Hi, I am hoping for some feedback about this situation. I have been working towards buying the other half share of a property inherited 50/50 by myself and my brother. I've had an unconditional loan OK'd but the amount l can get and what is a fair market value price I am willing to pay is less than what he wants. Besides being influenced by real estate appraisals (of the buy-your-listing variety) he has recently supplied me with a valuation by a 'big' valuation company. This valuation initially shocked me as it was about 1/3 again higher than mine. But when I read it (luckily I read it!!) on page 12 the valuer stated that the property would be worth this amount after development which they said would involve subdividing it into two blocks then selling one vacant block and the other with the house (fixed up also - not 'as is') on it. I really don't see how this is an 'as is' valuation and this is the response I have made to his lawyer. Is there a regulatory body which polices these things? They have stated one amount only - 'as is' but they state "We have undertaken a hypothetical development of the site" citing highest and best use (which it isn't anyway) and their 'net realisation' is the 'as is' amount .. which is clearly not correct as it is a projected value and not what it would be sold for if put on the market 'as is'. I'm in SA. The property is not a cattle station by any means. We are not executors, we are joint owners. He has always been clear that he doesn't want the place and doesn't want to do the work and wants me to buy him out. I've advised his lawyer that as he has already threatened me with Supreme Court action (sadly the true colours I never would have expected have come out since about March this year) then if he won (at unnecessary cost) then it would be auctioned and it would not get projected value, but the true 'as is' value. Any advice would be welcome.