Review: Appraiser I'm reviewing calls me

[Michigan CG]

I learned a lot doing reviews as a trainee.

However, without adequate supervision I'm sure I could have screwed up a good appraiser's name. That never happened because I was well supervised.

Metamorphic appears to be well supervised. He also seems to have a logical mind. So what's the problem?

That is exactly my point.

As for trainees completing reviews; it is a good learning tool but not as the finished product for the client.

And that.

 

[Kevin Mc]

So what's the problem?

They are the exception to the rule. The problem occurs when a trainee (or someone else with limited experience) decides that there are 3 additional comparables or sales that are "better", girds them and reports a value different than the original appraiser without ever leaving his/her desk. AMCs and some lenders like to call these products 'enhanced desk reviews". There is no such thing. If you are an employee of a lending institution or you work for a grading service fine. If you are doing these things as a contractor keep in mind they are considered appraisals despite what anyone else may call them and you will be held to the same standard. Be careful.

 

[Tudor]

Using reviews as a training tool? Sure that is a great idea.

Trainees should not be doing reviews. The Supervising Appraiser, if they want to use reviews as a training tool, should do their own review and have the trainee do a review at the same time. But we know that is not how the skippy's do it. They let the trainee do the review then sign off as they did the review.

I sure as heck don't want some trainee telling me how to appraise.

 

[Mike Garrett RAA]

The issue is competency...which is defined as having both knowledge and experience. How much experience does a trainee have? Reviewing should be reserved for more "experienced" appraisers!

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

I don't do reviews and I'm just wondering whether the fee for a review appraisal is based on whether the reviewer concurs with the original appraisal, or whether the reviewer does not agree and needs to provide comparables that support a different opinion of value. One one hand a staggered fee might appear to violate the predetermined notion of value concept, although IMO to charge the same fee for either outcome isn't "fair." (just wondering...)

 

[c w d]

I don't do reviews and I'm just wondering whether the fee for a review appraisal is based on whether the reviewer concurs with the original appraisal, or whether the reviewer does not agree and needs to provide comparables that support a different opinion of value. One one hand a staggered fee might appear to violate the predetermined notion of value concept, although IMO to charge the same fee for either outcome isn't "fair." (just wondering...)

Our fee for a field review is $500 regardless of opinion. That fee acts to weed out the undesirable clients requesting a rubber stamp.

 

[Metamorphic]

I don't do reviews and I'm just wondering whether the fee for a review appraisal is based on whether the reviewer concurs with the original appraisal, or whether the reviewer does not agree and needs to provide comparables that support a different opinion of value. One one hand a staggered fee might appear to violate the predetermined notion of value concept, although IMO to charge the same fee for either outcome isn't "fair." (just wondering...)

You've hit directly upon one of the biggest problems with reviews. Basically the way the form has you do them, at the very least flirts, with inappropriateness. Namely that the scope in not knowable when you take the assignment, and no matter what fee you agree to, there's always a financial incentive for the review appraiser to agree with the original appraiser's opinion.

MHO, the 1032 should go through question 10 as is, but should end after the first 2 questions of Section II. At that point the person that ordered the review can either sink the deal, or forward the appraisal, the review and a check for a new appraisal to a 3rd appraiser if they're still interested in going forward.

 

[Oh No Not Him]

I was doing a review and ended up calling the appraiser because it was so bad I had serious doubts about whether it was a fraudulent use of their name and signature. It wasn't . Ouch!

I couldnt help but notice that you ar listed as a "trainee"...is anyone else uncomfortable with a trainee reviewing appraisals?

 

[laynelucia]

Mike, Actually, the AQB has not determined that more experienced appraisers should train the have determined simply that State Certified Appraisers and above can only train. I know of State Licensed people that have 10+ years that absolutely should be training and also some State Certified that should stop.

 

[Michigan CG]

I couldnt help but notice that you ar listed as a "trainee"...is anyone else uncomfortable with a trainee reviewing appraisals?

See pages 4 and 5 of this thread.