I appraised a burned down duplex, across the street from a brand new 5 story hospital. Property was previously zoned R-2, currently changing to C-? Was the land value enhanced because of the fire destroying the improvements, No need to haul off three truck loads of stuff, questionable requirements for other stuff removal.

The comps illustrated lands for new medical offices exceeded that of ollldduplexes, and demand was excessive and provable.

The only question was the problem of my client, The insurance company and it was not an appraisal problem.

My favorite photo of a comp is with the moving van blocking the house. It may cause confusion but the situation is explainable.

If you know that to be a fact, then report it to the state regulatory board for appraisers. Look up State Real Estate Appraisers Board for the state in question. Some variant of that will usually come back but it will clearly indicate that they license appraisers.

Send complaint (may have to download their own form) along with evidence that you have they are n’t doing own inspections. Like appraiser is a male but a female inspected the house. Or appraiser signed as Jones, but person inspecting identified themself as Smith, etc.

Every one of us certifies that we conducted our own inspection OR we supply an explanation (and description) of professional assistance provided by others, & list thier name.

He saved me from advertising my GOOF by his remark.

Some back knowledge: I picked up the keys from the agent driving their I picked the wrong side of the street, knocked and the in-laws of the buyer let me inspect, I didn’t need the keys! I SNUKED across the street measured the correct one and returned the keys.
I didn’t tell, was the agent just polite or was he as innocent as I was stupid.
Education is always important however we don’t always use it!

Mike I accidentally measured the WRONG house, The listing agenting came by as I was finishing and taking the photos, he remarked Wow your really busy, your appraising that one also.

He saved me from advertising my GOOF by his remark.

Some back knowledge: I picked up the keys from the agent driving their I picked the wrong side of the street, knocked and the in-laws of the buyer let me inspect, I didn’t need the keys! I SNUKED across the street measured the correct one and returned the keys.
I didn’t tell, was the agent just polite or was he as innocent as I was stupid.
Education is always important however we don’t always use it!

I can’t argue with that Dan. Exactly what we are supposed to be doing.

Absolutely correct! However, if the appraiser would lie about that, then why should you believe any thing else about their report

Mike Ford makes a good point, however, as I stated, I still drive the comps, would have seen this mess, taken recent pictures and ruled it out as a comp.

Optional tougher to enforce. Maybe a separate and distinct yes/no question to “Did the appraiser personally drive by each comparable sale?” Another issue is MLS copyrights. Perhaps they would collectively authorize re-use of their photos in reports by Board member appraisers?

I always figured incidental use would be ok (not sure why – public domain; limited use?) whereas complete substitution of mls pics versus appraiser pics could be problematic.

The real problem though is still the appraiser that will simply lie about having inspected the comparable to the extent that could be seen from the right of way.

Lol! When I was at IRS I asked my manager why AICPA accountants didn’t simply follow USPAP in real property valuation. Her response? “Because some of us don’t believe it it!” That was even after Treasury Dept had officially adopted USPAP.

Let’s face it, USPAP is ‘inconvenient’ for government agencies. California could not begin to comply with it or conform to it in BREA investigations, which is why they now claim they don’t do ANY appraisal reviews or appraisals.

MRK, I suspect, it was inadvertent rather than deliberate. While Dustin and I disagree on several issues, I’ve never known or found him to be disingenuous or deceptive. It may be nothing more than he was finished with the topic and missed my ‘later in the game’ post.

DF: I inspected a property yesterday. It is a current pending sale. Did the buyer purchase the building reflected in the 6-month-old enhanced MLS (loopnet) pictures (more than 36 of them)? Or, did he purchase the less presentable, property with a homeless shelter (tarps) taking the entire width of the alley directly to the rear of the site, with half of that supported by his rear entry gate?

ALSO, access to users with vehicles is ONLY from the rear alley which is blocked by cars parking illegally. Graffiti sprayed on alley fence to rear of the site. Neighbor complaining that It is the property owner’s obligation to ‘cure’ the homeless problem in the alley because it is a nuisance (substance dealing purportedly).

Sides vocal ‘revival hall’ to south (‘Enthusiastic’ spiritual singing was definitely audible on-site); and a company called “innovative solutions’ on the north side that appears to be special service for developmentally disabled (physical and mental). Neither use is adverse however neither provides any level of neighborhood retail or professional office space synergy.

When THIS sale becomes a comparable (as it will) nothing in the printed data will demonstrate that this property is also being purchased for plattage or parcel assemblage despite agents’ statements to the contrary…because it makes no economic sense otherwise! 75% of sales in the area are for assemblage/future developments. At best, current use is carrier property. The photos make it look like a brilliantly remodeled interior when its actually 50% decently renovated and 50% still needing renovation with dangerous physical hazard conditions leading to the rooftop. 1920’s unreinforced brick masonry construction not indicated in mls data either. Only Class “C”. IN FAIRNESS, reinforcing per code not determinable from interior inspection (or exterior)-that will have to be verified via city.

Looking at online data only and the reader will be led to believe this is just an intended owner-user extremely low cap rate sale instead of spec purchase for a future flip.

Anyway, the fact that you use BOTH mls and your own eyes means (to me) that you’d probably have identified any differences and adjusted accordingly. As a supplement MLS is fantastic. As a substitute, it is inadequate.

Current technology provides numerous photos of most properties on the MLS, far more photographic documentation than the appraiser can get from a drive-by picture (often from a moving vehicle). My practice focuses almost exclusively on litigation and other non-lender work, and many assignments involve retrospective valuations. A current photograph on a comparable property that might have sold years ago provides little useful information about property at time of sale.

So while I’m not an advocate of mandatory comp photos, that DOES NOT mean that I eschew the idea of DRIVING the comparables. Physically inspecting comparable properties provides valuable information about the neighborhood, the property and the relationship of the comp to its surroundings. Even in cases where I’m using numerous comparables for statistical modeling, I still drive the neighborhood to get a sense of locational and other factors that might play into my analysis.

So that’s my two cents . . . photos should be optional, but driving the comparables (depending on how many there are) is a no-brainer. For the record, I’ve posted the same response to Dustin Harris’ commentary as well.

Don’t shame other lines of work.

It’s worse than I remember as the lawsuit and resulting settlement covered 9 high rise condo buildings. Short, but interesting reading ($78 per sf settlement), GLA off my 6 to 26%, etc.

Seek the truth.