Slippery Slope: As-repaired And The Appraiser's Assumption

[TRESinc]

I am not sure which of the umpteen posts you are referring to but I am referring to your original post.
You have an existing home that needs floorboards of the deck replaced for a safety issue. You conditions for the damaged floor boards to be replaced. Good! That is what I would have done.

You go back out and instead of replacing the floor boards they removed the deck. Ugh! Ok, now I would have conditioned for them providing stairs for the 4 ft drop as that is now a safety hazard OR show that the door out is secured with a nailed board (not just locked as children can unlock a door). You already addressed that the removal of the deck had a nominal affect on value. Your job is done! Who cares what the new deck is going to look like? It will be built after the affective date of the appraisal so you have no concern about it. What are you afraid of liability-wise?

go back and read what you are referencing. the original post called for the safety hazard to be cured, no mention of removing boards. it's also already been pointed out the rear door was nailed shut.

 

[residentialguy]

That's your call in the original appraisal. If the deck was so run down that it had minimal value, ( or no value) but it still had the safety issue ), then you could have made it subject to repair the loose boards to address

So you want them to spend money on something that has no value?
I think you've been watching too many Thug Life videos

 

[J Grant]

So you want them to spend money on something that has no value?
I think you've been watching too many Thug Life videos

If there is a safety issue and they need to repair it to get the approval for loan, so be it if you note a hazard, safety issues and value are two different aspects . I must be bored to even be responding at this point

 

[residentialguy]

If there is a safety issue and they need to repair it to get the approval for loan, so be it if you note a hazard, safety issues and value are two different aspects . I must be bored to even be responding at this point

They don't need to repair a deck that has no value. That's like making them re-side the house instead of repainting it. If you made me repair a deck that has no value that my buyers are going to rip out anyway instead of eliminating the hazard by removing it, I would sue you.

 

[J Grant]

They don't need to repair a deck that has no value. That's like making them re-side the house instead of repainting it. If you made me repair a deck that has no value that my buyers are going to rip out anyway instead of eliminating the hazard by removing it, I would sue you.

If there is a safety issue you HAVE to condition report on repairing it, correct? Value is not the issue, is it, ? Why would they sue you for conditioning the loan on repairing a few boards...your conditioning the loan on a repair got it approved for the borrower so the seller would also have to be a moron to sue you for it. If it has no value, why did you adjust for it in the appraisal, or call for it's removal? Your posts are scattered all over the issue...

 

[residentialguy]

If there is a safety issue you HAVE to condition report on repairing it, correct?

Repairing the hazard yes. It cannot have a hazard issue.

 

[ucbruin]

If there is a safety issue you HAVE to condition report on repairing it, correct? Value is not the issue, is it, ? Why would they sue you for conditioning the loan on repairing a few boards...your conditioning the loan on a repair got it approved for the borrower so the seller would also have to be a moron to sue you for it. If it has no value, why did you adjust for it in the appraisal, or call for it's removal? Your posts are scattered all over the issue...

"If it has no value, why did you adjust for it in the appraisal..."

@RegGuy: "I was able to fudge my way out of it because it didn't really have a significant factor in value..."


Because it's in THE BOOK....

 

[residentialguy]

"If it has no value, why did you adjust for it in the appraisal..."

@RegGuy: "I was able to fudge my way out of it because it didn't really have a significant factor in value..."

That's not germane to the topic at hand. We are talking about a hypothetical scenario of what should be done. Focus UC

 

[ucbruin]

That's not germane to the topic at hand. We are talking about a hypothetical scenario of what should be done. Focus UC

Haha...
I'm focused....
Laser focused....

BTW...

When did this turn into a "hypothetical scenario"???

 

[residentialguy]

Haha...
I'm focused....
Laser focused
When did this turn into a "hypothetical scenario"???

I think you've been shining your laser in your eyes.
From the very first post when I stated "It's really not any different than new construction. We would never assume what the HO is going to build...we go off plans and specs. Should we not stop the appraisal process and find out exactly what all is going to be done to the property before we opine value on it???"

This is about when we find an adverse condition, how should we handle it. FNMA, FHA, etc cares about getting rid of the adverse condition. They don't care how it's done. If, (as a hypothetical scenario) the deck is bad, they don't care if the HO replaces the bad boards or they tear it out or alter it into that screen porch they always wanted. They do care, however, if you sabotage the deal by insisting it is done how you want it to be done. And if that happens, you'll lose your client and face possible ramifications in court from the transaction party, such as being sent to the state board and/or getting sued. ALL of that can be eliminated by just asking the client how they are planning to cure the adverse condition and appraising the property appropriately. It's really common sense, which apparently isn't an attribute that's common with some appraisers.

Now, go put some batteries in your laser.