
Image via Wikipedia
This wise appraisal corollary never seemed any more true for me as when I went to Ft. Lauderdale recently to testify as an expert witness in appraisal technique and highest and best use.
This was a hearing before a judge involving my client and the plaintiff, a well-known regional bank, to rule on a judgment for payment of a deficiency balance resulting from a forced foreclosure on the property formerly belonging to my client. To add an interesting twist, the action deals with a retrospective date of value challenging the experts to wind back the clock 3 years.
The problem clearly reinforces the basic premise of market value (no matter what the date of value). Few actually recognize that as real estate appraisers we actually appraise the “Use” not the property. Picture a pyramid, with the top layer at the point being “market value”, the middle layer, the highest and best use conclusions and the base providing the underlying support and foundation is a thorough market analysis of the actual or proposed use. All three are essential to providing the basis for an appraisal of market value.
Every real estate appraisal is a highest and best use puzzle, requiring the appraiser to locate and place together the pieces necessary to solve the riddle. There are a few simple rules that must be adhered to, the more stable and likely unchanging the recent market for the property use under analysis, the less a formal market analysis is necessary.
It follows then, that the more volatile the market conditions with a high degree of uncertainty implicit, the more complex the market analysis must be. In addition if the use and property indicate a small, less complex problem, the more likely that only a basic, referred to as “Inferred Market Analysis” is required to support the use, users and estimate of market timing.
The Ft. Lauderdale property and use as of the date of value, was a part of a wildly uncertain market and proposed to be developed with a complicated concept and specialty improvements. In fact, the use was preliminarily approved for this unusual development as a “Mega-Yacht”, “dock-o-minium”. By the client’s definition, a mega-yacht would be greater than 100 feet in length and of course cost millions of dollars. So you can’t help but ask yourself, “how many of these yachts can there be, and why choose Ft. Lauderdale?”
It turns out that Ft. Lauderdale is generally acknowledged to be the boating capital of the U.S. and very possibly the world. Even here there are few sites able to support such a facility and little if any competition. And worth mentioning, 10 of 26 covered slips were bought with at risk deposits.
- Four appraisals in total were completed, the first (which was subsequently updated) correctly and properly analyzed the market for this use and the appraiser believed that mega-yacht use to be the “highest and best use”.
- A second appraiser concurred and performed an even more well supported market analysis.
- The bank then ordered another appraisal after the foreclosure and suit had been filed. This appraiser unfortunately did not perform an adequate market analysis and therefore arrived at an entirely different highest and best use conclusion. This use was then valued at roughly one-half the conclusions proffered by the first two appraisers.
- The client then ordered the fourth appraisal during the post foreclosure process and this appraiser supported the first two and within a similar value range.
Please don’t jump to the conclusion that just because three appraisers of four agreed, that the fourth is wrong.
The value estimate is only the result of the proper attention to market analysis to support or in this case, provide support that the proposed and approved use of the property, which then suggests using only the necessary market data that relates to the use conclusion.
There is strong evidence to suggest that three appraisals because of their very complete market analysis supporting the mega-yacht dock-o-minium are more credible than the appraisal with virtually no market analysis provided other than anecdotal interviews. Therefore, the corollary applies “If the highest and use is wrong, the value cannot be right”.
If you’d enjoy discussing this further, please leave a comment below- I’d enjoy conversing with you.