Subject as it's own comp.

[Mike Boyd]

Sure if you want a UW stip

All you need to do is explain. However, the last one I did the UW came back and berated me because the subject photo was the same as the comp 4 (the previous sale) photo. Fortunately, I had taken 2 photos of the front of the subject. Then, all was well.

 

[Michigan CG]

There is no better comparable than the subject itself or an exact duplicate property. Use it. I must be in that shallow gene pool Joyce is talking about.

 

[PropertyEconomics]

Whenever I include something in the appraisal for mortgage lending purposes that is atypical I copy and paste the FNMA guideline relating to it for clarity and to save the reviewer or underwriter the trouble of looking it up. It portrays an appraiser who is knowledgeable and follows guidelines and builds credibility between you and your client.

Per FNMA Guidelines: XI, 406.02: Selection of Comparable Sales "The appraiser may use the subject property as a fourth comparable sale or as supporting data if the property previously was sold (and closed or settled). If the appraiser believes that it is appropriate, he or she also may use contract offerings and current listings as supporting data."

Frederick .. this is great advice and one I had never thought of ... simply great. Thanks.
Kill the stip before it ever happens ... very smart.

 

[TJSum]

There is no better comparable than the subject itself or an exact duplicate property. Use it. I must be in that shallow gene pool Joyce is talking about.

I have nothing against using it as an extra comp, if you wish. I also agree that Frederick wrote a great answer as usual.

But keep in mind, who is to say that the subject's recent sale was "legit". Maybe it sold way above market and they got Skippy to make it work. The new owners may have already robbed the first lender with a bogus sale and now could be looking to rip off a second lender with a HELOC or second mortgage before leaving dodge with a "windfall". This prior sale can only be verified through other independent sales which should be used as the actual comparables for the report.

 

[Frederick]

I have nothing against using it as an extra comp, if you wish. I also agree that Frederick wrote a great answer as usual.

But keep in mind, who is to say that the subject's recent sale was "legit". Maybe it sold way above market and they got Skippy to make it work. The new owners may have already robbed the first lender with a bogus sale and now could be looking to rip off a second lender with a HELOC or second mortgage before leaving dodge with a "windfall". This prior sale can only be verified through other independent sales which should be used as the actual comparables for the report.

Thanks,

It it were the case that the prior sale was an anomaly it would be evident whan compared to the three other cited sales. If I were an underwriter I would be highly skeptical of it if it indicated a value significantly above that of the other three adjusted comparable sales and the Opinion of Value was based solely upon it. As comparable #4 it is "supplementary" data and not "primary" data and therefore should be seen as supportive of the analysis and not leading it or overwhelming it.

Regardless of using it as a 4th comp or not I am never comfortable "hanging my hat" on one single comp. I want them all or at least more than one to paint a consistent and balanced picture.

 

[TJSum]

Yes Frederick, I totally agree. I was just responding to the statement that there is no better comparable than the subject itself, because sometimes it is NOT the best. And the point you stated is the point I tried to bring out, it would have to be supported by the indepedent market data available, because as a stand alone piece of data, it does not prove market value, even at the time of sale (except for those appraisers that always hit the number square on ).

 

[Tom Giraldin]

Thanks every one, this has been most helpfull. I have sent the report off, and cited verbatim the guide line. The sale appears to be arms lenght, and in line with the market at time of sale. I appraised it now for $10,000 less then 3 mos ago.

 

[Joyce Potts]

What was the second biggest?

If you analyzed the recent sale of subject, I would think you are using it as a comp, even if you don't put it on the grid. Try appraising something for 300 and report that it sold a month ago for 200.

That SS thinks that appraising is a science.

 

[Michigan CG]

Yes Frederick, I totally agree. I was just responding to the statement that there is no better comparable than the subject itself, because sometimes it is NOT the best. And the point you stated is the point I tried to bring out, it would have to be supported by the indepedent market data available, because as a stand alone piece of data, it does not prove market value, even at the time of sale (except for those appraisers that always hit the number square on ).

TJ,

You have good points, and I am too commercially slanted by some of my statements. Obviously if the previous sale of the subject is a skewed deal then it is not comparable. However, if the sale of the subject is arms-length, and confirmed as such, then it is the best comparable.

 

[Joyce Potts]

Oh for heavens sake, even FNMA requires the appraiser to report the last sale of the subject and comps within one to three years respectively. And they should!

So you're going to report it as the last sale AND use it to comp itself out?

I don't think so Scooter.