Two Separate Parcels On A 1004?

[utahbrad]

So, Fannie foreclosed on a 2005 refinance of lot 10, which was divided (same owner) in 1994 into 10a & 10b. 10a consists of a single family built in '86 and 10b consists of an additional single family built in '99. Each it's own parcel number and legal, as well as a separate address (2333 and 2335). Fannie has a legal that includes all of lot 10 and now owns both parcels. They are insisting this be reported as a single family with a guest house. This is not uncommon in my market except that they are two separate parcels. -anyone ever run into this type of situation? Any input/ advice would be much appreciated.

 

[AMF13]

Sounds like 2 separate properties to me.
But I'm not in Utah.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

"Each it's own parcel number and legal, as well as a separate address (2333 and 2335)."

Options Opinion.
a. inform Lender of the above and recommend they obtain the updated Legal Descriptions from their fave Title Company and forward them to you.
b. obtain same yourself, forward to Client

 

[Michigan CG]

There are four tests of highest and best use, I would concentrate on Maximally Productive.

 

[Mr Rex]

The table below provides the requirements when the security property consists of more than one parcel of real estate.

✓ Multiple Parcels Requirements
Each parcel must be conveyed in its entirety.
Parcels must be adjoined to the other, unless they comply with the following exception. Parcels that otherwise would be adjoined, but are divided by a road, are acceptable if the parcel without a residence is a non-buildable lot (for example, waterfront properties where the parcel without the residence provides access to the water). Evidence that the lot is non-buildable must be included in the loan file.
Each parcel must have the same basic zoning (for example, residential, agricultural).
The entire property may contain only one dwelling unit. Limited additional non-residential improvements, such as a garage, are acceptable. For example, the adjoining parcel may not have an additional dwelling unit. An improvement that has been built across lot lines is acceptable. For example, a home built across both parcels where the lot line runs under the home is acceptable.
The mortgage must be a valid first lien that covers each parcel.

 

[Digger88]

had the same situation a while ago and the VA would not allow it. if thats permitted why not an entire condo building? theyre attached! lol

 

[CANative]

There are four tests of highest and best use, I would concentrate on Maximally Productive.

How can the OP complete the HBU until the OP knows what the subject property is?

 

[hastalavista]

How can the OP complete the HBU until the OP knows what the subject property is?

Sounds like the OP has identified the necessary components of the subject property:

So, Fannie foreclosed on a 2005 refinance of lot 10, which was divided (same owner) in 1994 into 10a & 10b. 10a consists of a single family built in '86 and 10b consists of an additional single family built in '99. Each it's own parcel number and legal, as well as a separate address (2333 and 2335).

The question is: what is the subject; how should it be valued; and how should the value be reported?
The client is asking for the subject to be identified, valued, and the value reported as an SFR w/guest house:

They are insisting this be reported as a single family with a guest house. This is not uncommon in my market except that they are two separate parcels.

This seems like an issue that is decided by H&BU to me?

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I would not be comfortable treating it as a SFR with a granny flat. It is clearly fungible as separate tracts. I would refuse the assignment if they insisted of a 1004 format. Narrative, I would value them separately but put under one cover.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Based strictly on the information within the OP and the assumption that the information is correct. It seems to me that the problem is not how to appraise the subject(s). But how to clear up the problem with the legal description provided by fannie. If what the op states is accurate. Then it is obvious that somewhere down the line. Somebody screwed up. Could have been title company. Could have been original appraiser (if any) in the 2005 deal. Something just does not make any sense.