Stable Market

[NC Appraising]

the appraiser must not expand the neighborhood boundaries just to encompass the comparables selected.......

Is it humanly possible for anybody to determine objectively that an appraiser did so, especially because it is the responsibility [and corresponding Authority] of the appraiser to define the Neighborhood, based upon its definition os a "congruous group of of complimentary land uses," which means less than anything tangible. My perspective is just for the sake of argument to express my opinion that most of the standards that an appraiser is required to honor are meaningless...

Simple. This is for gse appraisals only.

Most appraisers just enlarged the neighborhood boundaries. This solves most of the problems with the AMC reviewers and the automated review software.

By including multiple neighborhoods, which is now the market area, reduces the red flags and it populates the sections of the URAR with data.

It also reduces the commentary needed by the appraiser.

Appraisers think they are being slick....by extending the boundaries.

Neighborhood sizes can vary. That is why the block, one mile and five thing came about. Neighborhood are suppose to be small, given the area..urban, suburban or rural.

Also, if you read the guidelines the neighborhood is really the subdivision or pud or the name of the neighborhood for which is it commonly reffered to. As always, exceptions apply. This was ment to make it obvious if the subject was a overimprovement, odd ball, functional, design, etc.

If you define multiple or enlarge the neighborhood, it is easier for the appraiser to cover this up.

It makes sense if done right. In most cases, you will have only 1-5 truly comparable sales in the neighborhood.

So put there was 2 closed sales at the top of page 1. This makes it more believable if you have to go outside of the neighborhood for comps.

If you put there were 20 closed sales in the neighborhood, and then went outside of the neighborhood for comps.....Ok...

I think this is why appraisers will make the neighborhood crazy big....time, money, skippyville....canned churn and burn baby.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Most appraisers just enlarged the neighborhood boundaries. This solves most of the problems with the AMC reviewers and the automated review software.

By including multiple neighborhoods, which is now the market area,

Problem for 30 years. "Neighborhood" isn't necessarily the "Market area" and therefore, limiting reporting the "Neighborhood market conditions" is somewhat shorting the value of analyzing the "Market area" - the confusion being 100% the problem of the GSEs and secondary market, not the real world.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Simple. This is for gse appraisals only.

Most appraisers just enlarged the neighborhood boundaries. This solves most of the problems with the AMC reviewers and the automated review software.

By including multiple neighborhoods, which is now the market area, reduces the red flags and it populates the sections of the URAR with data.

It also reduces the commentary needed by the appraiser.

Appraisers think they are being slick....by extending the boundaries.

Neighborhood sizes can vary. That is why the block, one mile and five thing came about. Neighborhood are suppose to be small, given the area..urban, suburban or rural.

Also, if you read the guidelines the neighborhood is really the subdivision or pud or the name of the neighborhood for which is it commonly reffered to. As always, exceptions apply. This was ment to make it obvious if the subject was a overimprovement, odd ball, functional, design, etc.

If you define multiple or enlarge the neighborhood, it is easier for the appraiser to cover this up.

It makes sense if done right. In most cases, you will have only 1-5 truly comparable sales in the neighborhood.

So put there was 2 closed sales at the top of page 1. This makes it more believable if you have to go outside of the neighborhood for comps.

If you put there were 20 closed sales in the neighborhood, and then went outside of the neighborhood for comps.....Ok...

I think this is why appraisers will make the neighborhood crazy big....time, money, skippyville....canned churn and burn baby.

IMO the "correct" answer should/must be based on the industry definition of "Neighborhood," which is short and sweet and based upon "complimentary" real property. This line of reasoning requires a strict interpretation of the term, although practical application is enabled by the Present Land Use "other" option. That is to say, "WTF are 'complimentary' improvements," IMO a vague term that makes the entire controversy as moot, e.g., FNMAE recently cconfirmed via email that a full-scale commercial industrial enterprise could be defined as complimentary to a luxury, equestrian estate. Consequently a user rarely if ever can be sanctioned for his or her definition of "Neighborhood," because a functional definition doesn't exist, i.e., it's impossible to enlarge the geo scope because the neighborhood boundaries are what one says they are. [just for the sake of argument]

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

IMO a vague term that makes the entire controversy as moot, e.g., FNMAE recently cconfirmed via email that a full-scale commercial industrial enterprise could be defined as complimentary to a luxury, equestrian estate.

The idea we can read the mind of another (the underwriter or reviewer) as to what they believe is any more correct than what we opine...well, that's a problem, right?

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

The idea we can read the mind of another (the underwriter or reviewer) as to what they believe is any more correct than what we opine...well, that's a problem, right?

As long as the appraiser is given an opportunity to defend him/herself in response to stipuations, the playing field is reasonable. I estimate that 80% or more of every condition received wasere dismissed after I responded to expain my rationale--although 80% of the 80% was just to refer the reviewer to read the damn report!

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

although 80% of the 80% was just to refer the reviewer to read the damn report!

Yes. So, it gives a question to how much extra should we charge in secondary market work for the 80% chance of a time-consuming revision or 'stip' to be addressed?

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Yes. So, it gives a question to how much extra should we charge in secondary market work for the 80% chance of a time-consuming revision or 'stip' to be addressed?

Sounds logical, although i personally never know which lending report goes where, with a surcharge for specific segments surely to be termed discriminatory, whether true or not. A stipend for untenable conditions imposed by clients presumably would simply cause potential clients to go elsewhere... probably nieve thought, but there must be a way to enhance the B2B value of appraisals, there being a time honored principle that duress often yields a creative response.