EstatePass
sales-comparison-approacheasy

In a commercial-residential mixed-use neighborhood, an appraiser adjusts a comparable for corner location using a $16,000 dollar adjustment derived from detached single-family sales. The subject is a duplex on a corner lot. The appraiser notes in the report: 'Corner premium is assumed consistent across housing types due to shared street exposure.' Under USPAP, what is the primary deficiency in this reasoning?

Correct Answer

B) The adjustment is not supported by market data specific to duplexes or mixed-use properties.

Standards Rule 1-4(a) requires that adjustments be based on market data relevant to the *type of property being appraised*. Applying a corner premium derived solely from detached single-family sales to a duplex violates this requirement — duplexes may exhibit different locational premiums due to differing buyer expectations, parking needs, or zoning constraints. Option B correctly identifies the core USPAP deficiency. Option A references a non-existent USPAP net adjustment limit. Option C confuses methodology: dollar adjustments are appropriate for locational features when supported by paired sales. Option D invents a prohibition not found in USPAP or the 2026 AQB Content Outline.

Answer Options
A
The appraiser failed to apply a net adjustment limit of ±12% to the comparable’s sale price.
B
The adjustment is not supported by market data specific to duplexes or mixed-use properties.
C
The appraiser should have expressed the corner adjustment as a percentage of land value rather than a dollar amount.
D
USPAP prohibits corner-location adjustments unless verified by at least two appraisal firms.

Why This Is the Correct Answer

Standards Rule 1-4(a) requires that adjustments be based on market data relevant to the *type of property being appraised*. Applying a corner premium derived solely from detached single-family sales to a duplex violates this requirement — duplexes may exhibit different locational premiums due to differing buyer expectations, parking needs, or zoning constraints. Option B correctly identifies the core USPAP deficiency. Option A references a non-existent USPAP net adjustment limit. Option C confuses methodology: dollar adjustments are appropriate for locational features when supported by paired sales. Option D invents a prohibition not found in USPAP or the 2026 AQB Content Outline.

Was this explanation helpful?

More sales-comparison-approach Questions

Excess land differs from surplus land in that excess land:

A subject property has a 3-car attached garage. The appraiser locates two valid paired sales: Sale 1 (with 3-car garage) sold for $512,000; Sale 2 (with 2-car garage) sold for $497,600. Both properties are otherwise identical — same age, quality, GLA, lot size, and neighborhood — and sold 5 days apart in a balanced market. The appraiser also confirms via public records and listing photos that no other functional or physical differences exist. What is the indicated contributory value of the *third* garage stall?

The most appropriate unit of comparison is determined by:

An appraiser analyzes three paired sales to isolate the effect of a fireplace. In Pair 1, the property with a fireplace sold for $12,000 more; in Pair 2, $10,500 more; and in Pair 3, $13,500 more. All pairs are highly similar and recent. The appraiser selects $12,000 as the final adjustment. Which principle best supports this selection?

A paired sales analysis yields an adjustment of −$15,000 for a property located on a busy arterial street. Later, the appraiser discovers that all three paired properties with arterial exposure also had 20% smaller lots than their non-arterial counterparts — a difference not initially controlled for. What is the most appropriate action per USPAP?

An appraiser identifies two comparable sales that are identical in all respects except that Sale #1 has a finished basement (1,200 sq ft) and sold for $432,000, while Sale #2 has an unfinished basement of the same size and sold for $408,000. Both sales occurred within three weeks of each other in a stable market. The appraiser intends to apply a per-square-foot adjustment for basement finish to the subject property, which has a 1,000 sq ft finished basement. What is the appropriate paired-sales-derived adjustment amount per square foot for a finished basement?

Three sales support $520,000; the borrower's purchase contract is $505,000. May the appraisal conclude above the contract price?

An appraiser develops a $3,200 adjustment for a fireplace based on a single paired sale. The subject has a fireplace; Comparable A does not. The appraiser applies +$3,200 to Comparable A. Later, the appraiser identifies a second pair showing a $4,600 fireplace contribution. The appraiser replaces the original adjustment with $3,900 — the simple average — and applies it to Comparable A. What is the appropriate USPAP-compliant action regarding the adjustment amount?

A comparable sold for $300,000 with the seller carrying a loan 2 points below market, a benefit worth $8,000. What is its cash-equivalent price?

Three comparables adjust to $412,000 (gross adj. 5%), $405,000 (gross adj. 22%), and $410,000 (gross adj. 8%). What is the best-supported value conclusion?

People Also Study

Practice More Appraiser Questions

Access all practice questions with progress tracking and adaptive difficulty to pass your Appraiser exam.

Start Practicing