You are completely correct, but I guess they are valuing as being in the scheme, if you want the true valuation you need to leave the scheme and then get the valuer back in.All a bit of a nonsense I think. Probably not all valuers will do the same and if you are lucky you may not even have the problem. Guess you need to give it a go with your own…[Read more]

ScottExact wording in the valuation was "We believe this property is part of the NRAS scheme …", which does not look to me like a statement of fact. Anyway I don't really have an issue with that because assumption or not, it was correct.You said "Based on the current restrictions, the highest & best use is NRAS." – sorry don't understand what…[Read more]

Interesting…I just came off the phone from another major valuer who basically said the same – lenders are providing specific guidelines on particular types of properties, such as NRAS that indicate that it is a higher risk security and therefore the valuations will in most cases be lower. Another issue is that the banks require valuations to be…[Read more]

Thanks emptyvessel.Those suggestions are along the lines I am thinking. I assume that the logic of the valuer is – as it stands on the day of valuation it is in NRAS so to sell as is, the buyers pool is limited. The interesting part about the valuation statement was that the valuer did not definitively know the property was NRAS, I am guessing…[Read more]

Clarification – obviously it was the valuer that has provided the low valuation (I have full copy), the lender is not the issue, other than the fact that they used a particular valuer.