• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

When is a Review Required to meet Std 3?

Status
Not open for further replies.
-
When I did reviews #1 The name of the appraiser was blacked out and there was no contact between us and #2 I did the review , turned it over to the client , end of my involvement.

Email exchanges seems it would be a lot harder to draw the line about standards and could get personal.
I never had problems with the use of emails. But then again I don't express my own opinions or criticize their opinions. Or try to tell them how to appraise the property.

If they didn't provide the opinion of "as is" value that the terms of their assignment required then I point that out to them. If they used an EA without ackowledging that they're using an assumption then I point that out to them. If they miss a prior sale I point that out. If they're not using the most similar comps then I ask why they didn't consider these similar sales which on paper appear to be more similar or relevant.

I never got rebuttals on my reviews because I don't say things in my reviews that I don't already know the answer to. Aside from that, tie always goes to the runner. I don't look for "accurate" values or quibble over them thinking it's $210k and me thinking it's $205k. , I look for "reasonable" and "supported".
 
The problem with the OP appraisal is the reference to the bubble. Bubble talk is not for the faint investors.
 
I never had problems with the use of emails. But then again I don't express my own opinions or criticize their opinions. Or try to tell them how to appraise the property.

If they didn't provide the opinion of "as is" value that the terms of their assignment required then I point that out to them. If they used an EA without ackowledging that they're using an assumption then I point that out to them. If they miss a prior sale I point that out. If they're not using the most similar comps then I ask why they didn't consider these similar sales which on paper appear to be more similar or relevant.

I never got rebuttals on my reviews because I don't say things in my reviews that I don't already know the answer to. Aside from that, tie always goes to the runner. I don't look for "accurate" values or quibble over them thinking it's $210k and me thinking it's $205k. , I look for "reasonable" and "supported".
Agree with the priorities of reviewer. Just surprised to see it performed via email rather than the reviewer presenting their findings to client and then client shares with the appraiser if appropriate.

But if a client prefers it to occur via email between reviewer and appraiser instead...their option. Just never see it often...whenever I get feedback on an appraisal which I assume came from some type of review it came via a request from the client rather than an email from the person reviewing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eli
Late to the party.

Email conversations with reviewers while they are working on a report are common in many areas outside of the residential lending world. It used to be phone calls, but now it is almost always by email (I'm not sure which I prefer - I can see advantages to either). The reviewer is typically looking for the appraiser to clarify something or consider something else to see if what they are reading makes sense or is credible. Most of the time, some additional discussion is enough and if there aren't any actual corrections needed, the reviewer can add the notes to their review and "certify" the report (for lack of a better term). It isn't the most fun part of my appraisal world, but almost everything I produce gets reviewed and depending on the reviewer I may have to clarify something that is a big deal, even doing a new report with a different value if I screw the pooch (I have - in fact I had to change my opinion of value on a report just this fall when I missed something). Or, more likely, it is just clarifying something I should have explained/documented better or something that, frankly, a reviewer should have understood (IMO). It is the least fun part of the job whether or not it is reasonable, but it is definitely part of the gig.

FTR - the email exchanges are not in place of doing the review and presenting it to the client. They are part of the process of doing the review. They are gathering data which includes asking questions about parts of the report that may not seem clear. When they are done with their process, they then send the actual review to the client. The review includes corrections or items discussed with the appraiser. That is the actual report - not the emails. The emails are simply part of the process in many worlds.

And, yes, personalities can sometimes get involved on both ends. I know there have been reviewers who made me cringe every time I see a note from them and there are no doubt appraisers (hopefully not me, but I cannot guarantee that) who make a reviewer cringe when they see it is one of mine they are reviewing. But, since the review process is there to make sure the report is reasonably concluded and supported, they do need to contact you if they have questions and the blind review process wouldn't work very well (particularly since it is narrative and everyone has their own style, anyway).
 
-
When I did reviews #1 The name of the appraiser was blacked out and there was no contact between us and #2 I did the review , turned it over to the client , end of my involvement.

Email exchanges seems it would be a lot harder to draw the line about standards and could get personal.

Agree somewhat
 
Agree with the priorities of reviewer. Just surprised to see it performed via email rather than the reviewer presenting their findings to client and then client shares with the appraiser if appropriate.

But if a client prefers it to occur via email between reviewer and appraiser instead...their option. Just never see it often...whenever I get feedback on an appraisal which I assume came from some type of review it came via a request from the client rather than an email from the person reviewing.

yes, What was std 3 made for? think about the risk it limits.

Along your line, that communication should go to the client of #1 and #2, and the response come from the client, imo.
 
Interesting the types of reviews...my impression is that an email exchange between a reviewer and appraiser acts like a consultation between the 2 - end goal a better report but it is not so much a review of the finished appraisal (even though one was done as part of the process ) but goal is to produce an improved version of that appraisal by alerting the appraiser of issues/discussing them to effect outcome.

VS field or desk reviews where the appraisal is completed and it is not a matter of changing the original appraisal/ making it better, the review is of the appraisal as a completed product - usually these are problem child appraisals UW or a QC process identified, whether recent date or forensic review of older eff date reports.
 
This one is std 3 because of licensed appraiser. Whether a std 3 review or report was given to client? I have no clue. The out of state part is not good.
 
Sometimes, I think some states or individuals file complaints with other state boards than the state the property is located in. I am pretty sure they do.
 
The out of state part and value issues means it should have been a std 3 (could have been). That's likely why the chief is saying your ok. The chief is likely out of state too. The whole process is not ok. That's like cutting behind the client (s) back. If they were not licensed professional appraiser's, it would be different.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top