Appraisers' Free Forum

If that's the case, then why do you need an "as is" value?

What would make an appraiser think anybody wants to lend out money secured by hypothetical property or hypothetical property value?

Is it possible that the federal government decided to include that regulation because it is both common sense and sound banking pracitce? And perhaps because the taxpayers got burned so badly in the SL crisis from deals where as-is value was less than hypothetical value?

"The 71B is designed for up to 4 units. The 71A has enough slots for a 5 unit but the preprinted definition of MV still refers to "the highest price...which a property will bring...""

Actually, Greg, the 71B was designed for 5+ units. I was there:) At the time of it's addition there was a perfectly adequate TWO PAGE 2-4 family report form available.

If you happen to have more than 4 distinct unit combinations, the form gets a bit clunky. In the units box, you note the number of 2 BR/1 bath units, for example.

I forgot about the pre-printed MV definition on the 71A. I never used that form, but I looked it up out of curiosity.

The 71B can be combined with the limiting conditions and certifications from a pre-3/2005 URAR to help the appraiser automatically comply with some of USPAP reporting requirements. Patchwork addenda is still required.

Anyone else out there suffer through a 71B? Did you Frankenstein one together with URAR MV, Certs and Limiting conditions?

Thanks Roger. I take a closer look at the 71B.

Pina Colada wrote:

If that's the case, then why do you need an "as is" value?

What would make an appraiser think anybody wants to lend out money secured by hypothetical property or hypothetical property value?

Is it possible that the federal government decided to include that regulation because it is both common sense and sound banking pracitce? And perhaps because the taxpayers got burned so badly in the SL crisis from deals where as-is value was less than hypothetical value?

That is true, and I agree. However, the poster indicated that the client was a cheapskate (not the exact word used, but close enough). "As is" values for partially completed properties are a pain in the butt. That is actually what caused the question to be posted in the first place... basically, "how do I get an "as is" income approach for this turkey."

My approach in this situation would be to communicate with the client. If he doesn't want or need an "as is" value then I see nothing in USPAP that would require one. Now, I have never personally done one that way, but then I've never run up against this exact situation before either.

My approach in this situation would be to communicate with the client. If he doesn't want or need an "as is" value then I see nothing in USPAP that would require one.

Disagree. The only way a lender wouldn't need an as-is value appraisal now, is if they already had one.