"Sample" Appraisal: Subjective Value Containment Approach

[George Hatch]

I was referring to your 2018 land sale on the east side of Buckingham, one lot south of Pacific. But since you mention Brighton, if you saw the lot you'd have seen they did a lot split and put 2 houses on it as of your effective date. Just the fact that the lot was of sufficient size and dimensions to do a lot split in that neighborhood should have registered with you.

 

[George Hatch]

The ranking of the comparables on Condition, Quality, Appeal, is done by the method, based on residuals. The appraiser has no input, other than deciding on the transaction data to be entered into the regression. And, basically, the Sales Price minus regression contributions based on physical attributes, or the residual, determined that value. For better or worse. That's it - you have no say as to whether Comp A is better than Comp B. All you can do is rank your subject against the already ranked comparables. I can't guarantee that won't be problematic, but I have never had a problem. In fact, it has been easy.

But .... that damn sales price incorporates market reaction to CQA far better than your .... hmmmm ... opinion whatever that is now worth. Caught you in a trap buddy. You didn't see it. Your personal subjective judgment is NOT supported by the hard cold facts. I guess you "could" argue that the market reaction is flawed in comparison to your superior judgment. Heck you can argue all you want. I'd rather just have the sale price on my side.

I'm not arguing the model that you're using to adjust those comps. I'm asking why you're even using 3bd sales when you have 2bd sales nearby.

Like #4 Hibbert, for example. An apparent model match, located on your subject's block, which reportedly sold in 09/2017 for $799k and which was apparently in more similar overall condition than any of your other sales. (And just in case it's not clear, I found the sale before I looked for the pic.)

 

[James Micozzi]

So Bert likes to throw stones. Pretty funny from a guy who by his own admissions as of 2018 has a total of 6 years of appraisal experience. See attached photo. SMH.

 

[RCA]

I am an SRA and that income approach is nowhere near credible and neither is the cost approach. There is no justification to put that kind of analysis in the report when it doesn't even remotely follow basic procedures. What you have demostrated is you don't know how to do either.

The Cost Approach was done according to the 2017 California Tax Assessor's Handbook. Their costs include a list of things, including "contractor's overhead and profit" and "entrepreneurial profit". Have you read the handbook?

As far as other issues, as far as I know, no one has made a specific objection I haven't covered. Regression showed that lot prices are averaging around $350K, and no know lot characteristics have influenced lot price up until the effective date of appraisal in this particular sample report.

Thus your objections are largely idiotic from my perspective. Perhaps have you were more explicit?

Mostly what I have seen so far is BS.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

So Bert likes to throw stones. Pretty funny from a guy who by his own admissions as of 2018 has a total of 6 years of appraisal experience. See attached photo. SMH.

https://www2.brea.ca.gov/breasearch/faces/party/view.xhtml?id=30891

 

[George Hatch]

Or how about this one: 650 Canyon Dr; 800sf 2/1 on an 8800sf lot; sold on 07/13/2017 for $790,000?

 

[James Micozzi]

https://www2.brea.ca.gov/breasearch/faces/party/view.xhtml?id=30891

Ok. That just proves that Bert cannot count and that fact alone can cause one to question his mathematical abilities. LOL

 

[TRESinc]

 

[Artemis Fowl]

Bert, you are heavily invested in this. Is there any possibility that our feedback is at all useful to you or is everybody else in the entire profession just too stupid to get it? Either way I think there is something you can learn from it if you are open enough to what you're hearing here. Opposing counsel would, at this point, likely be thinking "mission accomplished".

 

[George Hatch]

The Cost Approach was done according to the 2017 California Tax Assessor's Handbook. Their costs include a list of things, including "contractor's overhead and profit" and "entrepreneurial profit". Have you read the handbook?

As far as other issues, as far as I know, no one has made a specific objection I haven't covered. Regression showed that lot prices are averaging around $350K, and no know lot characteristics have influenced lot price up until the effective date of appraisal in this particular sample report.

Thus your objections are largely idiotic from my perspective. Perhaps have you were more explicit?

Mostly what I have seen so far is BS.

Nobody is disputing the accuracy of those costs insofar as they go, but everyone who uses a cost service understand they don't always cover 100% of the costs in every situation. The instructions to which you refer include making additional adjustments by locale when necessary and per market conditions.

P.S., I use that cost reference when I do a CA on SFR's too.

You opined a cost new for those improvements of $113k, including their allowances for contractor overhead and profit. I asked once already and now I'm asking again - in your professional opinion and based on your previous exposure to SFR appraising, do you actually think an investor could have put that house+garage+landscaping and concrete could have been put on that parcel in that town in 2017 for $113k? Much less clear a profit margin from it?