similarities ion location (sale project), finish level, size, condition and amenities.

If you reopen the project, I think you need to consider that new data.

Are you or anyone else aware of a hard stop regulation that would prohibit you from considering only data after the effective date?

 

[J Grant]

OK... that is more in-line with the UW.

Newly settled sale is 11% below my AV and 19% below the subject PP. I feel it is significant.

I think I'm going to discuss the 'issues' in a dated addendum that includes the communication from the client. I will disclose the newly settled sale stating that it remains pending in the SC grid as this is a continuation of the original report, not a new assignment. Inform the reader that the listing was considered under the theory of substitution in the original report but not included in the final reconciliation as it was not settled. Had it been settled, it would have been deemed a strong indicator of value given similarities ion location (sale project), finish level, size, condition and amenities.

Did you call the agent, is there a particular reason this unit sold for the lower price ?

 

[SteveSpy]

Well, when you reopen the case, you find new evidence.


If you reopen the project, I think you need to consider that new data.

Are you or anyone else aware of a hard stop regulation that would prohibit you from considering only data after the effective date?

That's the way I was seeing it...
Maybe I can draw the line at adding info/correcting errors and adding data and analysis in the form of additional sales, etc. The former is an 'update' of an existing report, the latter a 'new report'. Just spitballin'.

I read this post from 6/20:

http://appraisersblogs.com/appraisal-report-corrections-protocol

 

[J Grant]

I would not submit any comments on it till you contact the seller or agent and find out why it sold for so much less - wrt over value the subject even though the OMV was lower than SC price...

Were other units closed located in the subject complex on the grid? Was this sale closing so low an anomaly or what...

 

[glenn walker]

The quickest way to get rid of this is to simply say that if you include that comp
as closed sale your value will be lower : -15 Minutes Later : E-Mail-Please disregard revisions-we have signed off and its going over to funding : ) Thats what I do when I get ridicules not true comparables sent over on an-ROV : Response we reviewed the three comparables you sent over and its unfortunate that resulted in a lower value. We can revise and send over revised report including your comparable;es with a new Lower value and a new signature date. E-mail back to us - HARD STOP disregard the ROV : ) LMAO

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Hmmm.... My thought was, if I issue a new Date of Report, its essentially a new report. If its a new report, shouldn't all data available today ne taken into account.

I agree, and also would include the same property 2x as consecutive comps in the SCA grid, especially because the unadjusted price of the pending sale presumably was based upon the list price rather than the contract price, which also presumably is above list. Post is somewhat confusing because it's inconceivable that a client would ask the appraiser to exclude info that, again presumably, would reflect a higher adjusted value, but perhaps I mis-read the Post. zzzzzzz sleepy

 

[glenn walker]

I would not submit any comments on it till you contact the seller or agent and find out why it sold for so much less - wrt over value the subject even though the OMV was lower than SC price...

Were other units closed located in the subject complex on the grid? Was this sale closing so low an anomaly or what...

In this market anything that sells substantially below market and other comp is an-outlier and I would set it aside and not place any weight on it . Officer that's my story and I am sticking to it

 

[Mike Kennedy]

" Do I leave it alone in the SC grid but include verbiage stating that the listing is now closed an settled at a value beneath the AV and would have been considered an excellent indicator of value." YES and change :"would have been" to " is"