Townhouse Question - SFR or Condo form?

[stacy158]

I have a question that has been a problem twice now. I did an appraisal on a townhouse and property records give NO value to any land (just $100??). There is no lot size indicated. And in the legal descpription, there is no lot and block. (Only a lot number) I would think that this would fall into the catagory of a condo (form 1073)?? Am I wrong? If I put it on a regular SFR (form 1004)...where does the/or any land come in and how would you complete a cost approach? I have it now on a condo form, but the underwriter wants it changed to a regular 1004 form....what would you do? Thanks in advance!!

 

[Joyce Potts]

I have a question that has been a problem twice now. I did an appraisal on a townhouse and property records give NO value to any land (just $100??). There is no lot size indicated. And in the legal descpription, there is no lot and block. (Only a lot number) I would think that this would fall into the catagory of a condo (form 1073)?? Am I wrong? If I put it on a regular SFR (form 1004)...where does the/or any land come in and how would you complete a cost approach? I have it now on a condo form, but the underwriter wants it changed to a regular 1004 form....what would you do? Thanks in advance!!

There are TONS of threads on this Forum addressing this question, but here's the long and short of it. A townhouse is not a form of legal ownership, it's form/style of architecture.

If the legal description says LOT--it's a SFR. If it says UNIT, it's a condo. All that said-their are exceptions and as far as I'm concerned, Don Clark pretty much has my respect as the authority on this topic.

You may also have hybrids, PUDS, footprint issues.

Did you ask for a survey? That would help a lot.

So hammer away.

 

[stacy158]

Thanks for the great reply!!! Oh I forgot one thing though...The land use description is listed as "condo". Does that matter?

 

[Joyce Potts]

Thanks for the great reply!!! Oh I forgot one thing though...The land use description is listed as "condo". Does that matter?

Even local zoning authorities get it wrong and make mistakes.

Call them and ask the question is it a SFR where they OWN the land underneath, a condo or a rare hybrid--because hybrids do exist.

 

[Paul Isolda]

I have seen it too many times that the Tax Assessor has it wrong so don't rely on a municipal employee to tell you what it is. If it is a condo, the deed will (should) refer to a declaration of the complex.

 

[TC]

Call the HO association, talk to the manager, ask the maintenance man, knock on some doors. Do some leg work.

TC

 

[hastalavista]

In California, a condo is identified as a part of a "condominium project" in the title report (condos are required to be identified as such in California).

I don't know if it is the same in Florida. If it ever gets to that level of uncertainty here, we request a copy of the title report. That clears it up for us.

 

[Joyce Potts]

Call the HO association, talk to the manager, ask the maintenance man, knock on some doors. Do some leg work.

TC

WHAT? To determine whether it's a condo or SFR where the underneath the improvement is owned?

 

[CCAAMO]

There are TONS of threads on this Forum addressing this question, but here's the long and short of it. A townhouse is not a form of legal ownership, it's form/style of architecture.

If the legal description says LOT--it's a SFR. If it says UNIT, it's a condo. All that said-their are exceptions and as far as I'm concerned, Don Clark pretty much has my respect as the authority on this topic.

You may also have hybrids, PUDS, footprint issues.

Did you ask for a survey? That would help a lot.

So hammer away.

You have to be careful. I've done condominiums where the assessor's records and plat map incorrectly indicated lot when it should have been unit and vis versa. When in doubt ask for ( a copy of ) the legal indicated in the title report.

 

[Joyce Potts]

You have to be careful. I've done condominiums where the assessor's records and plat map incorrectly indicated lot when it should have been unit and vis versa. When in doubt ask for ( a copy of ) the legal indicated in the title report.

This is probably the one instance where the legal description in the deed trumps.