Two parcels on one deed

[Ken B]

Don't get all mixed up about multiple parcels being on one deed. That's a non-issue.

I would be more concerned about verifying that the recently subdivided parcel is buildable. If not, the subdivision in meaningless as it would lack utility in that regard. Recall the four factors that create value; utility, desire, scarcity, and effective purchasing power.

 

[NC Appraising]

Chuck,



But if you follow the advice of the AMC "Compliance Officer", you are setting yourself up for failure. Listen to CAN and Lee.

This is from a compliance officer at a AMC:

9- NO REO COMPS can be used in the analysis. If required, expand the distance and date of sale in order to provide an arms length sale.

Then in the next email, she said it came directly from the UW.


Yeah, AMCs......smoke and mirrors.


PS. IS THERE A FAQ OR Q&A IN USPAP THAT YOU CAN SHARE?

 

[CANative]

Don't get all mixed up about multiple parcels being on one deed. That's a non-issue.

I would be more concerned about verifying that the recently subdivided parcel is buildable. If not, the subdivision in meaningless as it would lack utility in that regard. Recall the four factors that create value; utility, desire, scarcity, and effective purchasing power.

It's hard to imagine a planning department that would approve a split that would create a substandard (non-buildable) lot.

 

[Ken B]

Not so hard to imagine if the area is not served by public sewer and the site doesn't perc.

 

[Chuck Parent]

The subdivided lot is the exact minimum size required to build. It's definitely buildable. But it's just a large wooded tract right now, I believe.

That's most likely the bwr's plan, (sell the buildable lot ) but I guess I got hung up on two parcels being on one deed, and being asked to appraise them as a single unit when the second parcel was discovered to be on the same deed AFTER the original appraisal. Instead of surplus land, the land is currently excess and is already subdivided. I've believed since the beginning that it should be addressed separately.

I think I have my course of action, but will wait until tomorrow to address it with them. I'm gonna keep checking in here, just in case I get some additional information.

Thanks to all who offered advice. It is much appreciated.

 

[CANative]

Instead of surplus land, the land is currently excess and is already subdivided.

Now, just to torment you: That lot is not surplus land and it's also not excess land. It's just land. If there were two deeds this would not even be an issue.

 

[Chuck Parent]

Now, just to torment you: That lot is not surplus land and it's also not excess land. It's just land. If there were two deeds this would not even be an issue.

Continued education, not tormenting.

I understand that excess can be subdivided to be sold or valued separately, and in this case already has been. Correct?

IOW, it may not be excess now, but it was considered excess to the original parcel.

 

[CANative]

Exactly. Like another poster said, it's really important to know and use the proper terminology.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I've believed since the beginning that it should be addressed separately.

There is no reason to value this as two separate appraisals. One report can value both parcels. The current utility is a double lot. That is common as toast here, buildable or not. Selling off one lot is some future event. One deed with two lots means it was meant to be oversized. Two deeds on one lot...now that's a problem.

 

[Michigan CG]

Can. Lee and Ken give you good advice. The AMC compliance officer is an idiot.

The thing to remember about AMC compliance officers and many of their "appraisers" is they work for the AMC. Sort of akin to the Chief Madam at a brothel, she is still a prostitute.