Real Estate Appraisal Forum

appraisersforum.com logo
The Premiere Online Community for Real Estate Appraisers!
 Fastest Way to Find a Real Estate Appraiser Enter Zip Code:
 
 
Go Back   Appraisers Forum > Real Estate Appraisal Forums > Appraisal Review
Register Help Our Rules Calendar Archives Mark Forums Read


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #11  
Old 10-03-2008, 09:46 AM
Denis DeSaix Denis DeSaix is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Northern California
State: California
Professional Status: Certified General Appraiser
Posts: 14,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamba View Post
I have a question about the same form but I didn't want to open another thread...hope somebody will answer...

From what I understand, reviewer's opinion of value is USPAP compliant if SOW included that...but this form itself, in the letter of trasmittal states something else...and I'm gonna quote it:

"The reviewer has not been asked to arrive at a value conclusion, nor is any opinion of value rendered in connection with this review."

So how can one complete a desk review and reported on this particular form AND develop his/her own opinion of value (included in SOW)?

Thanks!
Are we talking about the Review Short Form 2006 originally created by NARA/NAMU?

I'm not familiar with any required letter of transmittal to that form?
Sponsored Links

  #12  
Old 10-03-2008, 10:24 AM
Bamba Bamba is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
State: Pennsylvania
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denis DeSaix View Post
Are we talking about the Review Short Form 2006 originally created by NARA/NAMU?

I'm not familiar with any required letter of transmittal to that form?
Yes, that's the form...so you're saying I should not include the letter of transmittal?...but is it there in the first place with the comment, if I could develop my own opinion of value...?
  #13  
Old 10-03-2008, 10:51 AM
Mike Kennedy's Avatar
Mike Kennedy Mike Kennedy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Southern Hudson Valley
State: New York
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 28,020
Default

suggest looking on the bottom right side of the form above THE SIG lines.......

"Reviewers Recommendation" $.............

IF the SOW for the order INCLUDES rendering a disparate value opinion by the Reviewer- in your report pack look for a supplemental SFR COMP 1 2 3 GRID .... complete, location map etc........

and fill in YOUR supported value opinion.

IF the SOW on the order does NOT require rendering a Review Value ( i.e. a technical review ONLY }

- then FILL THAT IN WITH N/A supported by COMMENTS above as well as checking appropriate recommendation boxes above.


IF the subject data in the appraisal appears INCOMPLETE/NOT CREDIBLE etc., RECOMMEND upgrading to a FIELD REVIEW 2000 or DECLINE un SOW RULE.

p.s. thats assuming you are totally comfortable NOT personally INSPECTING (at a minimum - exterior) THE SUBJECT AND NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMPS...........etc.
__________________
Kill the Contract Review Bull$eye - Now.

Last edited by Mike Kennedy : 10-03-2008 at 10:57 AM.
  #14  
Old 10-03-2008, 10:54 AM
Denis DeSaix Denis DeSaix is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Northern California
State: California
Professional Status: Certified General Appraiser
Posts: 14,787
Default

so you're saying I should not include the letter of transmittal?...

Bamba-

I'm not necessarily saying that.

Now, as to forming an opinion of value or not:
Technically (IMHO), this form's SOW does not require a review opinion of value. The pre-printed SOW requires the reviewer to develop an opinion of reasonableness and appropriateness of the original report's value based on the content of the original report. I know the form has a space for the reviewer's recommendation, but that is not required by the pre-printed SOW (you could type in that space "Not Supported" if you wanted to).
I would refer you to AO-20 (section starting on line 170) for additional background.

Now, in reality, most clients want a review opinion of value if it is possible for the reviewer to conclude one based on the SOW- and that SOW usually requires additional market research outside of what is presented in the original report.
I happen to use this form in my review work for lenders. However, I've developed a SOW which replaces the pre-printed form's SOW and is consistent with what my clients expect.

So, my recommendation would be this:
A. Find out exactly what your clients want.
B. Make sure you can do what they want: if so, accept. If not, decline.
C. Develop a SOW that outlines that agreement and what steps you are going to follow to give them what they want.
D. Complete the assignment and collect your fee.

One last practical word of advice:
I've spoken to clients before about what they asked for and why I thought I couldn't give them what they wanted exactly how they wanted.
1. Some clients appreciate this and, once they understood my point of view, agreed to what I thought I could give them.
2. Sometimes the client pointed out things I did not consider, and once I did consider it, I changed my opinion and gave them what they wanted and how they wanted it.
3. Sometimes the client didn't want to be bothered with what they considered technicalities, or replied "no one else has a problem with this..." and we agreed to part company.

So, my practical word of advice is before you take any recommendations from me, you do your own research on SR-3, read AO-20, review the SOWR, and decide what you think is the best way to proceed.

Good luck!
  #15  
Old 10-03-2008, 11:14 AM
Webbed Feet's Avatar
Webbed Feet Webbed Feet is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: City of Free Speech
State: Other Non-US
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 12,190
Default

Bamba, and others,

I am glad Mr. DeSaix is back posting actively. He and I post very differently, but very often arrive at the same destination. Something I personally hope is of value to everyone.

There have already been some great answers in this thread, but people are still struggling and asking good questions. I feel the problem is steps in defining the problem, the SOW, and the intended use have been skipped and replaced with confusion over a form. If we back up and then start over, while considering the time line "forms" were created against a backdrop of the history of USPAP and the current USPAP, you have all your answers.

One of the difficult items is original posters rather chronically fail to work at detailing exactly what form they are talking about when we get threads involving older forms versus USPAP questions about them. Next, it seems many people fail to consider that not all of us are using the same software packages. Some appraisal software providers use internal "form names" that don't match with other software provider internal form names in the various software form libraries. Then the creators of these forms did not exactly consider form identification a decade, or more, into the future. Combine this with clients coming up with form requests for extremely dated forms + an appraiser not in the trade long enough to instantly understand just how old the form is..... and you have a recipe for wanton form versus USPAP confusion.

Ok, now that we are all considering the above, shall we guess what form this is about and when it was created? Here is my guess. My software has a "Review Short Form 2006." At first glance one might even think this form came out in 2006. A careful look and I find on the right, in tiny font, "Copyright 1988 National Association of Review Appraisers and Mortgage Underwriters." Ahhhhh oops! Hold on here! .. 1988 ... and USPAP was adopted by anyone as a national appraisal standard when? ... LOL! .. Correct me if I am incorrect (I'm not. But I thought I'd toss a bone) but 1988 predates the ASB approval and adoption of the original USPAP developed in 1986-1987. It was not approved by the ASB until January 30, 1989.

Knowing the above, is there any small wonder there just may be a few little current USPAP details to cover with any client, during the indentification of the problem, intended use, and establishment of a SOW, with any client requesting the use of this form?

In conclusion. Stop doubting yourselves. All of you are well enough versed, or should certainly be by now, to know when any item on a form is calling for a real estate appraisal regardless of the buzz word(s) used to describe it. Review requested forms for USPAP compliance and then get right back to the requesting client with SOW clarification(s) (in writing!) BEFORE you take an assignment! Don't be so slow about the above as to quote fees based on deceptively "simple" drastically dated forms, or forms that were never written for any sort of USPAP compliance in the first place. Stop and consider just exactly how much work it is going to take to bring any requested form into USPAP compliance for use before you quote a fee to use a form you've never used for a SOW you should have had nailed down before coming to the forum for advice! Unless of course that advice needed was due to a confusing SOW and needing help understanding the SOW request.

Thinking a request for a certain form represents all you need to know about a SOW request is the very first mistake appraisers keep making over and over and over...... stop with the form think! Document more SOW answers to more asked SOW questions!

P.S. Wanna know the funny part? Mr. DeSaix was posting as I was and I didn't see his post till I clicked on "save."

P.S.S. I would do one thing different than Mr. DeSaix, assuming we are looking at the same form. If the SOW did not include a real estate appraisal by the reviewer then for the "Reviewer's Recommendation $ ___________" answer I would place "See Above / NA" for an answer. As I would have already provided my "Recommendations" above that and have detailed in my SOW addenda that no opinion of value on my part is called for. If the SOW did call for a real estate appraisal on my part I would put "See pages XX of XX" in there as I would have to include a USPAP compliant real estate appraisal.

Last edited by Webbed Feet : 10-03-2008 at 11:38 AM.
  #16  
Old 10-03-2008, 11:23 AM
Bamba Bamba is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
State: Pennsylvania
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 285
Default

I am sooooo mad right now I can scream...I decline the assignment ..after a full day of work...they put so much pressure on me (4 calls since 9:04AM) to put a value on this or they would have to reassign it...and I told me to just do that...

My problem is...and I still don't have an answer for it...this form that they specifically ask the desk review to be reported on...part of the pak is the letter of transmittal which states I am not going to render an opinion of value...now the form Review Short Form does have a Reviewer's recommendation $...contradiction!

Now, the client asks for an opinion of value...and both the review and the appraisal reported on this form...with SFR 123 COMP grid and everything...and to remove the letter of transmittal from the report...which they state I ADDED there...which I didn't, it was part of the pak...so my question is? Why is it there with that comment if it can be removed?

My opinion of value would have been lower than the original appraisal, they did not want to upgrade to at least a field review...so that's that...

Here is what he just emailed to me..."This email is following up on the phone conversation we had on above file. We require an appraiser to provide a value on all reviews. You determine that you were unable to provide this value due to fact that you include a cover letter in report saying you would not. I advise this cover letter not part of the form and thus a value would still be required. You agreed that the best solution would be for us to re-assign the report. The report will not be used by XXXXX and no payment will be made on the file."

Am I missing something here?

PS I was posting at the same time with Mr Feet and just saw your post...I was aware of SOW when I took the assignment and I had no problem with until I got to the part where to communicate my opinions and conclusions..what I wasn't familiar with was the form they required (hence the asking for advise on the forum)...especially, as Mr Feet kindly explained, after I saw the year the form was created...

Last edited by Bamba : 10-03-2008 at 11:36 AM.
  #17  
Old 10-03-2008, 12:26 PM
Webbed Feet's Avatar
Webbed Feet Webbed Feet is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: City of Free Speech
State: Other Non-US
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 12,190
Default

Bamba,

Mr. DeSaix and I were being so prophetic I almost don't know what to say! And with me, boy, is that saying a lot!

After reading my prior post I know that you know where you went wrong. Accepting an assignment with a SOW to use a form you were not yet familar with using your software with its limitations. My software does not force, or even include, that transmittal letter you bring up. This is a VERY hard lesson on learning that all appraisers MUST know how they are going to comply with Standard Two for any assignment BEFORE they accept an assignment that doesn't allow for a turn time they can't hit because they are not ready.

What you just went through is an excellent lesson for others too. I'll try being prophetic again. I guess your client was an AMC (not a hard guess) and they had you fee quoting, turn time quoting, and everything else by the form and not by the SOW !!!!!! Hence, they are digging an old form out of the basement in order to supposedly reduce fees and turn times because the form looks OOOOOH SO SIMPLE!!!!!! Meanwhile, you and all the other appraisers getting talked into this, are all going to get a really bad case of hemorrhaging out the rears, over USPAP violations and fees, or from trying not to commit any USPAP violations in the process.

I am very sorry. But you just let the form, and your software, control your performance under the SOW instead of following all the proper steps. Steps that probably should have led you to refuse to accept the assignment due to the demand for that form, the requested SOW, turn time, and fee offered via a bunch of game playing going on by an AMC. An AMC that doesn't give a flying rat's ass about what they are asking for and how to comply with USPAP when trying to do it. Outdated forms will always take an appraiser three to four times as long to use, as compared to more recent forms, and comply with USPAP in the process. It could take a full week of toying around to get old forms, or form unfamiliar to you, ready with addenda to be able to comply with a requested SOW and USPAP at the same time. The time for the preparation needed to be able to perform to a SOW in any decent sort of turn time, let alone the insane turn times most the AMC's demand, has to be taken before the assignments are.

Last edited by Webbed Feet : 10-03-2008 at 01:00 PM.
  #18  
Old 10-03-2008, 01:06 PM
Bamba Bamba is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
State: Pennsylvania
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Webbed Feet View Post
Bamba,

Mr. DeSaix and I were being so prophetic I almost don't know what to say! And with me, boy, is that saying a lot!

After reading my prior post I know that you know where you went wrong. Accepting an assignment with a SOW to use a form you were not yet familar with using your software with its limitations. My software does not force, or even include, that transmittal letter you bring up.
It doesn't bring it? mine does and it actually has my signature on it...I'm using ACI...

Quote:
What you just went through is an excellent lesson for others too. I'll try being prophetic again. I guess your client was an AMC (not a hard guess) and they had you fee quoting, turn time quoting, and everything else by the form and not by the SOW !!!!!! Hence, they are digging an old form out of the basement in order to supposedly reduce fees and turn times because the form looks OOOOOH SO SIMPLE!!!!!!
It is for an AMC but I didn't quote any turn time...they just felt the need to pressure on this...

Quote:
But you just let the form, and your software, control your performance under the SOW instead of following all the proper steps. Steps that probably should have led you to refuse to accept the assignment due to the demand for that form, the requested SOW, turn time, and fee offered via a bunch of game playing going on by an AMC.
Which I actually did...decline it...because I didn't want to lose my good night sleep over what they were asking.
  #19  
Old 10-03-2008, 01:48 PM
Webbed Feet's Avatar
Webbed Feet Webbed Feet is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: City of Free Speech
State: Other Non-US
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 12,190
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamba View Post
It doesn't bring it? mine does and it actually has my signature on it...I'm using ACI...
I am using Bradford's "ClickFORMS" ... I get a one page form only. No addendums or transmittal letter. I could add those.

Quote:
It is for an AMC but I didn't quote any turn time...they just felt the need to pressure on this...
To not would be asking a dog not to drool at dinner time...

Quote:
Which I actually did...decline it...because I didn't want to lose my good night sleep over what they were asking.
I really am sorry you got caught up in the event. Maybe someday all residential appraisers will demand pricing, turn times, and other business concerns to be by the SOW and not by the form. But I've always been a dreamer...

  #20  
Old 10-03-2008, 03:42 PM
Bamba Bamba is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
State: Pennsylvania
Professional Status: Certified Residential Appraiser
Posts: 285
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Webbed Feet View Post
I am using Bradford's "ClickFORMS" ... I get a one page form only. No addendums or transmittal letter. I could add those.
Mine came with everything ) order form, letter of transmittal, the form itself, SFR 123 Comp, subject photos, comp photos, location map etc )


Quote:
I really am sorry you got caught up in the event. Maybe someday all residential appraisers will demand pricing, turn times, and other business concerns to be by the SOW and not by the form. But I've always been a dreamer...
Thanks for all your help anyway )
Sponsored Links

Closed Thread


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump




Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
     Terms of Use  Privacy Policy
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at AppraiserSites.com

Fastest Way to Find a Real Estate Appraiser Enter Zip Code:
Partner Sites:
AppraiserUSA.com - National Appraiser Directory AllDomainsUSA.com - Domain Name Registration
DeadbeatListings.com - Deadbeat ListingsAppraiserSites.com - Web Hosting for the Professional Real Estate Appraiser
Find FHA Appraisers - FHA Appraiser Search Commercial Appraisers - Commercial Appraiser Search
Relocation Appraisal - Find Relocation Appraisers Domain Reseller - Business Opportunity
Home Security Buzz - Home Security Info Radon Testing - Radon Gas Info
My Medicare Forum - Medicare Info Stop Smoking Help - Help Quitting Smoking
CordlessPhoneStore.com - Great Cordless Phones AndroidTabletCity.com - Android Tablet Computers

Follow AppraisersForum.com:          Find us on Facebook            Follow us on Twitter


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:02 AM.

SiteMap: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93