Who is right? The appraiser measures your house, but Tax Records shows something different. Why is there sometimes a disparity between the appraiser’s sketch and what public records says about your square footage? Or maybe you’re wondering why appraisers even need to measure a house during an appraisal inspection. Let’s glean some quick insight below.
10 reasons why public records and the appraiser’s sketch can differ:
- An estimation: The Assessor’s office in most areas does not actually measure houses. This means the “official” square footage in some cases might be an estimate based on an algorithm or aerial view.
- The wrong information: For whatever reason, the wrong information was supplied to the city or county when the house was built. Maybe the builder simply measured incorrectly too.
Other areas & structures: At times an area such as an enclosed patio, basement, detached studio, porch, or garage is included in the square footage when it really shouldn’t be included. Remember too that an area must have direct access to the main house to even begin to be considered as living area. If you have to exit the home to enter another area, that other area is not considered square footage (it might still have value, but it’s not counted in the total square footage by the appraiser).- Changed plans: Maybe a builder turned in plans to the city, but then the buyer decided to change some of the features and square footage of the house. And you guessed it, new plans were never sent in (or maybe the city lost them).
- Permitted but not updated: Sometimes a home owner will do an addition with a permit, but the Assessor’s office never updates the property’s profile.
- Not permitted: Other times a property owner will do an extensive addition without permits. The appraiser shows up and realizes the house has two extra bathrooms and 500 extra square feet. Now whether the appraiser will consider that as living area is another question. Do you think it should be included?
The 5 foot rule: There is a difference between the footprint of a house and actual square footage in cases with slanted ceilings with short walls. It’s always important to take into consideration the “5 foot rule” for calculating square footage.- Ceiling height: A ceiling has to be at least 7 ft tall, and have at least 50% of the ceiling at a height of 7 ft. Sometimes a converted attic won’t meet these requirements, so the appraiser cannot consider it as square footage. It might still add value, but it won’t be included in the living area.
- Appraiser error: Tax Records might be correct, but the appraiser could have made an error when measuring the house, which resulted in a higher or lower square footage.
- Shoddy workmanship: Maybe there is a legal addition, but the workmanship is shoddy at best, so it really shouldn’t be considered as living space.
Why this matters: This conversation underscores the importance of marketing your home accurately. After all, it can make a price and value difference whether a property is actually 1500 or 1700 square feet, right? Case-in-point: I recently measured a home for an investor that ended up being the 3400 sq ft model instead of the 3000 sq ft model as Tax Records incorrectly stated. My advice? If you doubt the accuracy of your square footage, hire an appraiser or someone else who knows how to measure a house accurately. It’s better to be informed up front than leave money on the table unnecessarily.
Question: What other reasons might official records be incorrect?
If you liked this post, subscribe by email (or RSS). Thanks for being here.
Have a question. I’ve not received a solid answer for this topic in the 13 years I’ve been appraising.
There is a very tricky aspect in appraising and measuring multifamily properties. For some reason all counties providing public record details for these type of properties include the garage area as part of the overall living area. I know this because the discrepancy in square footage for multifamily properties I’ve measured & inspected always plays out this way when comparing to public records size. They typically match when the garage area is backed out of the calculations. This makes it difficult to compare the subject property to a property that indicates a size that includes the gross area that includes the garage. This means you would need to deduct the garage area from an MLS sale without knowing the exact garage size. That information is never provided so an estimate at best would have to be relied on . In a report the lender always requires the garage area to not be included in the overall size of the property which automatically puts the subject property at a disadvantage. I’ve spoke to the Bureau of Real Estate Appraisers for California about this issue and they have no guidance but do agree it’s an issue that should be resolved somehow. In my mind lenders/underwriters should get schooled on this since buyers/sellers are all using this size to determine price per square foot. So very different than how single family homes are dealt with. Any thoughts?
Hi Sheri. That is definitely an important issue. I’m not sure what area you are located in, but I know in Sacramento it seems there are sometimes two numbers listed in Tax Records. Gross Living Area and then Gross Building Area. Sometimes the GBA includes both the garage and the units, whereas the GLA is obviously only the living space. However, sometimes the GLA is missing altogether. It seems like standard duplexes (a street of duplexes) tend to have more accurate information, but stand-alone 2-4 units don’t have as detailed information.
I’m not sure there is only one answer to this question, which is okay. I imagine appraisers would deal with the issue in different ways. Like they say, there are different ways to skin a ….. Ultimately I would do my best to represent the most accurate GLA as possible in the report. I wouldn’t have a problem subtracting a reasonable garage space size out of a listed GBA, though part of me doesn’t like the guess work. If I did this I would be extremely clear about what I did and why I did it. But at the same time I could always leave the published information there on the grid even if it looks like the property is larger in size. In reality, as long as the actual units are fairly similar in size, I probably wouldn’t adjust for GLA anyway. I would be most concerned about rent and bed/bath count. An extra large multi-unit property may command a value premium of course, but if I am appraising something smaller, I probably wouldn’t use that larger one as a comp anyway (unless I had to). My sense is the single family market is more sensitive to differences in GLA, which would likely be adjusted for on the grid. But when appraising 2-4 units I’m personally less concerned about differences in GLA and more focused on rents and location for 2-4 unit properties. In short, I tend to be less prone to adjust for GLA anyway for 2-4 units because most investors are probably looking at rents more than anything. Can the larger property be rented for more? If so, then there is maybe an adjustment. But if it’s larger, maybe the adjustment is about bedroom count more than size. Or maybe it’s about location rather than size.
What do you think? I’d love to hear your take.
San Francisco with rent control is a little bit of a different animal. Price per SF is given more weight in that market & with public records along with MLS using GBA to report size but lenders/underwriters only want GLA, it’s a mess. A mess of estimations, explanations & exceptions that usually DON”T fly with underwriters. They don’t get it & for the most part are unaware of the issue all together. They think what they are looking at for 2-4 unit public record size is GLA. UGH.
I won’t pretend to know much about SF (though I like to be a tourist there). If investors are all buying based on GBA, then I suppose keeping that figure in the report might be relevant. I would imagine the value of a parking space or garage space is huge in SF. I wonder what your peers do. That would be my first question. As long as you are explaining yourself and doing what is normative in the market, that’s really about as good as it gets. It is interesting though someone could buy based on faulty numbers in public records, so investors better be careful about only using price per sq ft.
Powell, a builder in the Gold River Area in the 1980’s used to name its models in at least one subdivision with a number instead of a name for its marketing material. For example a 1610 sq ft. model was the “1800” a 1900 sf model was the “2100” and so on up the line.
Supposedly, it was not an attempt at fraud, but just marketing with numbers like calling a Ford Galaxy a “500” or the Oldsmobile “88” and Olds “98” or Dodge Rams 1500, 2500 and 3500.
Of course the model name wound up being recorded as the SF size on a lot of tax records back in the day. Much to the embarrassment of appraisers who did not take the time to measure and calculate.
Fantastic comment, Jim. Thank you for sharing your local expertise. I learned something here. I had not heard that before, and it makes me want to be extra cautious when measuring in Gold River now. 🙂 Thank you again.
How difficult is it to get the tax appraiser to update/correct the square footage?
We are currently looking at a home that the tax records indicate is 3220, while the most recent appraisal (and of course the sellers) believe to be 3400.
When considering $/sqft….I want it to show up as a 3400 sqft house when it comes time to sell. And not just in my listing, or after my explanation…but on the official tax records. Of course I would wait to update that until we want to sell so they don’t hike my taxes! haha
Hi Jason. Thanks for reaching out. I don’t know if you are local or not, so it’s hard to give you advice. I do know in Sacramento County though that it is fairly easy to get this changed. In the cases I have been involved with, an owner will hire a certified appraiser to sketch the house, the owner turns in the records to the Assessor’s Office, and then a change can be made by the Assessor. It has been as easy as that. However, I would imagine the Assessor would wonder why there is a change and weigh the validity of the situation too. In the cases I have been a part of there was an addition that simply never made it to the tax rolls. In your case I wonder if the appraiser was correct in the measurement at 3400.
Hi, thank you for your article. We are dealing with a situation mentioned.
Seven years ago we purchased our home in Long Beach, Ca as a 3/2. The main home is a 2/1 and the attached garage was converted into a half garage and 1 bedroom/1 bath. You do have to step out of our home to walk into the addition. We purchased it with a FHA loan. Our lender questioned the addition but since it was permitted and public records acknowledge the addition, it was allowed.
Since then we have refinanced twice and both times received an appraisal for a 3/2, no issues what so ever. Until now. The appraiser is not acknowledging the addition stating the same thing your article does about lack of direct access. He used comps from over a year ago that are in a horrible part of town.
So how is it that county records acknowledges the non direct access and allows it but this appraiser will not? Being that the buyers were using a FHA loan we will be stuck with this appraisal for 6 months. Can we go after the county for our losses?
Hi Kelly. I’m so sorry for your situation. I do thank you for reaching out. It sounds like your garage is attached, so I’m not clear on there not being direct access, but I trust that is the case because that’s what you said. I am not sure if your county is different than mine, but I know in my area the county is not the definitive source for recognizing whether something is square footage or not. They tend to get it right most of the time, which is great, but sometimes they include items that really should not be included. Other times the might say there are three bathrooms when there are only two (and other things of that nature).
Even if the addition is not included as square footage, it can still contribute to the value. Did the appraiser give it any value or ignore it completely? I think that is probably a big key to focus on here. It sounds like you are saying the appraiser chose the wrong comps too, so that may be a huge issue. If the right comps were chosen in your area, what would that have done for value?
Part of me wonders how your house compared to other 3/2 homes in the immediate neighborhood when you first bought seven years ago. I would be curious to see if your home sold on par with other homes at the time or if it sold at a discount because of the layout. That is only one sale and it probably was purchased at a time when there were many distressed sales in the market too, but it is one point of context worth considering. That might be a clue into the way the subject property fits into the market. In other words, does it compare best with 3/2 homes or 2/1 + 1/1 homes?
I’m not a lawyer so I really cannot offer you legal advice. Keep me posted if I can answer any questions for you.
Question for you related to point 5 : 5.Permitted but not updated: Sometimes a home owner will do an addition with a permit, but the Assessor’s office never updates the property’s profile.
We added 1000 square feet on to our home last year. It was permitted and city gave us the final approvals need to notate completion on their end. They even indicated that it was their responsibility to notify the county. Flash forward to this June….we received our 2016 appraisal notice and the county tax records do not include the addition. What should we do? Should we pay the taxes as is based upon their records for this year and see what happens for the 2017 tax year? We are contemplating selling our home this year, so want to make sure that we address this appropriately.
Thanks for reaching out. It may take a while for the addition to show up in official records of course. Whatever the case, if you do go to sell, make sure you have proper documentation to show this addition was permitted. It would be ideal to have the information recorded already, but if not you can show the signed off permit to the appraiser, and that will help the appraiser understand the permit status. The appraiser can certainly call the city also, but make it easy on the appraiser but having information up front. As far as taxes, I am not a huge fan paying higher taxes. Your call on what to do in your situation. 🙂
Some of the measurements on the Property map have the letters or after property block measurement. What does that mean?
Hi Suzanna. It’s really hard to say what they mean without seeing exactly what you are talking about. It could be a direction or a function of the lot and block survey system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lot_and_block_survey_system). The definitive source would be your city or county of course. I wish I could help further.
2 bedroom 1 bath house…just discover been paying taxes for 3 bedroom 2 bath…will the city reimburse me for higher property taxes paid for 10 years
HI k.kindred. I’m sorry to hear that. I’m honestly not sure if you would get reimbursed. I think it’s very prudent and reasonable for the county/city to do so, but whether that would actually happen or not is really just a guess. I would highly recommend you call them and ask them to reassess you at the proper amount and give you a credit for what you overpaid. The irony is home owners paying the wrong amount will definitely get what’s called an “escape assessment” from the Assessor if it’s found out the owner has been paying too little. Yet when it’s the other way around, I’m not sure the rules apply the same. I sure hope in your case they do. I would recommend you reach out to the city or county, explain your situation, ask what the solution is to you being overcharged, and be as diplomatic and patience as possible. I find many owners go in ready for war, but we tend to get better results with honey instead of vinegar so to speak. I have certainly learned this with all the communication I’ve had with the Assessor’s Office.
Does anyone know if a house on the tax records say MOBILE but all other records show stick built and there are no indications the home was ever a mobile home example: No labels, no steel frame, on a permanent foundation and sheetrock walls, how can you get the tax records changed? I think maybe at one time there was a single wide mobile where the home is now but the current home shows no signs it was ever a mobile home. I am in the state of PA.
Hi Joe. Thanks for reaching out. Different areas may not operate the same, so my advice may not fit your needs. In my area one would start by calling the Assessor to ask them to look into the situation. Owners do this all the time when the square footage is incorrect. The same would hold true for a property being classified incorrectly too. I would say maybe start there with a phone call and see what steps are needed. You may be able to share some photos, share a recent appraisal, or maybe they need to come to your property. It is curious why it is classified that way too, so it would be interesting to find out why too.
Best wishes.
When measuring square feet what is the convention for including or excluding the area of the walls.
I am under the impression that in CA, the proper method is to measure from the outside of the building and thereby include the wall areas. Is this correct?
My own apartment has nearly 100sq ft of outside walls, and more inside walls, so it would be a significant difference.
Hi Bud. Thanks for reaching out. Honestly, how we measure depends on the type of property. I can really only speak to residential, and for that we typically measure from the outside of the wall for most residential properties. Yet for condos we would technically measure from half way through any adjoining wall since the owner technically only owns through the middle of the wall. It can be different for commercial buildings though, and if you are in an apartment I would recommend trying to find out what the standard is for your area for the type of property. Since I only do residential at this time I do not know what standard is used to measure, whether BOMA, ANSI, or something else…. Sorry I could not be more help. I might suggest finding someone in your local market who measures though. A commercial broker might be able to help, but honestly I have asked some locally and they don’t always know these things. I do know appraisers regularly measure though and if you can email a couple, that might give you the insight you’re looking for. Best wishes.
I purchased a house and builder’s floor plan stated house in approximately 1916 ht.sq ft. The appraiser only measured gross exterior of house as 1916 ht.sq ft. My problem is I measured the gross liveable space as 1774 sq. ft. ft. Why hasn’t the appraiser measured living space as true ht. sq ft.? I thought I was getting 1916 ht.sq ft. When I have to sell the house it will be a ptoblem!
Hi Christine. Square footage is measured from the outside (not the inside). I suppose that seems odd because you cannot live in the walls, but that’s how it’s done. So if the appraiser and builder measured that way, they are doing it correctly. Does that make sense?
I agree with Ryan’s explanation. The square footage of exterior and interior walls is included in the residential GLA. 2×4 Framing would account for 59 square feet of the perimeter walls, along with the exterior siding and interior wallboard alone of a 50′ x 38′ 1900 square foot house. Interior walls might eat up another 59 easy. Then there is the water heater closet, the furnace closet. If you have 2×6 exterior framing or very thick siding such as brick or stone the exterior walls take up even more square footage.
Thanks Jim.
In the public record my home appears to be missing the 2nd floor, should I worry about having that corrected? The house was built in 2018 so the builder either didn’t submit the 2nd floor or the appraiser ignored it? I dunno, but the question is should I worry about correcting it? And if so would there be tax implications? my house and the 3 beside it area all the same floor plan but I’m the only one that took the 2nd floor. my home sold for ~$50-$70k more than my neighbors for this reason. Our taxes are all pretty varied and based on what I know of the houses, seem to be in line.
Hi Richard. It’s a Catch 22 because typically if you get it corrected you will likely pay more in taxes (said as a non-Assessor). Personally I would correct it because it creates less confusion for every future refinance or sale. I think having clarity is important in real estate transactions if it’s that big of a space. Honestly, my own house is missing about 200 sq ft because a previous owner did an addition and it just never made it in there for whatever reason. It’s a minor amount and I’m not really all that concerned. But if it was a second story, personally I would get that fixed.
Hello, I recently purchased a home in North Tustin, CA the County Records show the home is 2,693 sqft the original house was 1,435 sqft. When we looked at the realist it shows the home is 2,693 under tax records. Fast forward I am looking to completely remodel the home and the county inspector came out and said the original addition wasn’t permitted. When my realtor pulled up the disclosures there was a permitting timeline since 1991 and there was a permit for the roof to be replaced. How can there be a permit for the roof yet not one for the building itself? Now I am at a crossroads where the county is telling me I need to tear down the whole addition before I can do anything else. Can you share some insight?
Hi James. That’s a tough situation, and unfortunately it’s not something I can speak into because this is going to come down to local code and how things work in your area. It’s hard to imagine there isn’t a process for permitting stuff that flew under the radar though. I would hope you can go through the process to get things permitted rather than having to automatically tear everything down. That seems dogmatic to me, but again, this is where the only thing that matters is what your city / county says. I get your logical thinking about the roof being permitted, and that sounds like something the county / city should have to explain.