What Do You Consider To Be Data Sources And Verification Sources?

[Artemis Fowl]

None. Nobody has called the selling agent about it either.

 

[ucbruin]

None. Nobody has called the selling agent about it either.

You asked the agent(s)?
Maybe the buyer has been interviewed...

Or maybe, since your sale price wasn't an outlier....

 

[Artemis Fowl]

Or maybe, since your sale price wasn't an outlier....

OOoooh! Ooooh! I'll finish that for you...

Since my sale price wasn't an outlier, it has been used again and again without consideration that it is likely closer to a lower value threshold than an upper threshold indicator. In turn, skewing the value conclusions of appraisers who don't friggin bother to find out pertinent information.

You're welcome.

 

[ucbruin]

OOoooh! Ooooh! I'll finish that for you...
Since my sale price wasn't an outlier, it has been used again and again without consideration that it is likely closer to a lower value threshold than an upper threshold indicator. In turn, skewing the value conclusions of appraisers who don't friggin bother to find out pertinent information.

Your welcome.

Maybe the buyer and the agent that represented the buyer have been interviewed....
Or
Maybe your sale has been employed as a comp but not given most weight because the appraiser didn't interview you....

One never knows...

 

[residentialguy]

Since my sale price wasn't an outlier, it has been used again and again without consideration that it is likely closer to a lower value threshold than an upper threshold indicator. In turn, skewing the value conclusions of appraisers who don't friggin bother to find out pertinent information.

Sounds like that has UC's name all over it

 

[ucbruin]

It does!!!!!

 

[DTB]

I used to think that way, too....but a +/-5% span from center is not "large" by any means. 5% is easily just a naturally spread that occurs between typical motivations between different buyers on the same house. If you think you're going to narrow closer than that on houses with 100's of variances from each other, (many of which you don't know about), you'll end up weakening your report because you're adjusting to narrow the spread rather than by solid market support. There's no way to be that accurate, unless you're appraising new construction with identical properties. You're better off leaving a wider spread, use qualitative analyses (rather than to do a precise quantitative adjustments), then reconciling, imo.

I'm not concerned about the mid point, I'm concerned about the high to low spread. Yes, that is wider than I would like to see, sometimes it's unavoidable.

100s of variances, I don't worry about, really usually only 4-5 value drivers in my market.

 

[ucbruin]

OOoooh! Ooooh! I'll finish that for you...

Since my sale price wasn't an outlier, it has been used again and again without consideration that it is likely closer to a lower value threshold than an upper threshold indicator. In turn, skewing the value conclusions of appraisers who don't friggin bother to find out pertinent information.

You're welcome.

"Since my sale price wasn't an outlier..."

How do you know the sale price was NOT an outlier????
Just out of curiosity....
Did you interview the participants of the sales that you considered when determining list and sale price?????

 

[residentialguy]

Did you interview the participants of the sales that you considered when determining list and sale price?????

Probably not...of course he probably didn't go by some skippy adjustment list either.

 

[ucbruin]

Probably not...of course he probably didn't go by some skippy adjustment list either.

That's funny....
I didn't even see AF's lips move....