- Joined
- Jan 15, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- California
IMO arbitrarily deciding the contributory of a leased array is zero also isn't the correct answer. That contributory CAN be (and has been) zero in many cases but it can also be a positive or a negative.FNMA does not allow appraisers to apply value to leased solar panels.
Since FNMA has already determined such panels are valued at zero, even if a contributory value before completely paid for, the next step is to get the report past the underwriters. Whether they understand it or not, a DCF is not necessary nor is "paired sales" necessarily always the only way to value these panels. If a sinking fund mirrors the behavior of the market then so be it.
And while many home buyers may recognize the value is not zero, often they simply don't want to increase the amount of payment they can safely make thus tend to discount in their head or they seek an alternative without panels.
I understand their "we will accept" is an underwriting decision they are completely entitled to make. And appropriately so, no argument there. But I also don't think their underwriting decisions should be of effect on an appraiser's actual opinion of MV, assuming said opinion was actually developed using market data.
After a certain point their "we will accept" can be of sufficient effect on the value conclusion that it becomes more appropriate to refer to it as some form of Mortgage Value.
Was this attribute of effect on the sales price or not? It it was then perhaps there's an adjustment for the property rights appraised to be made in their somewhere, similar to when a home sells with furnishings or a tractor included in the sale price.