Petitioner: DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE
Respondent: RAUL BASALO
Judges: LARRY J. SARTIN
Agency: Department of Business and Professional Regulation
Locations: Miami, Florida
Filed: Dec. 22, 2009
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Wednesday, March 3, 2010.
Latest Update: Dec. 23, 2024
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION
FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD “
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS &
PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,
DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, O1- (,4US pL
Petitioner, a
Vv. CASE NO. 2008053131
RAUL BASALO,
Respondent.
/
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT
The Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation,
Division of Real Estate ("Petitioner") files this Administrative
Complaint against Raul Basalo(“Respondent"), and alleges:
ESSENTIAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT
1. Petitioner is a state government licensing and regulatory
agency charged with the responsibility and duty to prosecute
Administrative Complaints pursuant to the laws of the State of
Florida, including Section 20.165 and Chapters 120, 455 and 475 of
the Florida Statutes, and the rules promulgated thereunder.
2. Respondent is currently a Florida state certified
residential real estate appraiser having been issued license 6412
in accordance with Chapter 475 Part II of the Florida Statutes.
3. The last license the State issued to Respondent was as a
state certified residential real estate appraiser at 13454 SW 289
H:\FREAB\basalo. 131.doc 1
FDBPR v. Raul Basalo Case No. 2008053131
Administrative Complaint
Terrace, Homestead, Florida 33027.
4. On or about June 22, 2007, Respondent developed and
communicated an appraisal report (Report) on a property commonly
known as 1155 Brickell Bay Drive, #2403, Miami, Florida 33131
‘(Subject Property), valuing the Subject Property at $850,000. A
copy of the Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Administrative Complaint Exhibit 1.
5. The complainant, an employee of JP Morgan Chase/Chase Home
Lending commissioned a review appraisal (Review) that valued the
Subject Property at $525,000. A copy of the Review is attached
hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit
2. °
6. Respondent, while orally denying having developed and
communicated the Report, provided Petitioner’s investigator with a
copy of the letter Respondent sent to JP Morgan Chase Bank LTD on
September 10, 2008, defending the Report. A copy of that letter is
attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint
Exhibit 3.
7. Respondent also replied to the complaint by letter to
Petitioner’s investigator dated October 15, 2008, a copy of which
is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative
Complaint Exhibit 4.
H:\FREAB\basalo. 131.doc 2
FDBPR v. Raul Basalo Case No. 2008053131
Administrative Complaint
8. Respondent committed the following errors or omissions in
the Report:
A) Respondent misstated the zoning on the Subject Property;
B) Respondent used a gross living area adjustment of $30.00
per square foot when a different square foot adjustment was
warranted for the Comparable Sales which consisted of high priced,
luxury waterfront condominiums;
C) Respondent misstated that there were only 6 listings of
condominiums comparable to the Subject Property, and 5 Comparable
Sales as of the effective date of the Report, when there were over
100 comparable listings and sales;
D) Respondent adjusted for floor location inconsistent with
the Subject Property market;
E) Respondent utilized Comparable Sales that were not arms
length transactions, as the sales price exceeded the previous
listing prices for the Comparable Sales by $330,000, $295,000 and
$315,000, respectively;
F) Respondent improperly adjusted the Comparable Sales for
floor location.
9. Respondent failed to keep a copy of the Subject Property
work file.
H:AFREAB\basalo, 131 .doc 3
FDBPR v. Raul Basalo Case No. 2008053131
Administrative Complaint
COUNT ONE
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of fraud,
misrepresentation, concealment, false promises, false pretenses,
dishonest conduct, culpable negligence, or breach of trust in any
business transaction in violation of Section 475.624(2), Florida
Statutes.
COUNT TWO
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard
for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal,
specifically the Conduct Section of the Ethics Rule, or other
provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice (2006) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida
Statutes.
COUNT THREE
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard
for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal,
specifically Standards Rule 1-1(a), (b) and (c), or other provision
of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2006)
in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes.
COUNT FOUR
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard
for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal,
H:\FREAB\basalo.131.doc 7 4
FDBPR v. Raul Basalo Case No. 2008053131
Administrative Complaint
specifically Standards Rule 1-4(a), or other provision of the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2006) in
violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes.
COUNT FIVE
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard
for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal,
specifically Standards Rule 2-1(a) and (b), or other provision of
the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2006) in
violation ‘of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes.
COUNT SIX
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard
for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal,
specifically Standards Rule 2-2(b) (viii), or other provision of the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2006) in
violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes.
COUNT SEVEN
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard
for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal,
specifically Standards Rule 2-3, or other provision of the Uniform
Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2006) in violation of
Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes.
H:\FREAB\basalo. 131 doc 5
FDBPR v. Raul Basalo Case No. 2008053131
Administrative Complaint
COUNT EIGHT
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of having
failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal
report in violation of Section 475.624(15), Florida Statutes.
COUNT NINE
Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of failure to
retain records for at least five years of any contracts engaging
the appraiser's services, appraisal reports, and supporting data
assembled and formulated by the appraiser in preparing appraisal
reports in violation of Section 475.629, Florida Statutes, and,
therefore, in violation of Section 475.624(4), Florida Statutes.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Florida Real
Estate Appraisal Board, or the Department of Business and
Professional Regulation, as may be appropriate, to issue a Final
Order as final agency action finding the Respondent (s) guilty as
charged. The penalties which may be imposed for violation(s) of
Chapter 475 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon the severity of
the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration,
or certificate; suspension of the license, registration or
certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10) years; imposition
of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or
offense; imposition of investigative costs; issuance of a
H:\FREAB\basalo.131.doc 6
FDBPR v. Raul Basalo Case No. 2008053131
Administrative Complaint
reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including, but
not limited to, requiring the licensee, registrant, or certificate
holder to complete and pass additional appraisal education courses;
publication, or any combination of the foregoing which may apply.
See Section 475.624, Florida Statutes and Rule 6101-8.002, Florida
Administrative Code. The penalties which may be imposed for
violation(s) of Chapter 455 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon
the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license,
registration, or certificate; suspension of the license,
registration, or certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10)
years; imposition of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for
each count or offense; imposition of investigative costs; issuance
of a reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including,
but not limited to, requiring the licensee, registrant, or
certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal
education courses; publication; restriction of practice; injunctive
or mandamus relief; imposition of a cease and desist notice; or any
combination of the foregoing which may apply. See Section 455.227,
Fla. Statutes and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J31-8.002.
HAFREAB\basalo. 131.doc : 7
FDBPR v. Raul Basalo
Administrative Complaint
Case No. 2008053131
SIGNED this 1s day of becembys , 2008.
_ggantiteont OF Professional Wes.
~ Division of Real Estate
PCP: ~MR/CK 12/08
H:\FREAB\basalo. 131 doc
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
Be gGtp-Q_0
Donna Christine Lindamood
Senior Attorney
Fla. Bar No. 273694
Division of Real Estate
Legal Section
400 W. Robinson Street, N801
Orlando, Florida 32801-1757
(407) 481-5632
(407) 317-7260 - FAX
FDBPR v. Raul Basalo Case No. 2008053131
Administrative Complaint
NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS
PLEASE BE ADVISED that mediation under Section 120.573 of
the Florida Statutes, is not available for administrative disputes
involving this type of agency action.
PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that pursuant to this
Administrative Complaint you may request, within the time allowed
by law, a hearing to be conducted in this matter in accordance with
Sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes; that you have
the right, at your option and expense, to be represented by counsel
or other qualified representative in this matter; and that you have
the right, at your option and expense, to take testimony, to call
and cross-examine witnesses, and to have subpoena and subpoena
duces tecum issued on your behalf if a formal hearing is requested.
PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that if you do not file an
Election of Rights form or some other responsive pleading with the
Petitioner within twenty-one (21) days of receipt of this
Administrative Complaint, the Petitioner will file with the Florida
Real Estate Appraisal Board a motion requesting an informal hearing
and entry of an appropriate Final Order which may result in the
suspension or revocation of your real estate license or
registration. Please see the enclosed Explanation of Rights and
Election of Rights form.
H:\FREAB\basalo. 13 1.doc 9
APPRAISAL SOWUTIONS ” File No 070637 _Page #3
saudividual Condominium Unit Appraisal Report File # 070637
The purpose of this summary appraisal report is to provide the lender/client with an accurate, and adequately supported, opinion of the markel value of the Subject propery.
Property Address 1155 BRICKELL BAY DRIVE Unit # 2403 Cily MIAMI State FL Zip Code 33131
Borrowel JAVIER VICHOT Owner of Public Record ELENA SANCHEZ County DADE
Legal Description THE MARK ON BRICKELL CONDO UNIT 2403 UNDIV. 0.27761 INT IN COMMON ELEMENTS, i
Assessor's Parcel # 01-4138-080-0920 Tax Year 2006
Proyecl Name THE MARK ON BRICKELL CONDO Phase # 1 Map Reference 54-41-38
Occupant [XX] Owner [_] Tenant {_] Vacant Special Assessments $ N/A
Property Rights Appraised (X| Fee Simple { |Leasehoid [_]Other (describe)
Assignment Type Dx] Purchase Transaction ial Refinance Transaction [_Jother (describe) i
Lender/Clienl TRANSCONTINENTAL LENDING GROUP Address 401FAIRWAY DRIVE STE 100, DEERFIELD BEACH, FL 33441.
ls the subject property currently olfered for sale ar has it been offered for sale in the twelve months prior to the effective date of this appraisal? [X] Yes fy No
Report data source(s) used, oltering price(s), and date(s). THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS LISTED FOR SALE IN FEBRUARY 2007 ON THE MLX SYSTEM. IT WAS
LISTED FOR SALE FOR $555,000. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED ON MAY 2007 FOR $555,000.
[X] did {_] did not analyze the contract for sale for the subject purchase transaction. Explain the tesults of the analysis of the contract: for sale or why the analysis was not
Bes petlormed. UPON ANALYZING THE SALES CONTRACT, THE TRANSACTION APPEARS TO BE AN ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTION, NO SELLER CONCESSIONS
5 WERE OBSERVED. .
Fg Contract Price $850,000 Date of Contract 06-12-2007 _Is the properly seller the owner cf public record? ix Yes Li No Data Source(s) PUBLIC RECORDS
= is there any financial assistance {loan charges, sale concessions, gift or downpayment assistance, elc ) to be paid by any party on behalt of the borrower? i] Yes No
ea!! Yes. report the total dollas amount and describe the items to be paid. THE SALES CONTRACT OID NOT INDICATE ANY CONCESSIONS. AS PER THE BORROWER,
THEY DID NOT RECIEVE ANY DOWNPAYMENT ASSISTANCE AND/OR GIFTS OF EQUITY FOR THIS TRANSACTION.
RE. Taxes $ 8,047.50
Census Tract 67.01 / 2
HOA $ 700.00 [_} per year >< per month
Ss
fr
s
3
$
a
|
Note: Race and the racial composition of the neighborhood are not appraisal factors
Neighborhood Characteristics Condominium Housing trends ' im Housing [Present land Use % |
Urban & Suburban |" } Rura! _1 Property Values [_} increasing Stabie oO Declining PRICE AGE | One-Unil 30%
Burit-up XX] Over 75% [_} 25-75% Under 25% |Demand/Supply | Shortage inBatance [_} Over Supply! $ (000) (yts)_ | 2-4 Unit 20%
Ay _jRapid [XI Stable Lsiow Marketing Time [_] Under 3 mths [5<}3-6 mths [— ]Over 6mths| 380 low 1 | Multi-Family 40 %
EJ Neighborhood Boundaries THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF SE 15 STREET, SOUTH OF SE 8 990: High 18 | Commercial 5%
s STREET, EAST OF BRICKELL AVENUE, AND WEST OF BRICKELL BAY. 870 Pied. 8 | Other 5%
Fg Neighborhood Description THE SUBJECT NEIGHBORHOOD IS LOCATED IN DOWNTOWN. MIAMI, THE AREA CONSISTS MOSTLY OF MID TO HIGHRISE OFFICE
Topography APPEARS LEVEL TO GRADE Size TYPICAL FOR AREA Density MEDIUM/AVG View BAY VIEW |
Specific Zoning Classification 04 - CONDOMINIUM Zoning Description CONDOMINIUM i
Zoning Compliance [5X] Legal [—} Legal Noncontorming - Do the zoning regulations permit rebuilding fo current density? {| Yes LT No
|_| No Zoning i legal (describe)
Is the highest and best use of the Subject property as improved (or as proposed per plans and specitications) the present use? x Yes No I No, describe
Utilities Public Other (describe) Public Other (describe) Off-site improvements — Type Public Private
lectricity FPL. Waler Street PAVED ASPHALT
as) none noted Sanitary Sewer Alley NONE NOTED OU
=
bag “EMA Special Flood Hazard Area? P<] Yes [_]No FEMA Flood Zone VE FEMA Map # 120650 01913
Are tie utilities anc off-site improvements typical for the market area? x Yes [_|No_ INo, describe
Are there any adverse site condilions or external factors (easements, encroachments, environmental Conditions, land uses. etc Pot Yes PX] No {i Yes, describe
FEMA Map Date 03/02/1994
Data source(s) lor Project information FARES NET/REALQUEST/MLX
Project Description Detached Row or Townhouse
Garden { | Mid-rise x High-rise Other (describe}
General Description | General Description Subject Phase ; ae WProjéet Ineornpiete
# 04 Stones 36 STORIES| Exterior Walls CBS # of Units 362) # of Phases i 1|# of Pianned Phases N/A
# ol Etevators 4 Roof Surface BUG # of Units Completed 362i # of Unils [362] # of Planned Units N/A
(Existing [| Proposed | Tolal # Parking ADQ # of Units tor Sale 25+-| # of Units for Sale | 25+-| # of Units for Sale N/A
Under Construction | Ratio (spaces/units) 2/2 # of Units Sold 362} # of Units Sold 362) # of Units Soid N/A}
Year Bull 2001 Type COVERED # ol Unis Rented 10% # of Unils Rented 10%| # of Units Rented N/A
Etiective Age NEW Guest Parking ADQ _ # of Owner Occupied Units | 90%! # al Owner Occupied Units | 90%) # of Owner Occupied Units WA
Project Primary Occupancy x Principal Residence Second Home or Recreational fl Tenant
No
Developer [| Management Agent - Provide name of management company.
Fs the developer/builder in control of the Homeowners’ Association (HOA)? (] Yes
Management Group - [<] Homeowners’ Association
Does any singie entity (Ihe same individuat, investor group, corporation, etc.) own more than 10% of the total units in the project? [Tres §X No It Yes, describe
PROJECT INFORMATI:
Was the project created by the conversion of existing building{s} into a condominium? Yes [Xj No _ I! Yes, describe the original use and the date of conversion.
Are the units, common elements, and recreational facilities complete {including any planned rehabilitation for a condominium conversion)? x) es [JNo_ItNo, describe |
!s there any commercial space in the project? [
Yes IX) No ILYes, describe and indicate the overali perpegigae fil ieiGiakistade / COMPLAI
EXHIBIT # —
Foam reproduced by Unied Systems Software Company (806i 969-8727 wan uniBasy MATS Fem - Page T O16 t _B
Freddie Mac Form 465 (March 2009)
Foray
IBT_&
a
4073 (March 2008) ee senremrm
APPRAISAL SOLUTIONS
Fite No 070637 Page #4
Individual Condominium Unit Appraisal Report File # 070637
Describe the condition of the project, Quality of construction THE PROJECT IS IN AVERAGE CONDITION. THE QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION APPEARS TYPICAL/
JAVERAGE TO SIMILAR BUILDINGS IN THE SUBJECTS IMMEDIATE MARKET AREA.
Desoribe the common elements and recreational ‘aailities "GREEN AREAS, MAINTENANCE, POOL, GYM, TENNIS COURTS, SECURITY, VALET AND CABLE Tv,
Are any common elements {eased to or by the Homeowners’ Associalion? ti Yes [X| No If Yes, describe the renta’ terms and options.
gis the project subject 10 a ground rent? ial Yes No It Yes,$ Der year (describe terms and conditions).
Are the parking facilities adequate lor the project size and type? Xx Yes oO No _IfNo, describe and comment on the effect on value and Marketabilily,
I} aid i did nol analyze the condominium project budget for the current year. Explain the results of the analysis of the budget (adequacy of fees, reserves. efc.), of why “|
the analysis was not perlormed. THE APPRAISER WAS UNABLE TO OBTAIN A COPY OF THE CONDO PROJECT BUDGET FROM THE BROKER NOR HOMEOWNER
|AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION
Are there any other tees (other than reguiar HOA Charges) for the use of the project facilities? {_] Yes &X) No__lt Yes, report the charges and describe.
Compared to other competitive projects of similar Quality and design, the subject unit chaige appears High Xx Average [| Low i High or Low, describe.
Are there any special or unusual characteristics of the Project (based on the condominium documents, HOA meetings, or other information) known to the appraiser?
Yes XJ No! Yes, describe and explain the elfect on value and marketability.
Unit Charge $$700.00 per month X 12 = $8400.00 peryear Annual assessment charge per year per square leet ol gross living area = $ 7.41
Utulies inciuded in the unit monthly assessment [~] None [Heal [_} Air Conditroning [_j Electricity [_] Gas DX] Water [XX] Sewer [XJ Cabie [] Other (describe)
— General Description Interior" “Wiatetialsjeondition | __—Amarities | __ Applanoes Gar Storage
Floor # 24TH FLOOR Floors TILE/CRPT/GOOD Fireplace(s) # Bx] Retrigerator [None
# of Levels 1 LEVEL Walis DRYWALL/GOOD WoodStove(s) # _[X|Range/Oven [ |Garage PxjCovered [JOpen
Heating Type FA. Fuel ELECTRIC | Trim/Finish WOOD/GOOD. Deck/Patio [XiDisp D
eed ae
=
ry ay .
om Produced by United Systems Software Company (800) 969-8727 www unitedsystems com , . / 7 .
gen
———— _ _ Fie No QUA-103
r -
] |
: |
i '
REVIEW OF
t L
: |
: if
; |
; '
: i}
: |
i i
'
: '
! i
H
{ |
1 1
i |
+ !
é 1
i i
| i
'
:
: :
LOCATED AT: ‘
: 1155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#2403 ;
: . MIAMI, FL 33131 :
i : :
j FOR: :
! JPMORGAN CHASE BANK :
} DEERFIELD#890-DEERFIELD BEACH, FL.33442
, i
BORROWER: ;
VICHOT JAVIER,
AS OF:
June 22, 2007
‘
1
File No. QUA-103
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK
DEERFIELD#890-DEERFIELD BEACH, FL.33442
File Number: QUA-103
“in accordance with your request, | have completed an Appraisal Review for the following appraisal report.
Address: 1155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#2403
MIAMI, FL 33131
, Effective Date:
The purpose of this Appraisal Review is to verify the accuracy of the factual data and conctusions and to
determine the reasonableness of the value opinion contained in the appraisal report under review.
| have found the final opinion of market value unreasonable. In my opinion the market value of the
subject property is $ as of June 22, 2007
The attached report contains additional data and analysis, along with certain certification and limiting
conditions.
Sethi
Pidef belek
EXHIBIT #Q
fate
pene 2
az)
One-Unit Residential Appraisal Field Review Report fies QUA-103
Te porpoue ol tis appre Hild review report isto provide he lenderiient wil an opinion on the accuracy ofthe appa’sal report under review.
Propeny Address 1155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#2403 cay MIAMI State FL__Zip Code 33131
Borower VICHOT. JAVIER ‘Owner af Pubic Record SANCHEZ, ELENA, County MIAMI DADE
Legal Descipin THE MARK ON BRIGKELL CONDO UNIT 2403 UNDIV 0.27761 INT IN COMMON ELEMENTS
‘Assessor's Parcel #_01-4138-080-0920 ‘Map Reference N.Y.A. Census Tract 0067.04
Property Rights Appraised [XJ Fee Simple _[_] Leasenow [_] other iescrve) Project Type UX] condo [J euo _[) coopera
Loan # CHASE LOAN #1893599861 Elfective Date of Aporaisat Under Revew OG/22/2007 Manufacured Home _{_] Yes No
LenderiChent JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, Address DEERFIELD#890-DEERFIELD BEACH, Fi..33442 -
1. {5 the information in the subject section complete and accurate? Wes, provide a brief summary. If No. exptain: ADEQUATE
E
i 15 the information in the conixact section complete and accurate?
Yes LJ No LJ not applicable 11 Ves, provde bref summary. No, explain ADEQUATE
J ete riomnaton nthe neighborhood section compete and accurate?” (Jes [_]No Wes, provide a bet summary. t'No,exptin ADEQUATE
—|
4, 15 the information in the site section complete and accurate? Ores X] No if ¥es, provide a brie summary. No, explain ZONING AS. PER COUNTY iS SD-5-
SPECIAL DISTRICT(LEGAL USE)
—————— Ti ve: Coto ves provide a brief summary. W No. expan ADEQUATE
& Ave the comparabie sales selected locational, physical, and (unctionaly the most shmdar tothe subject property? “Lives Dx] No ives, provide a bret summary.
No, provide a detailed explanation as to why they ae not the best comparable seies. See Attached Addendum
:
7 ave the data and analysis (including te individual adjstrtents) presented in the Sales companson approach complete and accurate? Tves (xia ives, provide 2 tief summary
iiNo, eran _GLA ADJUSTMENT OF ONLY $30.00 PER SQ.FT. OF LIVING AREA IS NOT CONSISTENT AT ALL FOR THIS AREA OF
HIGH PRICED LUXURY WATERFRONT CONDOMINIUMS. THIS AREA WARRANTS $200 -$450 PER SQ.ADJUSTMENT FOR A
MARKET REACTION ADJUSTMENT FOR GLA. ALSO,APPRAISER STATES THERE ARE ONLY 6 SIMILAR CONDO UNITS FOR SALE
IN THIS ENTIRE AREA AND ONLY 5 SIMILAR COMPARABLE SALES IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS.FACTIS,THERE ARE CURRENTLY
OVER 100 FOR SALE OF SIMILAR UNITS AS THE SUBJECT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.ALSO, THERE ARE OVER 100 SIMILAR
COMP SALES. FLOOR LOCATION ADJUSTMENT WAS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THIS WATERFRONT CONDOMINIUM MARKET
AREA,
7 vee data ne anapispreserid in he come aed east proaches complete and acowate? LJves L)No DX Nat developed Who. expan N/A
8. 1s he sale or ranser history reponed lr the subject property and each ofthe comparable sales complete and accurate? [X} Yes Toei ¥es, provide a bret summary
No, analyze and repon the correct sale or transfer history and the data source(s}, ADEQUATE.
E
40 Is the opinion of market vaiue in the appraisal ig
a ADMINS
No_If No, complete Section It mrt Fe EPA! y i
Fea Fon 0 Wi 0S rane vy or Tae Fe OD We BS
armel J pared
; J
2
One-Unit Residential Appraisal Field Review Report eto. QUA-103
COMPLETE ONLY iF Rt APPRAISER A G
SECTION it
+ Provide detailed reasoning for disagreement with the opinion of value in the appraisal report under review. COMPS.USED BY THE APPRAISER ARE NOT.
“COMPS.USED BY THE APPRAISER ARE NOT ___|
CONSIDERED GOOD VALUE INDICATORS AS THEY APPEAR NOT TO BE ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTIONS.ALL PREVIOUS
LISTING PRICES WERE CONSIDERABLY LEES THAN THE CURRENT INDICATED SALES PRICE IN RECORDS.GLA i}
ADJUSTMENTS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THIS CURRENT MARKET OF LUXURY WATERFRONT CONDOMINIUM UNITS.
7. Stale al enraordnary assumptions used (egos hing area, room cova, conde, etc). GROSS LIVING AREA, ROOM COUNT, CONDITION(NEW)
3. Provide a new opinion of value as of the effective date of the appraisal report under review using the below saies comparison anatysis grid. |
(NOTE, This may or may nol include the use of the same comparable sales in the appraisal report under review.
FEATURE ‘SUBJECT COMPARABLE SALE NO. 1 COMPARABLE SALENO.2 | ___ COMPARABLE SALE NO. 3
7155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#2403 77155 BRICKELL BAY OR.#290;| 1155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#230'| 186 SE 12 TERR.#1603
Aderess MIAMI, FL 33131 MIAMLFL.33131 MIAMLFL.33131 MIAMLFL.33131
Proximity to Subject 0.62 MIS 0.09 Mi SSW
Sale Price A 850,000 f 525,000 | $s 560,000 _ 475,000
See ProeiGrosivaea |s _750.22 sq.f. [$463.37 so. tt] STs 466.67 sot} | s 446.43 sa |
Data Source(s) FARES/PUBLIC RECORDS/ML| FARES/PUBLIC RECORDS/M.| FARES/PUBLIC RECORDS/ML|
Veriication Sowrcets) | EXTERIOR INSPECTION EXTERIOR INSPECTION | EXTERIOR INSPECTION
VALUE ADJUSTMENTS, DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION | watasamen | _desowoTION | wysaquimen | DESCRIPTION | _ 1 sagusnen
Sale or Financing CONV. CONV. CONV.
Concessions __|NONE KNOWN | NONE KNOWN NONE KNOWN
Date of SalefTime ‘06/2007(CLSD) 04/2007(CLSD) | 02/2007(CLSD)
Location. SUBURBAN-GOC| SUBURBAN-GOC SUBURBAN-GO} SUBURBAN-GOC
LeaseholdFee Simple FEE SIMPLE | FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE
sae 24THFLOOR [29TH FLOOR 715,000/23RD FLOOR | 3,000 16TH FLOOR 24,000
view BAY VIEW BAY VIEW. BAY VIEW “TINE.BAY View |___20,000
Oesign (Style) HIRISE/CONDO | HERISE/CONDO HI-RISE/CONDO HL-RISE/CONDO
Quality of Constucton | GOOD/CBS GOOD/CBS. ___|S00D/cBS GOOD/CBS
Actual Age GYRS 6YRS 6IYRS UR “119,000
Canton ‘GOOD GOOD, GOOD GOOD
‘Above Grade twat [eins] aim | ra fox ans oa [oars] bans Tis am
Room Count 4|2{ 200 |4]2} 2 4]2[ 200 | 4 2.00 _t
oss Len ea 4,133 sof 1,133 sof 4,200 san| -20,100] 4,064 sah. 20,700
Basement & Finished NA NA NA ; NIA
2000s Below Grade NA NA NA NIA
Functional Utity GOOD ‘GOOD GOOD. GOOD
Heaung/Cooting TFWA/CENTRAL_| FWA/CENTRAL FWAICENTRAL FWA/CENTRAL
Energy Eficet ems ‘STANDARD. STANDARD STANDARD. STANDARD.
GaragerCarpon COVIVALET PARI] COV/VALET PAF, COVIVALET PAF| ‘COVIVALET PAF|
PorctvPatiofDeck BALCONY-INSIDI| BALCONY-INSID| BALCONY-CORN _-10,000|BALCONY-INSID| |
“ J
‘Net Adjusirent (Total + 15,000, Ts 2700! & TI fs 54,700
Adjusted Sate Price : Net Ad, -2.9% Net Ag, ~4.8% Net Ad. 11.5%
of Comparables Gosh 2.9%/s 510,000|cmsag 5.9%]s. 532,900] Gussag_15.7%|s 529,700
+ [Xiao [J cia not research the sale o° transfer history of the above comparable sales. It not, explain
hay research [Joie [0 as not revel any prior sales or transfers ofthe comparable sales forte year vos othe date of sale ofthe comparable sal
Osta souce(s)_ FARES/PUBLIC RECORDS, |
Report the results of the research and analysis of the prior sale or wansfer history of the above comparable sales {report additional prior sales on an addendum).
ITEM COMPARABLE SALE NO. 1 COMPARABLE SALE NO. 2. COMPARABLE SALE NO. 3.
Date of rir SaefTanster NO PRIOR SALES-12 MONTHS [NO PRIOR SALES-12 MONTHS _|NO PRIOR SALES-12 MONTHS
Price of Prior Sake/Transfet N/A NIA __ |N/A
Data Source(s) FARES/PUBLIC RECORDS. FARESIPUBLIC RECORDS FARES/PUBLIC RECORDS:
Etlective Date of Data Source(s} 06/22/2007 06/22/2007 06/22/2007
‘Analysis o prac sale or tansler istry forthe comparable saies. ALL. PRIOR SALES OF COMPS. RESEARCHED 12 MONTHS:
“Summary of Vaiue Conclusion (including detaiied suppon for the opinion of value and reasons why the new comparable sales are better than the sales used in the appratsal report under review)
ALL COMP.S UTILIZED ARE SIMILAR TO SUBJECT IN STYLE, AREAMARKET APPEAL,AND CONSTRUCTION.COMPS 1 & 2 ARE
FROM THE SUBJECTS CONDO PROJECT AND COMP.3 IS FROM S NEARBY SIMILAR CONDO COMPLEX WITH SIMILAR FEES
AND AMENITIES.COMPS. REVIEWER USED $300 PER SQ. FT ADJUSTMENT FOR GLA AS THIS IS WHAT IS REFLECTIVE IN THIS
MARKET FOR A LUXURY WATERFRONT CONDOMINIUMS IN THIS AREA ADJUSTMENY OF $3,000 FOR FLOOR LOCATION
WARRANTED; REVIEWER ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY.COMP.3 HAS AN INFERIOR BAY VIEW;ACROSS ST:MARKET RECOGNIZES
THIS DIFFERENCE AND WARRANTS ADJUSTMENT,ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY
REVIEW APPRAISER’S OPINION OF MARKET VALUE, UTreview appraiser answered "Ho" 16 Question 10'n Section 2),
visual inspection of the exterior areas of the subject praperty from at least the street or |_} compiete visual inspection of the interior and
exterior areas of the Subject property. defined scope of work, statement of assumptions and limiting conditions, and appraiser's certification, my opinion of
the market value, 2s defined, of the real property that perror wearers S25) G22) which
is the effective date of the appraisal report under Ae MPRA MIME CONT PRINT
Freie ac Tom 032 Warch2005
z
a nneseaias settee ARRAS
SSCOPE OF WORK”
‘The scope of work for this appraisal field review is defined by the complexity of the appraisal report under review and the reporting requirements of this report
form, including the following statement of assumptions and timiting conditions, and cerlifications. The review appraiser must, ai a minimum: (1} read the entire
appraisal report under review, (2) perform a visual inspection of the exterior areas of the subject property from at least the street, (3) inspect the neighborhood,
(4) inspect each af the comparable sales from at least the street, (5) perform data research and analysis to determine the appropriateness and accuracy of the
‘data in the appraisal report, (6) research, verify, and analyze data from reliable public and/or private sources, (7) determine the accuracy of the opinion of value,
and {8) assume the praperty condition reported in the appraisa! report is accurate unless there is evidence to the contrary.
One-Unit Residential Appraisal Field Review Report __Fieto. QUA-103
If the review appraiser determines that the opinion of value in the report under review is nol accurate, he or she is required fo provide an opinion of marke! value
‘The review appraiser is not required to replicate the steps completed by the original appraiser that the review appraiser believes to be reliable and in compliance
with the applicable real property appraisal development standards of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. Those items in the appraisal
report under review are extended (o this report by the use of an exiraordinary assumption, which is identified in Section tl, Question 2. If the review appraiser
determines that the opinion of value is not accurate, he or she must present additional data that has been researched, verified, and analyzed to produce an
accurate opinion of value in accordance with the applicable sections of Standard 1 of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice,
INTENDED USE ~
‘The intended use of this appraisal field review report is for the jender/client to evaluate the accuracy and adequacy of support of the appraisal report under
review.
INTENDED USER
The intended user of this appreisal field review report is the lender/client.
GUIDANCE FOR COMPLETING THE ONE-UNIT RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL FIELD REVIEW REPORT
‘The appraisal review function is important to maintaining the integrity of both the appraisal and loan underwriting processes. The folowing guidance is intended
10 aid the review appraiser with the development and reporting of an appraisal field review:
1. The review appraiser must be the individual who personally read the entire appraisal report, pertormed a visual inspection of the exterior areas of the
‘subject property from at least the street, inspected the neighborhood, inspected each of the comparable sales from at least the street, performed the data
research and analysis, and prepared and signed this report.
2. The review appraiser must focus his or her comments on the appraisal report under review and not include personal opinions about the appraiser(s) who
prepared the appraisal.
‘The lendericlient has withheld the identity of the appraiser(s) who prepared the appraisal report under review, unless otherwise indicated in this report
‘The review appraiser must assume that the condition of the property reported in the appraisal report is acourate, unless there is evidence to the contrary.
5. This One-Unit Residential Appraisal Field Review Report is divided into two sections. Section | must be completed for all assignments. Section li must be
completed only i the answer to Question 10 in Section | is “No.”
6. The review appraiser must determine whether the opinion of market value is accurate and adequately suppérted by markel evidence. When the review
appraiser disagrees with the opinion of value, he or she must complete Section il. Because appraiser's opinions can vary, the review appraiser must have
conclusive evidence that the opinion of vatue is not accurate,
7. The review appraiser must explain why the comparable sales in the appraisal report under review should not have been used. Simply stating: “see grid” is
unacceptable. The review appraiser must explain and support his or her conclusions.
8. The review appraiser must form an opinion aboul the overali accuracy and quality of the data in the appraisal report under review. The objective is to
determine whether material errors exist and what effect they have on the opinions and conciusions in the appraisal report under review. When the review
appraiser agrees that the data is essentially correct (although minor errors may exist) he or she must summarize the overall findings. When the review
appraiser determines that material errors exist in the data, he or she must identify them, comment on their overall effect cn the opinians and conclusions in
the appraisal report under review, and include the correct information.
9. The Questions in Section | are intended to identify both the positive and negative elements of the appraisal under review and to report deficiencies. The
review appraiser must make it clear to the reader what effect the deficiencies have on the opinions and conclusions in the appraisal report. Simple “Yes”
and “No” answers are unacceptable.
10. The review appraiser must provide specific, supportable reasons for disagreeing with the opinion of value in the appreisal report under review in response
to Question 1 in Section Il.
41, The review appraiser must identify any extraordinary assumptions that were necessary in order lo ative at his or her opinion of market value, Extraordinary
assumptions include the use of information from the appraisal report under review that the review appraiser concludes is reliable (such as an assumption
that the reported condition of the subject property is accurate).
42. The review appraiser must include the rationale for using new comparable sales. The following question must be answered: Why are these new
‘comparable sales better than the sales in the appraisal report under review?
43. The new comparable sales provided by the review appraiser and reported inthe sales comparison analysis grid must have cased on or before the effective
date of the appraisal report under review. it may be appropriate to include data thal was not avaiable to the original appraiser as of the effective date of the
original appraisal, however, thal information should be reported as “supplemental to the data that would have been available to the original appraiser.
14, The review appraiser must provide a sale or transfer history of the new comparable sales for a minimum of one year prior to the date of sale of the
comparable sale. The review appraiser must analyze the sale or transfer data and report the effect, if any, on the review appraiser’s conclusions.
15. Areview of an appraisal on 2 unit in a condominium, cooperative, or PUD project requires the review appraiser to analyze the project information in the
appraisal report under review and comment on its completeness and accuracy.
46, An appraisal review of a manufactured home requires the review appraiser to assume thal the HUD data plate information ss correct, unless information to
the contrary is available. in such cases, the review appraiser must identify the source of the data.
47. The review appraiser's opinion of market value must be “as of the effective dale of the appraisal report under review.
Lopes ae
eS CRE
aaa Ta aE Raccns Sr pO om a
EXHIBIT.
DAGE wnt]
One-Unit Residential Appraisal Field Review Report fie wo QUA-103
STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS.AND LIMITING CONDITIONS.
‘The review appraiser will not be responsible for matters of a legal nature that aflect either the property that is the subject of the appraisal under review or
the title to it, except for information that he or she became aware of during the research involved in performing this appraisal review. The review appraiser
assumes that the tile is good and marketable and will not render any apinions about the title.
2. The review appraiser will not give testimony or appear in court because he or she performed a review of the appraisal of the property in question, unless
Specific arrangements 1o do so have been made beforehand, or as otherwise required by law.
3. Unless otherwise stated in this appraisal field review report, the review appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent physical deficiencies or
adverse conditions of the property (such as but not limited to, needed repairs, deterioration, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, adverse
‘environmental conditions, etc.) that would make the property less valuable, and has assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees
‘or warranties, expressed or implied. The review appraiser will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing
thal might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because the review appraiser is not an expert in the field of environmental hazards, this
appraisal field review report must not be considered as an environmental assessment of the property.
REVIEW APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION
‘The Review Appraiser certifies and agrees that:
1, have, at a minimum, developed and reported this appraisal fied review in accordance with the scope of work requirements stated in this appraisal field
review report,
2. {performed this appraisal field review in accontance with the requirements of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were adopted
‘and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place at the time this appraisal feld review report was
Prepared.
3. Ihave the knowledge and experience to perform appraisals and review appraisals for this type of property in this market area
Jam aware of, and have access to, the necessary and appropriate public and private data sources, such as multiple listing services, tax assessment
records, public land records and other such data sources for the area in which the property is located.
5. obtained the information, estimates, and opinions furnished by other parties and expressed in this appraisal field review report from reliable sources that |
believe to be true and correct.
6. Ihave not knowingly withheld any significant information from this appraisal field review report and, to the best of my knowledge, all statements and
information in this appraisat field review report are true and correct.
7. [stated in this appraisal field review report my own personal, unbiased, and professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which are subject only to the
‘assumptions and limiting conditions in this appraisal fiekd review report,
B. I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and | have no present or prospective personal interest or bias with
respect fo the participants in the transaction. | did not base, either partially or completely, my analysis and/or opinion of market value (if any) in this,
appraisal field review report on the race, color, religion, sex, age, marital stalus, handicap, familial status, or national origin of either the prospective
‘owners or occupants of the subject property or of the present owners or occupants of the properties in the vicinity of the subject properly or on any other
basis prohibited by law.
9. My employment andior compensation for perfarming this appraisal field review or any future or anticipated appraisals or appraisal feld reviews was not
conditioned on any agreement or understanding, written or otherwise, that ! would report (or present analysis supporting) a predetermined specific value, a
pretletermined minimum value, a range or direction in valve, a value that favors the cause of any party, or the attainment of a specific resull or occurrence
of a specific subsequent event (such as approval of a pending mortgage loan application).
10. | personally prepared all conclusions and opinions about the reat estate that were set forth in this appraisal field review report. further cerlify that no one
provided significant professional assistance to me in the development of this appraisal field review report. | have not authorized anyone to make a change
to any item in this appraisal field ‘eview report therefore, any change made to this appraisal feld review report is unauthorized and { will take no
responsiblity for it.
11. [identified the tender/client in this appraisal field review report who is the individual, organization, or agent for the organization that ordered and will receive
this appraisal fiekd review repoit.
12. The lendericlient may disclose or distribute this appraisal field review report to: the mortgagee or its successors and assigns; mortgage insurers;
government sponsored enterprises; other secondary market participants; professional appraisal organizations; any department, agency. or instrumentality
of the United States; and any state, the District of Columbia, or ather jurisdictions; without having to obtain the review appraiser's consent. Such consent
must be obtained before this appraisal field review report may be disclosed or distributed to any other party (including, but not limited to, the public
through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media),
13. The mortgagee or its successors and assigns, mortgage insurers, goverment sponsored enterprises, and other secondary market participants may rely
‘on this appraisal field review report as part of any morigage finance transaction that involves any ane or more of these parties.
14 If this appraisal field review report was transmitted as an “electronic record” containing my “electronic signature,” as those terms are defined in applicable
federal andior state laws (excluding audio and video recordings), or a facsimile transmission of this appraisal field review report containing a copy or
representation of my signature, the appraisal field review report shall be as effective, enforceable and valid as if a paper version of this appraisal field
review report were delivered containing my original hand written signature.
15, Any intentionat or negligent misrepresentation(s) contained in this appraisal eld review report may result in civil ability andlor criminal penalties including,
but not limited to, fine ar imprisonment or both under the provisions of Tile 18, United States Code, Section 1001, et seq., or similar state laws.
REVIEW APPRAISER
Name
‘Signature Nin On a
Name TOM SALIMINO, ASA.
‘Company Name JPMORGAN CHASE BANK
Company Adcress DEERFIELD#890-DEERFIELD BEACH, FL.33442
Company Kame SALIMINO APPRAISAL SERVICES.
Company Address P.O.BOX 565208
KENDERICLIENT OF THE APPRAISAL UNDER REVIEW
MIAMLFL.33256_ Name VICHOT, JAVIER.
‘Telephone Number 305.251.7024 Company Address DEERFIELD#890-DEERFIELD BEACH
Email Address, FL.33442
Date of Signature and Repon 08/15/2007
State Cenifcatin # FLRD727
State License #
State FL. PUTS TIN intey,
Expiration Date of Certification or License 17/30/2008 wer
Reviewer's Opinion of Market Value $ 525000
pate 06/22/2007
Dal EN ABs DOHA AE uso ecan
Free MC Form WOOP March 2005 Faas ae For 100) are TS
70 S086
EXHIBIT. :
PAGE FL
ADDENDUM File No. QUA-103
Comparable Sales Selection
AFTER REVIEWER ANALYZED COMPS.USED BY APPRAISER {T APPEARS THAT THESE COMPS.ARE NOT ARMS
LENGTH TRANSACTIONS.ALL WERE LISTED PREVIOUSLY ON THE MLX FOR COMP.1-$530,000,
COMP.2-§560,000 AND COMP.3 FOR - $535,000. THERE ARE CURRENTLY SIX ACTIVE LISTING CURENTLY LISTED
FOR SALE ON THE MLX THAT ARE THE SAME MODEL AS THE SUBJECT THE * 03" LINE IN THE SUBJECTS
COMPLEX.FOLLOWING CURRENT LISTINGS:UNIT #2603-$670,000-MLX#D01175240,
‘UNIT#2003-$539,500-MLX#M 1106343, UNIT# 2803-$539,000-MLX#D 1183229, UNIT#2503-$535,000-MLX#D 1206740,
UNIT#2303-$530,000-MLX#M1141261,AND FINALLY UNIT#1503-#509,000-MLX# M1 143733. THESE ARE ALL ACTIVE
LISTINGS IN THE MARKET PLACE COMPETING AGAINST THE SUBJECT.BASED ON THE CURRENT LISTINGS IT
DOES APPEAR THAT THE COMPS.USED BY APPRAISER ARE NOT ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTIONS,AND ARE NOT
ACCURATE INDICATORS OF THE MARKET VALUE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. REVIEWER PROVIDED 3 NEW
COMPARABLE SALES THAT APPEAR TO BE ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTIONS.
‘Addendurn Page 1 of $
. PAGE.
ҤL_JECT PROPERTY PHOTO ADDENDUM
Borrower; VICHOT JAVIER
File No.:_ QUA-103
Property Address: 1155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#2403
Case No.:
City: MIAML State: FL.
Zip: 33131
Lender: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK.
AEN OES
FRONT VIEW OF
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Reviewed Date: June 22, 2007
Reviewer's Opinion: $
REAR VIEW OF
SUBJECT PROPERTY
STREET SCENE
Sa
&
COM: . «RABLE PROPERTY PHOTO ADDENDUM.
Borrower: VICHOT, JAVIER File No.: QUA-103
Property Address: 1155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#2403 Case No.:
City: MIAMI State: FL Zip: 33131
Lender: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK.
COMPARABLE SALE #1
Efi nants nnn
ae eer EES
1155 BRICKELL BAY DR#2903
MIAMI FL.33131
Sale Date: 06/2007(CLSD)
Sale Price: $ 525,000
COMPARABLE SALE #2
1155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#2301
MIAMIFL.33131
Sale Date: 04/2007(CLSD)
Sale Price: $ 560,000
COMPARABLE SALE #3
186 SE 12 TERR.#1603
‘MIAMI,FL.33131
Sale Date: 02/2007(CLSD)
Sale Price: $ 475,000
LOCATION MAP.
Borrower: VICHOT JAVIER File No.:_ QUA-103
Property Address: 1155 BRICKELL BAY DR.#2403 - Case No.:
City: MIAMI State: FL Zip: 33134
Lender: JEMORGAN CHASE BANK
Scanned Image without Header
QUA-103.
Zip: 33131
|
|
STATE OF FLORIDA i
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION
i
|
i
FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BD Fy -
1940 N. MONROE ST. 850/487 1335
TALLAHASSEE FL 32399-0783 :
i
!
|
: SALIMINO, THOMAS J JR : {
| PO BOX 565208 i
MIAMI i
i
if
'
j PL 33256 :
!
H 1
: ooo
STATE OF FLORIDA ACE 28 70083 i
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND |
PROPESSIONAL REGULATION fo
ii
\ RD727 20/02/06 068073457 | |
: i fa
i | CERTIFIED RESIDENTIAL APPRAISER | i
SALIMINO, THOMAS J JR i
YS CERTSPIED under the provisions ot 2.475 re. | |
te eepiration ance, HOV,30, 2008 40200201773 ;
i
! i
DETACH HERE :
a - — — o —
2870061 STATE OF FLORIDA if
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION i
FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BD SEQ#106100201773
SCOT LICENSE NBR
10/02/2006 lo6a073457_|ep727 i
The CERTIFIED RESIDENTIAL APPRAISER
Named below IS CERTIFIED
Under the provisions of Chapter 475 Fs. .
Expiration date: NOV 30, 2008 i
}
SALIMINO, THOMAS J JR : i
MIAMI FL 33176
,
SEB BUSH SIMONE MARSTILLER me
Rate oNAS . MARETE
POET AE
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK N.A. SEPTEMBER 10, 2008
4919 MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
SUITE 260, OMC 7-2
FL-25203-415161
TAMPA, FL 33634
REGARDING | APPRAISAL REVIEW FOR PROPERTY 1155 BRICKELL BAY ‘DRIVE, UNIT #2403
_ QUESTION #4 . ae vee oe - ce te ee es nee ene ene ee ee penne eee
“THE APPRAIS ‘REVIEWS CORRECT THE ZONING SHOULD: BESD-5). =~
QUESTION #7
THE APPRAISER REVIEW OPINION OF GLA VALUE OF ADJUSTMENT IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT I GONSIDER
CORRECT FOR THE AREA. | BELEIVE THAT WHEN AN APPRAISER USES COMPARABLE SALES THEY SHOULD BE
VERY SIMILAR SO LITTLE OR NO ADJUSTMENTS SHOULD BE MADE. ADJUSTMENT OF $250.00-$450.00 ARE WAY TOO
o-~-__ --MUCH AN_WILL RESULTIN A VERY LARGE ADJUSTMENT FOR A COMPARBLE SALE THAT IS VERY SIMILARIN SIZE. ne
THE COMPARABLE SALES ! USED ARE TWO SIMILARADENTICAL MODELS IN THE SAME BUILDING AND ONE FROMA
NEAR BY BUILDING WITH SIMILAR LIVABLE SQFT AND BEDROOM COUNT WITH SIMILAR VIEWS. THESE
COMPARABLE SALES ARE-GOOD INDICATORS OF MARKET-VALUE. | HAVE ALSO ATTACH WITH THIS-REVIEW TWO
. PAGES SHOWING MORE COMPARABLE SALES THAT INDICATE THE MARKET. VALUE OF MY APPRAISAL TOBE _.. _ oe ee ee cee cee eee
ACCURATE. THESE COMPARABLE SALES ARE FROM THE SAME BUILDING AND FROM NEAR | BY BUILDINGS WITH :
SIMILAR CHARACTERISTICS AS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
‘AS PER SALES-LISTED AND CLOSED:1 ONLY: MENTIONED 6-LISTINGS AND-5 CLOSED SALES BECAUSE AT THE TIME
OF THE INSPECTION THE ONLY IDENTICAL OR SIMILAR MODELS AVAILABLE FOR SALE IN THE SUBJECTS BUILDING
WERE 6 LISTINGS AND 5 CLOSED SALES. THE APPRAISER REVIEW IS CONSIDERING ALL AVAILABLE UNITS INSIDE
AND PCTS Bu OF THE SUBJECTS NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN { ONLY. CONSIDERED THE COMPARABLES INSIDE THE
CC
THE APPRAISER REVIEW ALSO INDICATES THAT THE COMPARABLE SALES | USED ARE NOT AN ARMS LENGTH
TRANSACTION. THERE IS NO INFORMATION STATING THAT CAN GARANTEE THAT THE COMPARABLE SALES THAT |
USED ARE NOT AN ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTION. THE ATTACHED SHEETS PROVIDE SHOW MORE COMPARABLE
~ SALES THAT-COULB HAVE-BEEN-USED FOR THIS APPRAISAL REPORT-THAT-WOULB INDICA TE-THE-MARKET VALUE
AT THE TIMEOF THE APPRAISAL REPORT TO BE ACCURATE. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT YOUR APPRAISAL REVIEW
COULD SAY ALL THESE PROPERTIES PROVIDED ARE NOT AN.ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTION.
"COULD YOU PLEASE BE SO KIND TO ADVISE ME IF | WILL BE TAKEN OFF YOUR BLACK LIST OF APPRAISERS.
+ so *BEBASE-SEND MEA LETTER WITH REGARDS TO-THIS REQUEST THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME: ~~ ~~ seo ee annie
“SINCERELY,
RAUL BASALO
-786-252-0326.. ce Lae
APEX ONE APPRAISALS LLC.
13454. SW 289 TERRACE
fOct..20.2008 10:22 AM APEX ONE APPRAISALS LL
2
7
305 246 8766 PAGE. 1/ 1
ATTENTION TO: OCTOBER 15, 2008
DBPR
RAY THOMPSON
LEAD UNLICENSED
INVESTIGATION SPEACIALIST I
DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE
8240 NW 52 TERHACE SUITE 522
DORAL. FLORIDA 41168-7765
786-336-1462 ( 786-336,1472
THIS LETTER IS REGARDING MY APPRAISAL | OG HISTORY WITH APPRAISAL SOLUTIONS INC.
PLEASE iF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS SITUATION YOU GAN REACH ME AT 766-252-0326 OR FAX
FO5-240-6 766
> a
RAUL BASALO
APEX ONE APPRAISALS LLC.
13454 SW 289 TERRACE
HOMESTEAD. FL 39033
(86 252.0320 FAX 109-240-8768
Docket for Case No: 09-006965PL
Issue Date |
Proceedings |
Mar. 03, 2010 |
Order Closing Files. CASE CLOSED.
|
Mar. 02, 2010 |
Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction filed.
|
Feb. 25, 2010 |
Respondent's Witness and Exhibit List (exhibits not attached) filed.
|
Feb. 22, 2010 |
Respondent's Response to Petitioner's Request for Admissions filed.
|
Feb. 22, 2010 |
Respondent's Responses to Petitioner's Request for Production filed.
|
Feb. 22, 2010 |
Respondent's Responses to Petitioner's First Interrogatories filed.
|
Feb. 08, 2010 |
Notice of Taking Deposition of Non-Party, Ray Thompson filed.
|
Feb. 08, 2010 |
Subpoena for Deposition (Ray Thompson) filed.
|
Feb. 02, 2010 |
Notice of Taking Deposition of Non-Party, Brian Piper filed.
|
Feb. 02, 2010 |
Notice of Taking Deposition of Non-Party, Derrick Ham filed.
|
Jan. 27, 2010 |
Designation of Petitioner's Expert filed.
|
Jan. 27, 2010 |
Petitioner's Witness List filed.
|
Jan. 25, 2010 |
Notice of Serving Request for Production filed.
|
Jan. 25, 2010 |
Notice of Serving Interrogatories filed.
|
Jan. 25, 2010 |
Notice of Serving Request for Admissions filed.
|
Jan. 05, 2010 |
Order Directing Filing of Exhibits
|
Jan. 05, 2010 |
Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
|
Jan. 05, 2010 |
Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for March 15 and 16, 2010; 9:00 a.m.; Miami and Tallahassee, FL).
|
Jan. 05, 2010 |
Order of Consolidation (DOAH Case Nos. 09-6963PL, 09-6964PL, 09-6965PL).
|
Dec. 22, 2009 |
Initial Order.
|
Dec. 22, 2009 |
Administrative Complaint filed.
|
Dec. 22, 2009 |
Answer to Administrative Complaint filed.
|
Dec. 22, 2009 |
Agency referral filed.
|