The Real Estate Appraisal Profession is viewed in different ways by different people. Market value estimates are seen as everything from a financial assurance to a necessary evil. Personal views are typically reflective of the benefits or consequences of the end result; negative views are often the result of misinterpretation or confusion stemming from a lack of direct involvement in the process coupled with the absence of proper explanation. Unfortunately, this has led to several common misconceptions, or myths, about Real Estate Appraisal.

Myth 1: Real Estate Valuation is the same as Real Estate Appraisal

Real Estate Valuation and Real Estate Appraisal, although similar, are not analogous in nature and, contrary to popular belief, should not always be used interchangeably. The term Real Estate Appraisal is a more general term that covers a broad spectrum of value estimates. An appraisal can be anything from an estimate of price provided by a real estate agent to a written value estimate (report) provided to a financial institution by a certified appraiser. Real Estate Valuation, however, is a systematic process which provides an independent or impartial opinion of actual market value that frequently has full legal standing. It’s a complex process that can only be performed by professionally accredited individuals. Although it’s not common practise to point out the misuse of these terms to a potential client, I always like to capitalize on the opportunity to educate my audience and differentiate between the product being offered and the process involved.

Myth 2: Assessed Value = Current Market Value

Although most assessed values are purported to reflect market value, these figures are not necessarily current. For example, in Nova Scotia the assessed value of a property for the 2016 tax year is actually determined by the market value of the property at a base date of 1st January 2014, reflecting the state of the property as of 1st December 2015 (state date). As a result, the current market value of a property could in fact be significantly different than the Assessed Value.

Myth 3: Cost to build or renovate translates into Market Value

Although the cost approach is one of the three traditional methods of valuing real estate (see Myth 7), it is not without limitations. The cost approach can provide a reliable indicator of value for properties where the buildings are fairly generic, relatively new, and have very little depreciation. In this case, the building and improvements likely reflect newer construction trends and support the level of utility demanded by current market participants. However, this approach is less reliable when the building is older and begins to suffer from depreciation, or if the building is not of a typical design or style. The misconception here is that the cost to renovate will be recovered upon sale of the asset. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. In some instances, a retrofit does not necessarily add value to the property; it simply aligns the product with current demand or economic/functional requirements. Similarly, inflated costs due to atypical building designs are not always realized by the local market. In fact, the level of “uniqueness” can actually limit the pool of potential purchasers, therefore lengthening marketing times, and potentially decreasing the achievable value.

Myth 4: Market Value varies depending on who the report is prepared for

Market value is an impartial, unbiased opinion of value. The Appraiser/Valuer has no vested interest in the final outcome of the analysis, and therefore, the final figure should be the same no matter who commissions the report (i.e. borrower, lender, etc.).

Myth 5: A paying client can share a Valuation Report with anyone, and anyone can rely on it

A customer can share the results of a valuation with anyone they please, however the only individuals or organizations that may rely on the conclusions are expressly documented within the report.

Myth 6: A Property Valuation is the same as a building inspection

Although most valuations include an onsite examination of the subject, the Valuer’s task is to render an opinion of the market value for the property. A building inspection typically constitutes a structural survey of the building in order to determine the actual condition of the structure and its major components.

Myth 7: Market Value is based solely on comparable sales

There are three traditional approaches to valuing real estate: the Direct Comparison, the Cost Approach, and the Income Approach. Only the most appropriate combination of the three approaches is utilized in order to properly value a property.

1. The Cost Approach can provide a reliable indicator of value for properties that are fairly generic, relatively new, and have very little depreciation.

2. The Income Approach can provide a reliable indicator of value for properties which are acquired as investment vehicles. The value of the property is determined by its ability to generate revenue. This approach is less reliable when applied to properties which are not likely to be rented to a tenant.

3. The Direct Comparison Approach can provide a reliable indicator of value when comparable sales data are available. This approach is less reliable when sales data is sparse or when the various sales are not truly comparable to the subject thereby requiring extensive adjustments.

Written by Mark Farrow, Senior Consultant in our Valuation Division. For more information about our valuation services, feel free to contact Mark at (902) 429-1811 or .