Hi all,
I have mentioned a couple of times in responses made to queries/questions regarding bank and other property valuations that I will post a couple of interesting comments made on professional valuations I have seen – purely for information purposes, and to assist with understanding that not only is it not an exacting science, but it does rely both on comparable sales, and sales activity. I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions. I have not a valuer (much as it interests me) but simply have posted this for info only. Obviously other forum members involved in lending/broking/banks will have seen this but for all others I hope it helps with some 'enlightening' – and seeing why the figures we may hope for are not always what come in.
EG1. Small acreage not to far out of a city, with residential zoning. Note how this would affect the valuation…
Our investigations revealed an absence of recent sales of directly comparable residential accommodation within the immediate locality. Consequently the market for properties such as the subject is largely untested deeming our assessment to be more subjective then normal, where the normal degree of valuation accuracy may not apply. By necessity we have been forced to have regard for slightly dated sales evidence which remain our best guide as to the market value of the subject property.
EG2. Val on a block of land – on the coast but no ocean views. Note the comments re valuation guidelines.
Due to a shortage of vacant land sales in XXXXX, we have relied on sales evidence that does not fit within normal guidelines. There are few sales of this type of property in the locality and therefore some of the sales evidence may be over 6 months old, or are outside of the preferred 10% price range. In this instance we are unaware of sales evidence that fits within normal guidelines and confirm the sales evidence used within this report is the best available.
Cheers
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
