Sales Comparison Approach Reconciliation

[AnonApprsr]

The market indicates that no time adjustment was necessary due to the closing dates of the comparable sales in relation to the effective date of the estimation of value for the Subject. This is due to recent stabilized values over the past 12+- months, in the Subject's market area, at this time (see Market Condition comments). All Sales sold within 6+- months.
In determining a final value estimate, the indicated adjustments were derived from research and analysis of relevant market data from within the Subject's marketing area, as well as local real estate markets. All sales were chosen from among other viewed and under consideration. They are considered to be the best available in arriving at an estimate of value for the Subject property, as of the effective date of this appraisal.
During the reconciliation of the Sales Comparison approach most weight was given to Sales #2 and #4. They were considered to be the superior indicators for an estimate of market value in the opinion of the appraiser. Sales #1 and #3 were considered as support for the overall range of value presented by the Comparable Sales. Please also see attached active listings which lend further support to the Reconciliation of Value for the Sales Comparison Approach.
At the top of the sales grid, page 2, the data is based on properties of Comparable Style per MLS, within 3+- miles from the Subject. Please note these sales are not all Comparable Sales such as Sales #1-#4, the data is presented to inform the reader on the market for homes "similar" or comparable to the Subject Property with the data drawn from H3MLS the local Listing Service.
The Comparable Sales used as support for the estimate of a reasonable market value of the Subject were the best Sales available. These are the best available Comparable Sales, if there were any superior indicators of market value they would have been used as Comparable Sales in this report. Other sales were considered, but not used.
After researching potential comparable sales data from within the Subject's general marketing area, it was determined that some bungalow, ranch, raised ranch, split level, and some multi level style homes offer reasonable overall comparability when determining a market value for the Subject, as each style would appear to compete with the Subject style in this marketing area at this time. The opinion of comparability of styles is based on experience, knowledge of local marketing areas, and discussion with market participants. Any other variations, such as GLA, condition, utility, etc., would be adjusted when and where it was warranted in the opinion of the appraiser, as shown in the Sales Grid. These properties were the best available sales in the local market area considered as the best available indicators of market value for the Subject property.
Comparable Sales #1, #3, and #4 ares over 1 mile in distance from the Subject. This is not considered unusual, as competing neighborhoods within Plymouth and other local communities are often located many miles apart due to the nature of the development of the town, along with availability of suitable land for such development. The overall competition and marketability of these areas as a whole is considered similar to the Subject.

Post your SCA Reconciliation comments that appear in each report, when applicable. Not the specific reasoning for adjustments but as such as you see in mine. I think it's good for us to see what our professional EXPERT peers are doing.:new_multi:

 

[Mr Rex]

The market indicates that no time adjustment was necessary due to the closing dates of the comparable sales in relation to the effective date of the estimation of value for the Subject. This is due to recent stabilized values over the past 12+- months, in the Subject's market area, at this time (see Market Condition comments). All Sales sold within 6+- months.
In determining a final value estimate, the indicated adjustments were derived from research and analysis of relevant market data from within the Subject's marketing area, as well as local real estate markets. All sales were chosen from among other viewed and under consideration. They are considered to be the best available in arriving at an estimate of value for the Subject property, as of the effective date of this appraisal.
During the reconciliation of the Sales Comparison approach most weight was given to Sales #2 and #4. They were considered to be the superior indicators for an estimate of market value in the opinion of the appraiser. Sales #1 and #3 were considered as support for the overall range of value presented by the Comparable Sales. Please also see attached active listings which lend further support to the Reconciliation of Value for the Sales Comparison Approach.
At the top of the sales grid, page 2, the data is based on properties of Comparable Style per MLS, within 3+- miles from the Subject. Please note these sales are not all Comparable Sales such as Sales #1-#4, the data is presented to inform the reader on the market for homes "similar" or comparable to the Subject Property with the data drawn from H3MLS the local Listing Service.
The Comparable Sales used as support for the estimate of a reasonable market value of the Subject were the best Sales available. These are the best available Comparable Sales, if there were any superior indicators of market value they would have been used as Comparable Sales in this report. Other sales were considered, but not used.
After researching potential comparable sales data from within the Subject's general marketing area, it was determined that some bungalow, ranch, raised ranch, split level, and some multi level style homes offer reasonable overall comparability when determining a market value for the Subject, as each style would appear to compete with the Subject style in this marketing area at this time. The opinion of comparability of styles is based on experience, knowledge of local marketing areas, and discussion with market participants. Any other variations, such as GLA, condition, utility, etc., would be adjusted when and where it was warranted in the opinion of the appraiser, as shown in the Sales Grid. These properties were the best available sales in the local market area considered as the best available indicators of market value for the Subject property.
Comparable Sales #1, #3, and #4 ares over 1 mile in distance from the Subject. This is not considered unusual, as competing neighborhoods within Plymouth and other local communities are often located many miles apart due to the nature of the development of the town, along with availability of suitable land for such development. The overall competition and marketability of these areas as a whole is considered similar to the Subject.

Post your SCA Reconciliation comments that appear in each report, when applicable. Not the specific reasoning for adjustments but as such as you see in mine. I think it's good for us to see what our professional EXPERT peers are doing.:new_multi:

Repeat yourself much? FWIW, alot of what you have is not really reconciliation comments but SCA comments.

 

[CANative]

All comps given equal weight with most weight given to comp 1.

 

[sandpiperapp]

All comps given equal weight with most weight given to comp 1.

All comps used given equal consideration with most consideration given to Comp #1

 

[residentialguy]

You should probabley tag the end with something like. "In case I didn't tell you, these are the best available Comparable Sales."

 

[Non Sequitur]

FWIW, alot of what you have is not really reconciliation comments but SCA comments.

True, but in all fairness, what he wrote is about 90% more narrative than what I've seen in nearly all reports I've reviewed.

All comps used given equal consideration with most consideration given to Comp #1

If you gave Comp #1 the most consideration, then you didn't give equal consideration to the other comps.

 

[Michigan CG]

Anon,

A reconciliation of value should summarize the findings of the report and then tell the reader why you picked $x instead of $y or $z.

If you have a range of $230,000 to $250,000 the reconciliation tells the reader why you picked $230,000 or $240,000 or $250,000 or even $241,386.

What you have provided are paragraphs of canned statements with duplicity in the paragraphs.

The reconciliation may address those items which you did not adjust for quantitatively but considered qualitatively. Perhaps the comparable #1 adjusted to $230,000. The house across the street is in poor condition and thus is not given much consideration. Maybe comp #2 had a park contiguous to the home which was not adjusted for in the grid.

Your reconciliation should be short concise paragraphs summing up the appraisal and directing the reader to the reason for the opinion of value.

RECONCILIATION OF VALUE: The subject property is unique in the features of the property. The home has 4,358 SF on the 19.1-acre site. The ~two-acre lake is not a common feature and no sales of similar properties were found with a pond feature. I have discussed the value of the pond in the land valuation portion of this report.

The unadjusted sales prices (after concessions are applied) range from $225,000 to $270,000 for the five SALES. Also included in this report are one contingent REO sale and two active listings which have a range of $175,000-$329,000. The adjusted sales prices range from $320,100 to $347,100.

The three active properties have an adjusted range from $304,100-$368,100 with the $368,100 being far above any adjusted value.

The subject property has not been updated in some time and there is duplicity in some of the GLA. The home is a brick home and has a large desirable site with the ~two–acre lake. The adjustments for this property are high considering the land area. No sales were found in three years of similar properties on large sites compared to the subject. Sales #1 and #2 are given the most consideration in this report. Sale#1 because of land size and GLA and sale #2 because of condition as discussed in the individual comments of the sale properties.

The subject property is dated with no improvements in some time. There is little deferred maintenance although a typical buyer would anticipate some immediate upgrades to the property.

It is my opinion that the subject property value as of August 27, 2012 is at or near $325,000 in the property’s AS-IS condition.

 

[George Hatch]

Based on the other threads we've had recently involving this topic I get the impression that the OP is angling for a "walk-off", like these two guys:

 

[residentialguy]

Some good comments for explaining the SCA, Anon. I'd like to see more summation like Mich said, but it's certainly better then the reports I see that don't have additional comments.

I'll assume that you continue on to reconciling the 3 approaches to value, explaining what your exposure time is for your conclusion, your conclusion was consistent with H&BU, etc.

 

[CANative]

Anon,


What you have provided are paragraphs of canned statements with duplicity in the paragraphs.

Duplicity:

deceitfulness in speech or conduct, as by speaking or acting in two different ways to different people concerning the same matter; double-dealing.