Three values, one report

[ZZGAMAZZ]

It depends on if you used a form program. The form programs does like different types of adjustment pages in the same appraisal. You can do many values, but your issue is how to make it 1 pdf without a lot of confusion. Now if you can put the values on 1 appraisal, then reference the other 2 reports, then easy peasy.

It depends on if you used a form program. The form programs does like different types of adjustment pages in the same appraisal. You can do many values, but your issue is how to make it 1 pdf without a lot of confusion. Now if you can put the values on 1 appraisal, then reference the other 2 reports, then easy peasy.

Question: Please clarify "form program." Or provide a form name/number if it's a generic term. Thanks.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Question: Please clarify "form program." Or provide a form name/number if it's a generic term. Thanks.

Forms software, like Alamode, Clickforms, ACI

 

[timd354]

It's simpler for all involved to do separate reports when what you start with is different than what you end with. Especially when there's a potential for partial release in the mix. But some clients are not that savvy about appraisals and can't foresee how difficult it will be for them to keep everything straight in the same report.

These are issues to clarify at the outset. If they want it one way or another then that's how the appraiser should proceed. Unless otherwise prohibited, the answer to their request isn't "no", but rather "Sure, I can do that. What's the fee?"

As someone who reviews partial release requests on a regular basis, I do not care whether the results of the appraisal are reported in a single report or in multiple reports as long as the appriasal report(s) are credible and the value opinions are well supported. Unfortunately, all too often I see appraisal reports for partial releases that are completed by appraisers who are clearlry incompetent to complete such appraisals because they have no idea of how to do a credible highest best use analysis and no idea how to value a resdential property in which the highest and best use is to subdivide the property and sell the newly created building lot(s) or build another residence.

Here is an example that literally just came across my desk earlier this afternoon:

Just consider the stupidity involved in concluding that releasing a buildable parcel with a value of $450,000 only reduces the overall value of the property that serves as collateral for the mortgae we insure by $40,000.

The problem lies in the lack of a credible HBU analysis and the fact that the appraiser apparently thinks the following passes for a credible HBU analysis for this property:

 

[Tom D]

Do they actually want the other 2 reports grided, etc. Or just the values of the other requests. Obviously your work file has to have all that.

When I see as is and rehabed value, the lender wants the rehabd report with just a line saying the as is value.

And it's confusing when you say in one report. What exactly do they want. 3 reports, or 1 report with 2 other values noted.

Me also thinks they lender is being cheap.

 

[timd354]

Do they actually want the other 2 reports grided, etc. Or just the values of the other requests. Obviously your work file has to have all that.

When I see as is and rehabed value, the lender wants the rehabd report with just a line saying the as is value.

And it's confusing when you say in one report. What exactly do they want. 3 reports, or 1 report with 2 other values noted.

Me also thinks they lender is being cheap.

What is required depends on the servicer and/or mortgage insurer/guarantor. As the Chief Appraiser at a mortgage insurer, I don't care whether the appraiser reprots the needed values in 1 report or multiple reports and I don't necessariy need to see multiple sales comparison grids as long as enough information is provided within the reports(s) to credibly support all of the values opinied by the appraiser.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

In house banks are required to report both the "as is" and the "as competed" (or whatever) value. FDIC required, not secondary market.

As for HBU, I think you are in danger of stretching the problem with an "as is" value is wanted. The question is which is more valuable - the property as it is, or as if vacant...in other words is the house a teardown.

HBU does not address creating a scenario of subdiving a property. The question is "as is" and that means what is the value of the lot in total if the house was not there. I did a series of houses in a small town where large lots were subdivided. 2 into 4 lots and 1 into 6 lots. They sold as individual large lots but after divided, they were worth more. But it is not correct HBU analysis to claim these single lots should be divided and value them accordingly. That is not "as is", it is "as planned" or whatever. In all 3 cases, curbs, utilities, surveys, and 2 streets were required to subdivide the lots plus the permits and approvals of the city. Then the houses were built and sold as individual lots.

 

[timd354]

In house banks are required to report both the "as is" and the "as competed" (or whatever) value. FDIC required, not secondary market.

As for HBU, I think you are in danger of stretching the problem with an "as is" value is wanted. The question is which is more valuable - the property as it is, or as if vacant...in other words is the house a teardown.

HBU does not address creating a scenario of subdiving a property. The question is "as is" and that means what is the value of the lot in total if the house was not there. I did a series of houses in a small town where large lots were subdivided. 2 into 4 lots and 1 into 6 lots. They sold as individual large lots but after divided, they were worth more. But it is not correct HBU analysis to claim these single lots should be divided and value them accordingly. That is not "as is", it is "as planned" or whatever. In all 3 cases, curbs, utilities, surveys, and 2 streets were required to subdivide the lots plus the permits and approvals of the city. Then the houses were built and sold as individual lots.

Most of the time, when I see requests for partial releases of buildable lots, the lots have already been subdivided as we won't consider a partial release request unless we are provided with an an approved subdivision survey plat showing the property to be retained and the parcel(s) that are requested to be released. We require this because we don't want to end up with retained collateral that no longer meets applicable zoning requirements (if any) or, worse yet, is landlocked or otherwise no longer reasonably accessible..

 

[sputnam]

It's simpler for all involved to do separate reports when what you start with is different than what you end with. Especially when there's a potential for partial release in the mix. But some clients are not that savvy about appraisals and can't foresee how difficult it will be for them to keep everything straight in the same report.

These are issues to clarify at the outset. If they want it one way or another then that's how the appraiser should proceed. Unless otherwise prohibited, the answer to their request isn't "no", but rather "Sure, I can do that. What's the fee?"

It is simpler in some ways. Appraisers are bound by USPAP and by other regulations however, at its core, appraising is a service industry. You provide what your Client asks for as long as it doesn't require you to violate any appraisal standards or your own ethics. When it is harder, you charge a higher fee. If your Client wants one report with multiple values, you can accept the assignment and find a way to comply with all regulations and Client requirements, you can accept the assignment and muck it up, or you can decline. To give the Client what they ask for in a manner that is compliant, you might opt to write a narrative report.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Do they actually want the other 2 reports grided, etc. Or just the values of the other requests. Obviously your work file has to have all that.

When I see as is and rehabed value, the lender wants the rehabd report with just a line saying the as is value.

And it's confusing when you say in one report. What exactly do they want. 3 reports, or 1 report with 2 other values noted.

Me also thinks they lender is being cheap.

Just because it seemed like the right thing to do, i completed a few assignments that required ASIS and ARV by using a 1004 with an ACI "Supplemental" SCA form, but it took me mucho time to realize that the ASIS value literally has no tangible bearing on the ARV, which is based on post-improvement market response... and then you explain to overbody involved 1 by 1 why the cost of improvements might be way less than the corresponding change in value [and several construction estimates seemed like they were created to effect the lender's perspective of the project???]

 

[jay trotta]

I did two reports for a house that is sub diving the lot. One with the house and current lot and one with the house after the lot would be sub divided. They are now saying they need the value of the house with current lot, the house once the lot has been sub divided and the value of the land. The problem is they are saying all values must be provided on one report. Is this possible? Any recommendations? Thanks

IMO-as of the effective date no sub-division was approved? Has there been an application to sub-divide? How long of a process will this be?