Curable physical deterioration is measured at cost to cure because:
Correct Answer
B) A buyer discounts by roughly what the repair costs
Why this is correct: Curable physical deterioration is measured at cost to cure because a typical buyer would discount the property's price by approximately the cost to repair the item, assuming the repair adds value at least equal to its cost. Why the other choices are wrong: The standards prescribe that specific method is wrong; USPAP and standards do not prescribe a single method but endorse this logic. Age-life ratios cannot be applied to any component is wrong; age-life can be applied to long-lived components. Cost to cure is always the smallest available figure is wrong; it is used when economically justified, not because it's always smallest. Exam tip: 'Curable' means economically feasible: cost to cure ≤ value added.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
A buyer discounting by roughly what the repair costs is the reason, and it grounds the method in market evidence rather than convention. It also implies the test the appraiser must actually apply, which is whether curing the item adds at least as much value as it costs, since an expenditure that adds less than it costs is not economically feasible and the item is incurable regardless of whether a contractor could physically fix it. In application the appraiser develops the cost to cure as of the effective date from current repair pricing, not from what the component originally cost, and supports it with estimates or market data in the workfile. Where the market shows buyers discounting by more than the repair cost, because of inconvenience or uncertainty, that additional penalty is itself observable and should be analyzed rather than assumed away.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A: The standards prescribe that specific method
USPAP does not prescribe methods, and no standard dictates cost to cure for curable items; the standards require the appraiser to correctly employ recognized methods and techniques and to support conclusions, leaving method selection to appraisal theory and market evidence. Looking for a rule where the answer is market behavior is a recurring error. The method is chosen because it reflects the market, not because a document commands it.
Option C: Age-life ratios cannot be applied to any component
Age-life ratios are entirely applicable to components, and in a breakdown analysis short-lived and long-lived items are commonly depreciated by their own age-life relationships. What the method suits poorly is an item a buyer would repair at once, where the market charges the repair cost rather than a proportion of remaining life. The option overstates a limitation into an impossibility.
Option D: Cost to cure is always the smallest available figure
Cost to cure is used because it measures the market's reaction, not because it produces the smallest number, and in many cases the cure exceeds what an age-life ratio would have charged. The economic feasibility test compares the cure to the value added, not to alternative computations. Choosing a method for the size of its answer would be results-driven appraising.
The Buyer Runs the Numbers
Ask what a buyer standing in the room would do. For a broken thing that is worth fixing, the buyer subtracts the repair estimate. The method mirrors the market; it is not handed down from a rulebook.
How to use: When asked why a depreciation method applies, answer with market behavior rather than with a rule. Then confirm the feasibility test, which is that value added must at least equal the cost to cure. Reject options citing the standards as prescribing methods or choosing a method for producing the smallest figure.
Exam Tip
Methods are chosen because they replicate market behavior. USPAP requires correct use of recognized methods; it does not prescribe which one.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Deducting a cost to cure for an item where the repair would not add at least its cost, which makes it incurable
- -Using the component's original installation cost rather than the current cost to cure
- -Explaining a method choice by citing the standards rather than market behavior
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
This item tests why depreciation methods are chosen, which is always by reference to market behavior rather than by rule. Every measure of accrued depreciation is an attempt to quantify the difference between cost new and contributory value, so the right method for any component is the one that best replicates how participants in that market actually price the deficiency. For an item that is physically and economically feasible to repair, buyers do something quite mechanical: they estimate the repair, deduct it from what they would otherwise pay, and negotiate from there. Cost to cure therefore reproduces observed behavior directly, which is why it is the accepted measure for curable physical deterioration. The feasibility test embedded in the word curable is what makes this work, since an item qualifies as curable only when the value added by the repair at least equals its cost, and where that is not true the item is incurable and gets measured another way.
Background Knowledge
You need to know the categories of accrued depreciation, physical deterioration divided into curable and incurable, functional obsolescence divided into curable and incurable, and external obsolescence, which is generally incurable by the owner. You should know that curable means economically feasible, meaning the value added at least equals the cost to cure. You also need to know that cost to cure is developed as of the effective date from current pricing and supported in the workfile, and that the appraiser must correctly employ recognized methods under the standards rather than following a prescribed formula.
Real-World Application
Appraising a house with a failed water heater and peeling exterior paint, the appraiser obtains current repair pricing for both, confirms that each expenditure would add at least its cost in a market where buyers routinely negotiate on such items, and deducts the cost to cure as curable physical deterioration. For an outdated floor plan that no reasonable expenditure would fix, she turns instead to market-extracted evidence of the discount buyers apply.
More Cost Approach Questions
In a cost approach for a proposed building, the appropriate cost basis is generally:
A warehouse cost $210,000 to build when the cost index stood at 105. The index is now 210. Its indicated current cost is:
The age-life method expresses depreciation as:
Market extraction of depreciation is limited by the fact that it:
Functional obsolescence caused by a deficiency is measured as curable when:
A 2,050 sq ft dwelling is priced at $178 per square foot with a $34,000 detached garage and $21,500 of site improvements. Cost new is:
A house has three bedrooms sharing one bathroom, and adding a second bath is economically justified. This is:
Direct costs in a construction budget include:
An appraiser writes that a 40-year-old house has an effective age of 10 but describes original wiring, original kitchen and a 25-year-old roof. The report's problem is:
A 45-year-old office building has undergone extensive system upgrades (HVAC, electrical, fire suppression) and interior modernization, resulting in strong tenant demand and rental rates exceeding those of newer buildings in the area. The appraiser estimates its total economic life at 65 years. Which statement best reflects the likely relationship among its chronological age, effective age, and remaining economic life?
People Also Study
Real Estate Market
13.6% of exam
Property Description
11.8% of exam
Land or Site Valuation
4.5% of exam
Sales Comparison Approach
16.4% of exam
Income Approach
8.2% of exam