I do review work sometimes. I could careless what the OMV was or even what my OMV is. 9 out of 10 times my OMV is within 5% of the OA. I don't even care if the OA used the "best comps". I do my own appraisal and I reconcile the two. The choice of which comps to use or not use, was again, their opinion. If their comps were appropriate, did those comps support the OMV? That's the only question I ever deal with concerning comps in a review. Just two considerations, appropriate and support. If I choose different comps but my results are similar to the OA, then that's just additional support for the OA that they did their job and their opinion is/was supported in the market place. And I don't care what they used for adjustments. If they used $25 a square foot and I used $20, it matters not as most markets will support size adjustments between 0 and $50 a square foot here. So there is usually enough market data to "support" an adjustment. The question really is, did the adjustment minimize the economic difference for the size difference? Because some appraisers lose track of WHY we make adjustments and start out with comps that have sale prices 5% apart and wind up with adjusted sale prices that are 20% apart. You know the guys, here is a difference, make an adjustment mentality. But if my opinion is vastly different then the OA, now we have a problem. Either I missed something in the description of the subject property, or the OA did not use appropriate comps. So if they did not detail why they chose the comps they did, I have to try and figure it out. This is where my opinion counts. Either they used all far superior comps or comps from different neighborhoods, or far inferior comps without explanations. I'm always amused that when beating down a value, appraisers never leave a neighborhood for comps, but when pushing up a value, almost 100% of the time they use comps from outside of the neighborhood. Except for just one guy who used all lakefront sales in a PUD for a home not on the lake, and did not mention the lakefront locations of the comps. But then again. I've seen reviews that were worse than the original appraisals. Reviews should be their own specialty, and mandatory training should be required. There is nothing more disheartening than to know that some appraisers are running their behinds off trying to stay afloat and some AMC is going to have their report reviewed after shopping for the cheapest reviewer they can find. As an industry, our certs and our clients hang in the balance, pending a review. As an industry we should be demanding more, and better safe guards as to who is competent to review and who should not be allowed to review until competency is proven. .