Laserfiche WebLink
The PA presented five (5) comparable. sales: -of single-family residences in the <br />subject's neighborhood. The comparables. sold in the ranged from $318,900 to <br />$475,000 or from $175 SF to $269. SF. (The average sale price of the 5 comparable <br />sales was $212 SF.) No adjustments were applied to: the comparable sales. A <br />preliminary value estimate for the subject propertywas not established. A 15% <br />cost of sales (COS) was not deducted from the Sale price of each comparable sale: <br />According to the PA the 5 .comparable sales supportahe subject's just value of <br />$281,681 or $140 SF. The PA testifiedthat the COS deduction was.made4n the <br />CAMA system. <br />Summary of evidence presented by the petitioner: <br />The petitioner testified that they purchased the :property at the peak of the market, <br />had another house under contract that fell. apart, rushed in to the purchase of the <br />subject and, as a result, overpaid. The.petletoner provided the .property record .cards <br />for the PA's comparables with notes on the :cards showing the various: additional <br />features and/or recent upgrades or renovations that. were present at the time of <br />purchase of the comparables._ The inforniation.was based on a review of the MLS <br />listings. The petitioner provided inforination to: the PA and at the hearing regarding <br />the repairs made to the subject after the purchase. {No additional cftparables sales <br />were presented by.the petitioner and no analysis was. providedregarding the <br />comparable sales.) <br />Rebuttal Testimony: <br />The PA testified that the sales comparables ranged from $175 SF to $269- SF and <br />the sub j ect is at $140 SF. The PA testified that;4he subjectsold .for $325.;000 and <br />the just value is 86.6% of the purchase price. <br />The_petitioner testified that doe to the -and and defects (repairs.required) the value <br />should be lower. No other new evidence was presented- by either party that wasn't <br />discussed during the presentation of evidence. <br />Special magistrate's analysis and finding of facts: <br />The 'comparable sales presented by the PA were somewhat applicable -for the <br />analysis and valuation of the subject property if adjustments were applied. The <br />comparable sales were based on the recorded sale=price. No COS deduction was <br />made to the comparable sales. The 5 comparables sales -indicated a range from <br />2023-139 _ 71 _ Page 3:9f 5 <br />