SL Commercial Report Compliant?

[JSmith43]

The following commentary assumes the exhibit referred to is a fictional case. This is an EA. If the person and report are real, then the comments and musings are subject to revision or elimination. I'm going with the April Fools theory of MK for now.

Primary musings:
The guy should have used the term "not developed" rather than N/A to explain the absence of Income & CA:icon_mrgreen:

This is my favorite part:

The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, financial feasibility, and maximum profitability

Did anyone else come up with three? Obviously, he forgot to include max $$. But, he did go on to summarize 4 elements

It would interest me to see a sample of commercial reports on routine RE produced in the '50's. No doubt, quality and paper poundage varied widely. I wonder what the S & L file stuffers looked like back then?

Not even a stab at the income approach?

The guy did painted a pretty good depression era mood/word picture with the early verbiage. Is that accurate for current AR Terrell? His comment that "there is no market" should have been fleshed out and backed up.

So much, a mystery, like a detailed SOW. Maybe part of the SOW negotiation was an agreement to not include a detailed SOW

 

[DMZwerg]

Old time residential appraiser come out of "retirement" to take a stab at a commercial when he hasn't done one in over a decade?

Old time appraiser who couldn't find a proper "form" on his software for commercial? I mean, those are actual pictures scanned in there, I can see the overlap. It looks like something from 20 years ago!


But all that is minor to me compared to the "discussion" of comparable sales, or should I say "lack of discussion" and "no indication how or why they are comparable". Obviously skipped as 3/4ths of page 12 is blank.

That is my brief take on it.

 

[JSmith43]

Yes, the most glaring absence is that there isn't even a trail of bread crumbs to clue the reader in about how the comp sales relate to the subject & the subject's MV other than the listing of SP and SqFt. Not even a smily face indicating a favored sale.

Does listing the SF rise to the occasion? Well, I'd give credit for a couple of bread crumbs after all. But instead of disclosing the logic behind the decision, the reader is simply beamed to the conclusion.

Page numbering is really important. Maybe all the crucial stuff is in the missing executive summary.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Old time residential appraiser come out of "retirement" to take a stab at a commercial when he hasn't done one in over a decade?

Old time appraiser who couldn't find a proper "form" on his software for commercial? I mean, those are actual pictures scanned in there, I can see the overlap. It looks like something from 20 years ago!


But all that is minor to me compared to the "discussion" of comparable sales, or should I say "lack of discussion" and "no indication how or why they are comparable". Obviously skipped as 3/4ths of page 12 is blank.

That is my brief take on it.

C'mon Dmz we all know GCs aren't "form fillers".:new_smile-l: The report does however have some of the requisite "boiler plate" certs commensurate with the "detailed" reasoning and analysis contained in it. At least he tried.:Eyecrazy:

 

[George Hatch]

I dunno. What I got out of it was that perhaps this appraiser got ahold of someone else's template in MS Word and that template's author was accustomed to doing a lot of original writing. That would explain the holes.

Maybe I'm stupid, but I couldn't understand how they concluded to a $198,500 value from the sales data as presented. I mean, they didn't even round it out to $200k.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I have been informed by a state board member that this report is already before them and there are "issues" to be resolved

 

[Michigan CG]

......there are "issues" to be resolved

Ya think?

 

[DMZwerg]

C'mon Dmz we all know GCs aren't "form fillers".:new_smile-l: The report does however have some of the requisite "boiler plate" certs commensurate with the "detailed" reasoning and analysis contained in it. At least he tried.:Eyecrazy:

It was not necessarily a CG that did it and the report felt like a strange mix between a narrative & a form to me, especially as typical narrative exposition was missing (like any real mention of what features the subject & "comps" may have had in common besides GBA).

Most appraisers now use digital cameras but the photos were taken on film then scanned in, which also strikes me as odd.

Like I said, the overall feel is that of a report done 10 years ago or so.