Using subject as comparable

[Burney Lightle]

See Yellow Book (UASFLA) item 44241

 

[Burney Lightle]

This is the section of UASFLA I was really looking for:

 

[J Grant]

As others said, a prior sale of the subject can be used as a comp, if relevant to use it.

The pending contract of subject on grid as a comp is a red flag to a reviewer, and weakens rather than strengthens the report - we already analyze the current CS and can use it to support our OMV. But using it as a comp for itself? It just mirrors back the sales price.

Why are there other contestants in a beauty contest ? At end the choice comes down to the three most beautiful finalists (the 3 comps ). It would be a joke if the winner crowned herself by looking in a mirror .

 

[Don Jones]

See Yellow Book (UASFLA) item 44241

View attachment 53092
View attachment 53094

Burney, this refers to prior sales. I am talking about the current, pending sale of the subject property that is the subject of the appraisal. I say it does not make any sense to compare something to itself; that is not a comparison. To do that negates the meaning of "comparison." The purpose of the appraisal to to study similar sales and compare them to the subject in order to form an opinion of value of whatever is being appraised. If the rationale of comparing something to itself is a valid test of value then there is no need to compare it to anything else. Just compare it to itself and say that is it, that is the value, no further analysis, or comparison needed.

 

[Burney Lightle]

I feel that this is a hopeless conversation, but I don't see how you cannot consider the subject's pending sales price in your conclusion; I didn't mean to use it as a primary sale in your "grid" but if the sales "bracket" the pending sales price, who says its not the value...of course I could be wrong as a novice in this profession

 

[Mark K]

I am talking about the current, pending sale of the subject property that is the subject of the appraisal.

That's a horse of a different color!

Yeah, using the current pending sale in the grid doesn't make much (if any) sense.

Using the previous sale of the subject as a comp often makes perfect sense and is required in some cases, i.e., Yellow Book guidelines.

 

[Don Jones]

I feel that this is a hopeless conversation, but I don't see how you cannot consider the subject's pending sales price in your conclusion; I didn't mean to use it as a primary sale in your "grid" but if the sales "bracket" the pending sales price, who says its not the value...of course I could be wrong as a novice in this profession

Burney, I do analyze the subject's sale price and how it relates to my opinion of value. I do this in every appraisal in the reconciliation comments. I just do not put it in the sales comparison grid and compare it to itself. If my opinion of value is higher, or lower than the sale price I explain any obvious reason, if there is one. Otherwise I attribute it to variations in motivational factors and the fact that we deal with an imperfect market. And, no need for your self-depreciating comment regarding being a novice. I know you are not a novice, and neither am I.