please help. to check more clear view please save the picture and zoom in.

You have recently graduated from University of Texas, Arlington and now doing well at your new job in Old Town, Maryland. Up until now you have been living in a small apartment but you have spent the past six months shopping for a house. Finally, you find the perfect house, a beautiful three-story house located at 849 Bershire Drive. The current owner accepts your offer of $230,000. You have $23,000 ($13,000 in cash and a $10,000 gift from your parents) to put down so you need a loan of $207,000 from the bank (90% of the sale price). You go to Colonial Mortgage for financing. Congratulations! You have passed Colonial Mortgage's underwriting criteria. Your income ratios (MHE and TOR) are acceptable and your credit history is good. This Savings and Loan is willing to lend you the $207,000 contingent on the appraisal of the property. Colonial hires John C. Appraiser to appraise the property. Seven days later you receive a letter from Colonial Mortgage stating that they will not lend you the money. The reason is that the appraiser's value of the property was only $214,000. The Savings and Loan explains that they cannot make a loan of $207,000 on a property worth $214,000. Based on the appraiser's market value estimate of $214,000 that is only about 3% equity ($7,000), this Saving and Loan requires you to have 10% equity You are very disappointed! Instead of just giving up on your dream house, you remember that the bank must provide a copy of the appraisal if you make a written request. You write the bank and they send you a copy of the appraisal (see the attached appraisal). The first page of the appraisal is a description of the property (neighborhood, site, and improvements). You note that the appraiser has made positive comments on the neighborhood ( increasing property values" etc.). Also, the site and improvements look pretty good too with an effective age of eight and "no apparent functional or external inadequacies" (obsolescence]. The second page of the appraisal report contains the approaches to value. The appraiser used two of the three traditional approaches, the Cost Approach (located at the top of the page) and the Sales Comparison Approach (located in the middle of the page). You look at his analysis for a while and you determine that something is wrong in each approach. The appraiser has made seven mistakes, one major mistake in the Cost Approach and six mistakes regarding the adjustments in the Sales Comparison Approach (you have no problem with the actual dollar amount of the adjustments but you think that the appraiser reversed several of the signs by make some positive adjustment negative and negative adjustments positive). You figure that if you can identify the mistakes in the appraisal report, fix them, and determine what the market value of the property should be, you can go back to Colonial and save your loan. Step 1: Read the appraisal report carefully. Try to get a feel for the market and the property being appraised. Step 2: Identify the one error in the Cost Approach and the six mistaken adjustments in the Sales Comparison Approach (remember you have no problem with the dollar amounts of the adjustments, just the signs). You can identify the mistakes simply by highlighting them on the report. Step 3: Correct the mistakes and reappraise this property. Fix the mistakes and determine what the values by the Cost and Sales Comparison Approaches should be. Finally, reconcile the Cost and Sales Comparison Approaches and tell me what you think the property is really worth. Will you get the loan? 24.440 7430 Age - 2000 luation Section UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT - File No. 180601-43 ESTIMATED SITE VALUE 95 222 Comments on Cool Approach (such as, source of cost estimate, ESTIMATED REPCOUCTION COST-NEW-OF IMPROVEMENTS: alto value, square foot calculation and for HUD. VA and FHA, the Duelling _2.074 Sq.FL.$_60.00 - $ carmebed maining economie lide of the property): Site yhdues Bsat...64454 FLS 10,00 - 04410 based on review of recent land sales and Fireplace/Patio/Wood deck 2,000 site-to-total value ratlos. See addendum Ganga/Carport 440 54. FL. $ 17,00 site valuation analysis. Cost developed from Tatal Eatimaled Cost Hew....... III Cost Service, verified by appraiser's Physical Functional External Elles and local cost_date. Physical Depreciation - 15% 36 804 depreciation is based on agellife Bethod. Deprecated Value of improvements. .. 109,306 (Estipated remaining economic 11113_47 +/- As-is Value of Side Improvements .... 15,000 years foc. HUR_VA. and. EXHA.Users). INDICATED VALUEBT COST APPROACH LLE 219.300 JELA SUBJECT_ L COMPARABLE NO.1 COMPARABLE HO. 2 . COMPARABLE NO.3 849 Berkshire Drive 928 Roxbury Drive' 989 Cloucester Court 1112 Howard Drive Address Old Tow) 01d Town.Md. 11905 Old Tow. Md. 11905_ lod Tom. Md_11905 Proximity to Subiect ERES 21 Block North 1/4 Mile Northwest 1/2 Mile East Sales Price 228,500 $ 220,000 R 199.000 S 2 35.000 Prica/Breas Liv Ar 110.10 1 05.08 FLASH _ 95.95. _113.31PSA Dels and/or Inspection MLS/Ext. Inspection: MLS/Ext. Inspection.. MLS/Ext. Insp./Buyer Verticalon Sourcen Inspest Lon_ isting Agent closing Agent Deed Bk_560 Page 200. VALLE AUSTENT_DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION :- red DESCRIPTION S DESCRIPTION Sales or Financing a None None . . (None . . Concessions Conventional Conventional Conventional Date of Sale/Tlme 17/15/93 Months 889 - $ 89215 Honths Ago 2.082, 1 Month Ago 2.300 Location Good Good Average -700 Good Lorse Fee State Fee Fee Fee Fee Site 1.24. Acs/Avgl. 21. Acg.ZAYE. 17 Acs,/Avg, 2001,19 Acs./Avg 1000 Vine Other Resid. Avg/Other Res: Avg/Other Resi Avg/Other Res! Design and Appeals-Level/Avg. S-Level/Ayg S-Level/Avg. S-Level/Avg. sity Construckon Cood/Brick_ Cood/Brick Good/Brick Good/Brick 1963/30 Years 29 Years +/- 28 Years +/- 29 Years +/- Condition _cood Cood oo Good Cood_ Above Grade Tebli sathe T o tte . Towe Labin the Poorn Count L&13 2.5 13:25 7 31_225 L 31_25 Gross Ling Atas 2074 59.77 2 ,074 Sq. FL 2.07439 FL 2.074 59 FL: Basement & Finished Partial partial Partial Partial Rooms Below Gredo Un improved_Finished ou lEinished 2000 Finished Functional Utility Average Average Average Average Healing Cooling_ FWA/CAC FHA/CAC FWA/None - 13.000 EWA/CAC Energy Em ciert Mera None None None None Barase/Carpart2 Att, Carage Att.. Garage: 2. Att. Carose; 12.Att. Carage: Porth. Paso, Deck Patio Deck Wood Deck. 000 Patio . Fireplacelo) etc. lone Fireplaceone Fireplace! +30 None Poel. Fence, etc. None None Ingrd Pool_ -8500 Hel Ad (bolj al. 5,3000 1 1 3.0000. X-TRZOS Crossd567 Cross 82 of Comparable Net: 3183 14.700 Net 136 2/2 Ovo Net z 220.300 Comments on Sales Comparison (including the subject property'compatibility to the neighborhood, etc.): Each of the sales were adjusted upward for time based on 1% per month_Sale ? was adjusted upward for location. This sale fronts on a busy street, Sales #2 $3 were adjusted upward for site area. The subject's additional area is considered excess land. While not exactly the same, the sales do forta realistic range of value for the subject, Most weight is given to sale! 1 as it is the most similar and required the least amount of adjustment, See addendum extracted adjustments, ITEM_I SUBJECTI CCUPARABLE NO.1 _ COLPARABLE NO.2__ L COMPARABLE NO.3 Dale. Price and Dale 6 Honths ago None - Mone None Source for prioriting $214,800 N/A . . .! N/A N/A witin year olacois Land Records Land Records Land Records Land Records Asalyala dany current agement i sale of For, or iseng the subject property and analysis oly priorites of subject and comparables within one year of the date of appraisal: The subject's current and priorgele prices are consistent with the above sales analysis. Prior soles of the comparable Expert ce cod es ...neyser BB, HOICATED VALUE BY SALES COMPARISON APPROACH.......... .......$_214.002.- NOCATED VALUE BY COVE APPROACH C1 Applicable) Estimated Market Rent_ N/A b.x Gross Perkulpiet N/A $_ NIA This appraisal is trade m 'as 1 subjeb ha repara, sterfon, inspections or condona isted below . subject to completion per piano and specificador Cortions of Appnisal: No warranty of the appraised is given, er {mplied, No Hability is assumed for the structural or Eechanical elements of the property... Final Reconciliation Due to lack of rental state, the Income Approach is not appropriate. Most weights Slyan to the Sales Cowcacion Lapproach as it reflects the buyers. A llors actions. The cost APPaCn Supports the Sales Comparison approach. See addende fer Dort is. Ratne personne The purpose of this appraisal lato estimate the market value of the Nal property thells the subject of this report based on te above conditions and the centrala,con ngert and Limiling sond sons, and moral value de forfan talare stated in the atteded Fredo Was For 59 Farr Sea Ferma 10048 Poved 6/93_ ) LATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE REPOAT, AS OF July 29 (WHICH 13 THE DATE OF INSPECTION AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THO NEPOAT) TO ME APPRAISER SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (OHLT FREQURED San Cro siguin Mylad SON. APPROVER Re Harppralink y peste Det per Llawi July 25.1993 Belt Pusah deux. 25 ict. .rgte nnia ITNI R AT 300 None None Kone - Valuation Sectos UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT FM do 180608-93 ESTIMATED SE VALUE.. . Comments on Coil Approach (auch a source al cual estimate ESTIMATED REPRODUCTION COSY-NEN-OF IMPROVEMENTS: site value, suure fool calculation and for HUD, VA and FHA, the Dwilling 2.074 SFL .5_60.00 - $ simaladralning t ile of the property: Site values 5 Beat. 644SF 10.00 - based on review of recent landles and & Fireplace/Fatio/Wood deck site-to-total value ratios See addendum Garage/Carport 440 3 FL 17.00 site valuation analysis, Cost developed from Tola Estimated Cost New.... XXX Coat Service, verified by appraiser's Les Pynt Functional External sules and local cost. data Physical Deprecato _153 depreciation is based on ore/llfe Eethod. Deprecated Value of Improvements . Estimated remaining economie lice_is_47 - A9-9"Vale of Semprovements......... years for HUD, VA and FHA users). OCALED VALUE BY COSL APPROACH EV SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO.1 COUPARASLE MO I COMPARABLE NO 3 849 Berkshire Drive 926 Roxbury Drive 989 Cloucester Court 1112 Howard Drive Address Old Town Old Town. Md. 11905 Told Town. Md. 11905 old Ton. Md. 11905 Proximity testis Block North 1/4 Mile Northwest 11/2 Mile East.. Sale Price s 228.500 TS 220.000 T L 199.000 93235.000 Pre/ GLA 110,179 106,08 PS2 S 95.95 113.31 mars Data and/or Inspection MLS/Ext. Inspection M.S/Ext. Inspection MLS/Ext. Insp./Buyer Vedication Searcea InspectionListing Agent Iclosing Arert Deed Ek 562 Page 200. VALLE ANSTMONIS DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION S A L PESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION Sales orcing None None None Conventional Conventional Conventfonal Dale of Sale/Time 17/15/933 Months ago 5 Months Ago 1 Month ARO Lastian Cood Average Good LMS Fee Fee Fee Fee 1.24_AC3.Avg.21 Aes/Avg. 1.17 AC3, JAVR.: 1.19 Acs. Avg View other Resid. Avg/Other Res Avg/Other Resi Ave/Other Resi Desloe and Appeal S-Level/Avg. S-Level/Avg s-level/Avg ! 19-Level/AVE : Orstador Good/Brick_Cood/Brick Cood/Brick Good/Brick 1963/30 Years 29. Years + 28 Years +/- 129 Years +/-: Condition Cood Good Cood Good Above Grade Babe ! Tout Room Caunt 8: 3: 2.5 7 : 3: 2.5: 7:3 2 .51 7:31 2.5: Groms Living A 2,074 F 2.07459. F 2,074 SFL L 2.074 Ft Beste Finished Partial Partial Partial Partial Roma Below Gande Un proved Finished Finished Einished Functional by Averars Average Average Average testing/Copling FWA/CAC WA/CAC FWA/None FWA/CAC Erica None Nane I None None Garage/ port12 Att Carare2 Att. Garage: 2 Att. Caroge! 2 Att. Garage: Porch Patio Deck Patio, Deck Wood Deck None Patio Fireplace().etc. One FireplaceOne Fireplace! None None Pool Tence, le None None None Ingrd Pool Cood Site Nel Al TODOS Ausled Sales Price Cross: 556 Crosst15.6 Gross: 8.2: Congo Net .8$ Net 1316_ Net . Comments on Sales Comparison including the subject property's compellbilly to the neighborhood. Each of the sales were adjusted upward for tire based on 11 per taonth. Sale 1.2 was adjusted upward for location. This fronts on a busy street, Sales 2 & were ed iusted upward for site area. The subjects additional area is considered sucess land. While not exactly the same, the sales de_forma. realistic range of value for the subject. Most weight is given to sale 1 1 t is the most sinar and required the least amount of adjustment, See addendum extracted adjustments. _ITEM S UBJECT_ COLPARAHLENO 1 COMPARABLE NO.2 COMPARABLE NO.3 tele. Price and Data 6 Months ago None . . None None Source kur priores $214,800 N/A N/A N/A wa t and Records and Records Land Records I Land Records Alysis of any current agreement of male option sting of the ect property and analysis of prior sale of land companies wione year of te dale l isad The subject's current and prior sale prices are consistent with the above sales Analysis Prior! seles of the comparable properties occured more than one year ago WC CATED VALUC BY SALES COMPARUSON APPROACH............. KOCATED VALUE BY NCOME APPROACH (Applicable) Estimated Market Pents N/A Gross Rent M yer _N/A ___ __ N/A This appraisai is made w i s s edio the repair stensons, inspections or con un isted below subject to completion per plans and specificators Conditions of Arisal: No warranty of the appraised is given or lcplied. No liabili t for the structural or mechanical elcsents of the property. Final Reconciliation Due to a lack of rental data, the Income Approach is not appropriate. Most weight is siven to the Sales_Coeracion. Proach. rslot the buyers_ allers actions. The Cost Approach supports the Sales Copron Approach. See addende for participating personne The purpose of this appraisal bemate mare value of the real property tralls the subject of sport based on lesbove condon and the certificator, and loving conditions and are value debelion talarested in teattered Freddie Mc Form130/armee Porn 10048 Persed 6/92 (WE) ESTMATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THS REPORT AS OF JULY 29 (WHICH IS THE DATE OF INSPECTION AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE REPORT) TORES 230,000 SUPCIVISORY APPRAISEN (ONLY FREGUEDA CO APPRAISER Signature SES C R A Sigruntare Accu e cas dat same John C. Appraiser, SRA Nune Marys. Appraiser. SRA inspect Property Call or Sigud July 25. 1992 I LS - 1992 00137 39 araton 1214 312 Or Sale Usense the Lleanse Www VACETELS Men Botched Appraisal Answer Sheet Each answer for items 1-10 is worth 4 points. Item 11 is worth 10 points. Therefore, the botched appraisal assignment is worth a total of 50 points. DO NOT round your answers for this exercise. DO NOT weight the sales comparison data or the approaches when finding the indicated opinion of value. Use straight averages when needed to reconcile more than one value. Please pay attention to whether the answer is positive or negative. Please write the correct amount for each error: Item Value Points 1. Cost Approach Error 2. Error 1 in Sales Comparison Approach 3. Error 2 in Sales Comparison Approach 4. Error 3 in Sales Comparison Approach 5. Error 4 in Sales Comparison Approach 6. Error 5 in Sales Comparison Approach ||||||||||| 7. Error 6 in Sales Comparison Approach 8. Indicated Opinion of Value - Cost Approach 9. Indicated Opinion of Value - Sales Comparison Approach 10. Final Indicated Opinion of Value 11. Will you get the loan? Yes TOTAL POINTS You have recently graduated from University of Texas, Arlington and now doing well at your new job in Old Town, Maryland. Up until now you have been living in a small apartment but you have spent the past six months shopping for a house. Finally, you find the perfect house, a beautiful three-story house located at 849 Bershire Drive. The current owner accepts your offer of $230,000. You have $23,000 ($13,000 in cash and a $10,000 gift from your parents) to put down so you need a loan of $207,000 from the bank (90% of the sale price). You go to Colonial Mortgage for financing. Congratulations! You have passed Colonial Mortgage's underwriting criteria. Your income ratios (MHE and TOR) are acceptable and your credit history is good. This Savings and Loan is willing to lend you the $207,000 contingent on the appraisal of the property. Colonial hires John C. Appraiser to appraise the property. Seven days later you receive a letter from Colonial Mortgage stating that they will not lend you the money. The reason is that the appraiser's value of the property was only $214,000. The Savings and Loan explains that they cannot make a loan of $207,000 on a property worth $214,000. Based on the appraiser's market value estimate of $214,000 that is only about 3% equity ($7,000), this Saving and Loan requires you to have 10% equity You are very disappointed! Instead of just giving up on your dream house, you remember that the bank must provide a copy of the appraisal if you make a written request. You write the bank and they send you a copy of the appraisal (see the attached appraisal). The first page of the appraisal is a description of the property (neighborhood, site, and improvements). You note that the appraiser has made positive comments on the neighborhood ( increasing property values" etc.). Also, the site and improvements look pretty good too with an effective age of eight and "no apparent functional or external inadequacies" (obsolescence]. The second page of the appraisal report contains the approaches to value. The appraiser used two of the three traditional approaches, the Cost Approach (located at the top of the page) and the Sales Comparison Approach (located in the middle of the page). You look at his analysis for a while and you determine that something is wrong in each approach. The appraiser has made seven mistakes, one major mistake in the Cost Approach and six mistakes regarding the adjustments in the Sales Comparison Approach (you have no problem with the actual dollar amount of the adjustments but you think that the appraiser reversed several of the signs by make some positive adjustment negative and negative adjustments positive). You figure that if you can identify the mistakes in the appraisal report, fix them, and determine what the market value of the property should be, you can go back to Colonial and save your loan. Step 1: Read the appraisal report carefully. Try to get a feel for the market and the property being appraised. Step 2: Identify the one error in the Cost Approach and the six mistaken adjustments in the Sales Comparison Approach (remember you have no problem with the dollar amounts of the adjustments, just the signs). You can identify the mistakes simply by highlighting them on the report. Step 3: Correct the mistakes and reappraise this property. Fix the mistakes and determine what the values by the Cost and Sales Comparison Approaches should be. Finally, reconcile the Cost and Sales Comparison Approaches and tell me what you think the property is really worth. Will you get the loan? 24.440 7430 Age - 2000 luation Section UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT - File No. 180601-43 ESTIMATED SITE VALUE 95 222 Comments on Cool Approach (such as, source of cost estimate, ESTIMATED REPCOUCTION COST-NEW-OF IMPROVEMENTS: alto value, square foot calculation and for HUD. VA and FHA, the Duelling _2.074 Sq.FL.$_60.00 - $ carmebed maining economie lide of the property): Site yhdues Bsat...64454 FLS 10,00 - 04410 based on review of recent land sales and Fireplace/Patio/Wood deck 2,000 site-to-total value ratlos. See addendum Ganga/Carport 440 54. FL. $ 17,00 site valuation analysis. Cost developed from Tatal Eatimaled Cost Hew....... III Cost Service, verified by appraiser's Physical Functional External Elles and local cost_date. Physical Depreciation - 15% 36 804 depreciation is based on agellife Bethod. Deprecated Value of improvements. .. 109,306 (Estipated remaining economic 11113_47 +/- As-is Value of Side Improvements .... 15,000 years foc. HUR_VA. and. EXHA.Users). INDICATED VALUEBT COST APPROACH LLE 219.300 JELA SUBJECT_ L COMPARABLE NO.1 COMPARABLE HO. 2 . COMPARABLE NO.3 849 Berkshire Drive 928 Roxbury Drive' 989 Cloucester Court 1112 Howard Drive Address Old Tow) 01d Town.Md. 11905 Old Tow. Md. 11905_ lod Tom. Md_11905 Proximity to Subiect ERES 21 Block North 1/4 Mile Northwest 1/2 Mile East Sales Price 228,500 $ 220,000 R 199.000 S 2 35.000 Prica/Breas Liv Ar 110.10 1 05.08 FLASH _ 95.95. _113.31PSA Dels and/or Inspection MLS/Ext. Inspection: MLS/Ext. Inspection.. MLS/Ext. Insp./Buyer Verticalon Sourcen Inspest Lon_ isting Agent closing Agent Deed Bk_560 Page 200. VALLE AUSTENT_DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION :- red DESCRIPTION S DESCRIPTION Sales or Financing a None None . . (None . . Concessions Conventional Conventional Conventional Date of Sale/Tlme 17/15/93 Months 889 - $ 89215 Honths Ago 2.082, 1 Month Ago 2.300 Location Good Good Average -700 Good Lorse Fee State Fee Fee Fee Fee Site 1.24. Acs/Avgl. 21. Acg.ZAYE. 17 Acs,/Avg, 2001,19 Acs./Avg 1000 Vine Other Resid. Avg/Other Res: Avg/Other Resi Avg/Other Res! Design and Appeals-Level/Avg. S-Level/Ayg S-Level/Avg. S-Level/Avg. sity Construckon Cood/Brick_ Cood/Brick Good/Brick Good/Brick 1963/30 Years 29 Years +/- 28 Years +/- 29 Years +/- Condition _cood Cood oo Good Cood_ Above Grade Tebli sathe T o tte . Towe Labin the Poorn Count L&13 2.5 13:25 7 31_225 L 31_25 Gross Ling Atas 2074 59.77 2 ,074 Sq. FL 2.07439 FL 2.074 59 FL: Basement & Finished Partial partial Partial Partial Rooms Below Gredo Un improved_Finished ou lEinished 2000 Finished Functional Utility Average Average Average Average Healing Cooling_ FWA/CAC FHA/CAC FWA/None - 13.000 EWA/CAC Energy Em ciert Mera None None None None Barase/Carpart2 Att, Carage Att.. Garage: 2. Att. Carose; 12.Att. Carage: Porth. Paso, Deck Patio Deck Wood Deck. 000 Patio . Fireplacelo) etc. lone Fireplaceone Fireplace! +30 None Poel. Fence, etc. None None Ingrd Pool_ -8500 Hel Ad (bolj al. 5,3000 1 1 3.0000. X-TRZOS Crossd567 Cross 82 of Comparable Net: 3183 14.700 Net 136 2/2 Ovo Net z 220.300 Comments on Sales Comparison (including the subject property'compatibility to the neighborhood, etc.): Each of the sales were adjusted upward for time based on 1% per month_Sale ? was adjusted upward for location. This sale fronts on a busy street, Sales #2 $3 were adjusted upward for site area. The subject's additional area is considered excess land. While not exactly the same, the sales do forta realistic range of value for the subject, Most weight is given to sale! 1 as it is the most similar and required the least amount of adjustment, See addendum extracted adjustments, ITEM_I SUBJECTI CCUPARABLE NO.1 _ COLPARABLE NO.2__ L COMPARABLE NO.3 Dale. Price and Dale 6 Honths ago None - Mone None Source for prioriting $214,800 N/A . . .! N/A N/A witin year olacois Land Records Land Records Land Records Land Records Asalyala dany current agement i sale of For, or iseng the subject property and analysis oly priorites of subject and comparables within one year of the date of appraisal: The subject's current and priorgele prices are consistent with the above sales analysis. Prior soles of the comparable Expert ce cod es ...neyser BB, HOICATED VALUE BY SALES COMPARISON APPROACH.......... .......$_214.002.- NOCATED VALUE BY COVE APPROACH C1 Applicable) Estimated Market Rent_ N/A b.x Gross Perkulpiet N/A $_ NIA This appraisal is trade m 'as 1 subjeb ha repara, sterfon, inspections or condona isted below . subject to completion per piano and specificador Cortions of Appnisal: No warranty of the appraised is given, er {mplied, No Hability is assumed for the structural or Eechanical elements of the property... Final Reconciliation Due to lack of rental state, the Income Approach is not appropriate. Most weights Slyan to the Sales Cowcacion Lapproach as it reflects the buyers. A llors actions. The cost APPaCn Supports the Sales Comparison approach. See addende fer Dort is. Ratne personne The purpose of this appraisal lato estimate the market value of the Nal property thells the subject of this report based on te above conditions and the centrala,con ngert and Limiling sond sons, and moral value de forfan talare stated in the atteded Fredo Was For 59 Farr Sea Ferma 10048 Poved 6/93_ ) LATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE REPOAT, AS OF July 29 (WHICH 13 THE DATE OF INSPECTION AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THO NEPOAT) TO ME APPRAISER SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (OHLT FREQURED San Cro siguin Mylad SON. APPROVER Re Harppralink y peste Det per Llawi July 25.1993 Belt Pusah deux. 25 ict. .rgte nnia ITNI R AT 300 None None Kone - Valuation Sectos UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT FM do 180608-93 ESTIMATED SE VALUE.. . Comments on Coil Approach (auch a source al cual estimate ESTIMATED REPRODUCTION COSY-NEN-OF IMPROVEMENTS: site value, suure fool calculation and for HUD, VA and FHA, the Dwilling 2.074 SFL .5_60.00 - $ simaladralning t ile of the property: Site values 5 Beat. 644SF 10.00 - based on review of recent landles and & Fireplace/Fatio/Wood deck site-to-total value ratios See addendum Garage/Carport 440 3 FL 17.00 site valuation analysis, Cost developed from Tola Estimated Cost New.... XXX Coat Service, verified by appraiser's Les Pynt Functional External sules and local cost. data Physical Deprecato _153 depreciation is based on ore/llfe Eethod. Deprecated Value of Improvements . Estimated remaining economie lice_is_47 - A9-9"Vale of Semprovements......... years for HUD, VA and FHA users). OCALED VALUE BY COSL APPROACH EV SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO.1 COUPARASLE MO I COMPARABLE NO 3 849 Berkshire Drive 926 Roxbury Drive 989 Cloucester Court 1112 Howard Drive Address Old Town Old Town. Md. 11905 Told Town. Md. 11905 old Ton. Md. 11905 Proximity testis Block North 1/4 Mile Northwest 11/2 Mile East.. Sale Price s 228.500 TS 220.000 T L 199.000 93235.000 Pre/ GLA 110,179 106,08 PS2 S 95.95 113.31 mars Data and/or Inspection MLS/Ext. Inspection M.S/Ext. Inspection MLS/Ext. Insp./Buyer Vedication Searcea InspectionListing Agent Iclosing Arert Deed Ek 562 Page 200. VALLE ANSTMONIS DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION S A L PESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION Sales orcing None None None Conventional Conventional Conventfonal Dale of Sale/Time 17/15/933 Months ago 5 Months Ago 1 Month ARO Lastian Cood Average Good LMS Fee Fee Fee Fee 1.24_AC3.Avg.21 Aes/Avg. 1.17 AC3, JAVR.: 1.19 Acs. Avg View other Resid. Avg/Other Res Avg/Other Resi Ave/Other Resi Desloe and Appeal S-Level/Avg. S-Level/Avg s-level/Avg ! 19-Level/AVE : Orstador Good/Brick_Cood/Brick Cood/Brick Good/Brick 1963/30 Years 29. Years + 28 Years +/- 129 Years +/-: Condition Cood Good Cood Good Above Grade Babe ! Tout Room Caunt 8: 3: 2.5 7 : 3: 2.5: 7:3 2 .51 7:31 2.5: Groms Living A 2,074 F 2.07459. F 2,074 SFL L 2.074 Ft Beste Finished Partial Partial Partial Partial Roma Below Gande Un proved Finished Finished Einished Functional by Averars Average Average Average testing/Copling FWA/CAC WA/CAC FWA/None FWA/CAC Erica None Nane I None None Garage/ port12 Att Carare2 Att. Garage: 2 Att. Caroge! 2 Att. Garage: Porch Patio Deck Patio, Deck Wood Deck None Patio Fireplace().etc. One FireplaceOne Fireplace! None None Pool Tence, le None None None Ingrd Pool Cood Site Nel Al TODOS Ausled Sales Price Cross: 556 Crosst15.6 Gross: 8.2: Congo Net .8$ Net 1316_ Net . Comments on Sales Comparison including the subject property's compellbilly to the neighborhood. Each of the sales were adjusted upward for tire based on 11 per taonth. Sale 1.2 was adjusted upward for location. This fronts on a busy street, Sales 2 & were ed iusted upward for site area. The subjects additional area is considered sucess land. While not exactly the same, the sales de_forma. realistic range of value for the subject. Most weight is given to sale 1 1 t is the most sinar and required the least amount of adjustment, See addendum extracted adjustments. _ITEM S UBJECT_ COLPARAHLENO 1 COMPARABLE NO.2 COMPARABLE NO.3 tele. Price and Data 6 Months ago None . . None None Source kur priores $214,800 N/A N/A N/A wa t and Records and Records Land Records I Land Records Alysis of any current agreement of male option sting of the ect property and analysis of prior sale of land companies wione year of te dale l isad The subject's current and prior sale prices are consistent with the above sales Analysis Prior! seles of the comparable properties occured more than one year ago WC CATED VALUC BY SALES COMPARUSON APPROACH............. KOCATED VALUE BY NCOME APPROACH (Applicable) Estimated Market Pents N/A Gross Rent M yer _N/A ___ __ N/A This appraisai is made w i s s edio the repair stensons, inspections or con un isted below subject to completion per plans and specificators Conditions of Arisal: No warranty of the appraised is given or lcplied. No liabili t for the structural or mechanical elcsents of the property. Final Reconciliation Due to a lack of rental data, the Income Approach is not appropriate. Most weight is siven to the Sales_Coeracion. Proach. rslot the buyers_ allers actions. The Cost Approach supports the Sales Copron Approach. See addende for participating personne The purpose of this appraisal bemate mare value of the real property tralls the subject of sport based on lesbove condon and the certificator, and loving conditions and are value debelion talarested in teattered Freddie Mc Form130/armee Porn 10048 Persed 6/92 (WE) ESTMATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THS REPORT AS OF JULY 29 (WHICH IS THE DATE OF INSPECTION AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE REPORT) TORES 230,000 SUPCIVISORY APPRAISEN (ONLY FREGUEDA CO APPRAISER Signature SES C R A Sigruntare Accu e cas dat same John C. Appraiser, SRA Nune Marys. Appraiser. SRA inspect Property Call or Sigud July 25. 1992 I LS - 1992 00137 39 araton 1214 312 Or Sale Usense the Lleanse Www VACETELS Men Botched Appraisal Answer Sheet Each answer for items 1-10 is worth 4 points. Item 11 is worth 10 points. Therefore, the botched appraisal assignment is worth a total of 50 points. DO NOT round your answers for this exercise. DO NOT weight the sales comparison data or the approaches when finding the indicated opinion of value. Use straight averages when needed to reconcile more than one value. Please pay attention to whether the answer is positive or negative. Please write the correct amount for each error: Item Value Points 1. Cost Approach Error 2. Error 1 in Sales Comparison Approach 3. Error 2 in Sales Comparison Approach 4. Error 3 in Sales Comparison Approach 5. Error 4 in Sales Comparison Approach 6. Error 5 in Sales Comparison Approach ||||||||||| 7. Error 6 in Sales Comparison Approach 8. Indicated Opinion of Value - Cost Approach 9. Indicated Opinion of Value - Sales Comparison Approach 10. Final Indicated Opinion of Value 11. Will you get the loan? Yes