
Current Issue
|
> The Appraiser Coach
> Appraisal Institute
>
OREP
E&O
★★★★★
"They are knowledgeable,
professional, and understand
urgency." - Joe Thweatt
|
"Fannie Mae seems to have a problem with appraisals that involve
excess land, and the appraiser's characterization of Highest and Best
Use."
Fannie Mae's New Highest and Best Use
by Lee Lansford and Richard Heyn
Fannie
Mae seems to have a problem with excess land. Or, perhaps more accurately,
Fannie Mae seems to have a problem with appraisals that involve excess
land, and the appraiser's characterization of Highest and Best Use.
Before we proceed with this discussion, let's make sure everybody is on the
same page by defining two terms: "surplus" land versus
"excess" land.
Surplus land is land beyond what is necessary to
support the highest and best use but cannot be sold off separately. To
simplify things, think in terms of a house that sits on two lots in a
subdivision. The house "straddles the line" between the two lots
so neither lot can be sold off separately and the highest and best use is a
continuation of the existing use. Excess land is land that is not
needed to support the existing improvement and can be sold separately. In
this case, think of a house and two lots where the house is located on one
lot, leaving the excess lot free to be sold. If it helps you to remember
the difference, excess land is "excellent" and surplus land
"stinks."
On the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac appraisal forms, the question- "Is the
highest and best use of the subject property as improved (or as proposed
per plans and specifications) the present use?"- is followed by
"Yes" and "No" checkboxes. If the subject property
clearly has excess land, as in the case of the house on two lots described
above, the correct answer to this question is usually "No,"
followed by an explanation that the highest and best use involves treating
the improved and unimproved lots as separate entities in the valuation
process. The fallout from this is that Fannie Mae will not purchase loans
involving appraisal reports if the "No" box has been checked.
Apparently, Fannie Mae has been looking for a workaround to this situation.
In their "Appraiser Update" newsletter of December 2019, Fannie
Mae advised appraisers that "Excess land is considered 'value in use'
for the purpose of the appraisal, so the land should be described and its
contributory value included in the grid." That comment left numerous
appraisers scratching their heads. The concept of "value in use"
does not mesh with the definition of "market value" printed on
the form, and thus did not resolve the issue of checking the "No"
box regarding highest and best use.
In March of 2020, Fannie Mae issued another "Appraiser Update"
and again discussed excess land. This newsletter began by quoting a line
out of USPAP that states: "An appraiser must analyze the relevant
legal, physical, and economic factors ... to support the appraiser's
highest and best use conclusion(s)." The newsletter then stated that
"Fannie Mae's policy requires that the mortgaged premises must be the
highest and best use of the property as improved (or as proposed per plans
and specifications)." So far, so good. But here comes the fun stuff.
The article goes on to say that when applying the legal HBU test to
multiple parcels, the Fannie Mae Selling Guide requires that the mortgage
must cover each parcel, and consequently, excess land "is not a
possible outcome of the HBU analysis because the parcels cannot be
separated without mortgagee consent." This amounts to a new, fifth
test of highest and best use: Is the property encumbered with a mortgage?
|
(story continues below)
|

(story continues)
|
What's interesting about this new test is that the
overwhelming majority of appraisals reported on Fannie/Freddie forms have
the "Fee Simple" box checked under "Property Rights
Appraised." By definition, "Fee Simple" means Absolute
ownership unencumbered by any other interest and subject only to taxation,
eminent domain, police power and escheat. In other words, if an appraiser's
opinion of market value is developed within the context of "fee
simple," the appraiser ignores any mortgage. Another way of looking at
this is that if a person owns a house and two lots free and clear (one of
which is excess land), and then decides to mortgage the property, the
highest and best use does not change overnight.
So, we have gone from a confusing position in the December 2019 newsletter
to a dangerous position in the March 2020 newsletter. As one industry
observer noted, "they should have quit while they were behind."
The reason the latter position is dangerous to appraisers it that it
appears to put them at odds with USPAP and their State Regulatory Agency.
Standards Rule 1-1(a) calls for appraisers to "be aware of,
understand, and correctly employ those recognized methods and techniques
that are necessary to produce a credible appraisal"; yet in no
recognized source with which the authors are familiar does highest and best
use depend on whether the property is encumbered with a mortgage. So for
now, when dealing with excess land and Fannie Mae policy, appraisers should
ask themselves if the risks are worth it, or if these assignments are best
turned down. In that light, we'll close this discussion with a final quote
from USPAP: "An appraiser must not allow assignment conditions to
limit the scope of work to such a degree that the assignment results are
not credible in the context of the intended use."
Links to Fannie Mae Newsletters:
December
2019
March
2020
|
>> Join the Discussion at
OREP/Working RE's Coronavirus
(COVID-19) Discussion and Resource Page where you can share your
thoughts, experiences, advice and challenges with fellow appraisers.
>> Take OREP/Working RE's Coronavirus:
State of the Appraisal Industry
survey here.
About the Authors
Lee Lansford, ASA & IFA, is a Certified Residential Appraiser with 30+
years of experience. He holds an MBA (R.E. Finance & Urban Development)
from DePaul U. (Chicago) and is an AQB Certified USPAP Instructor. He
served for 9 years as a member of the State of IL Appraisal Board where for
2 years he was chairman. Previously, Lee had served as an "investigative
reviewer" for the state's appraiser licensing agency and is currently
serving as a 'hearing officer' for real estate tax assessment appeals
(office of Supervisor of Assessments) in his home county. A designated
member of the American Society of Appraisers, Lee is in private practice in
"Chicago-land."
Richard Heyn, SRA, has over 40 years of experience in real estate
appraisal, consulting, seminar development and teaching. Rich is an AQB
certified USPAP instructor and has authored dozens of continuing education
seminars for appraisers, REALTORS© and lenders. His seminars have been
attended by literally tens of thousands of appraisers from every State.
Tips For Smoother Appraising
CE Online - 7 Hours (45 states)
How To
Support and Prove
Your
Adjustments
Presented by: Richard Hagar, SRA
Must-know business practices for all appraisers working today. Ensure
proper support for your adjustments. Making defensible adjustments is the
first step in becoming a "Tier One" appraiser, who earns more,
enjoys the best assignments and suffers fewer snags and callbacks. Up your
game, avoid time-consuming callbacks and earn approved CE today!
Sign Up
Now! $119 (7 Hrs)
OREP
Insured's Price: $99
|
|
|
>Click
to Leave a Comment
>Opt-In
to Working RE Newsletters
>Shop
Appraiser Insurance
>Shop
Real Estate Agent Insurance
Send your story submission/idea to the
Editor: isaac@orep.org
|
|
|
|
Comments