Reviewer said: "County’s Public Records" cannot be used as a verification source in the Prior Sale History....

[J Grant]

person five states away has no idea if the comps, adjustments and comments are relevant / credible or make any sense whatsoever. They (or a computer ) has a check list

I usually put in the actual Tax ID parcel number, could be all they are asking for instead of just a boiler plate response.

TX ID is also boiler plate, (or non essential, who cares about the tax ID if the comp choice is horrible?

sorry imo this is record keeping which belongs in the work file, the trend to show more busy work from a work file in report distracts from the fact that what counts in the appraisal is the development : the analysis, research, comp choices, credible adjustments (which are typically not addressed in a QC "review". Adding the folio or OR number is not a USPAP requirement, just one more piece of busy work that takes time and attention away what is relevant to appraisal development.

 

[TJSum]

Each property has its own Tax ID number, the exact opposite of the meaning of boiler plate. It shows the reviewer where the info is coming from and how to access it, exactly what is being asked for.

 

[J Grant]

In my data source I put in the MLS number if a reviewer is actually looking for additional info on property that could be valuable, a tax folio ID is identification just as the address is, so if street/city address is ther5e it can be accessed - a tax ID is redundant.... more stuff in there to distract from fact the QC checklist ignores the critical /credible appraisal development - it lets a client or AMC claim they performed a "review" and imo needs a different label. Put a ID # in if want or client asks, but it ludicrous to elevate it to anything other than busy work ( it is not a USPAP requirement )

 

[glenn walker]

I believe what the reviewer was trying to convey may have be taken wrong. A big deal right now in reviews especially at my FHA HOC is that appraisers are only reporting the transfer using one source. In the Date of Prior Sale/Transfer Grid there is only enough room to report the Date-S/P and source. Some will place a Doc Recording Number in there. Anyway I digress-what the review may be saying is the County Recorders or Public Records shows a date it recorded and its transfer amount and that's fine but -Now what he/she wants is the appraiser below not in the grid to lay out the trail where you not only verified the Sale/Transfer but include what ever other sources were available. Note: See Below: Subject In Grid-Detail of Second-Third Sources below in analysis. If the appraiser has no second source then simply state no other data found. If the HUD reviewer looks in MLS and also finds one or two prior listings and sales then they ding you : )

 

[Meandering]

Reviewer said "County’s Public Records" cannot be used as a verification source in the Prior Sale History because this is considered too generic and must be more specific.

Has anyone experienced a similar revision request??!

What would be a more descriptive or more specific term for "County’s Public Records"?

Or is there another more reliable source for prior transfer history that i am not aware of?

Is this reviewer trying to create job security for him/her self, or am i being biased in my opinion?

Put in the deed number. The deed is dated and then tax stamped. That is the last conveyance in the public record. Any other conveyance not recorded by a deed is not the interest you are appraising, unless you are doing a lease hold with a privately held lease.

.

 

[ramrcdk]

Public Records are the most reliable and official Government source of Transfer History. Other Government data pertaining to Real Property may not be very precise, i.e Gross Living area etc Some Transfers are not recorded. In my state if the transfer of real property ownership is not recorded then in many/most cases it can not be enforced in Court. This is because NC is a "Race State".

" North Carolina is a “pure race” jurisdiction, meaning that the person first in time to record a deed to, or a lien against, a parcel of real property generally has priority against all subsequent grantees or lien holders. "

Lien Priority in North Carolina

Lien Priority in North Carolina North Carolina is a “pure race” jurisdiction, meaning that the person first in time to record a deed to, or a lien against, a parcel of real property generally has priority against all subsequent grantees or lien holders. Thus, if a lender records its deed of...

hutchenslawfirm.com

.

If your communicating with this Review Dude, ask him a simple question: Where do the Private Data Sources get their data to populate their own Data Base/information from?

Is the Review Dude creating Job Security. No! The Review Dude is only demonstrating how much of an idiot he is.

--------------------------------------

Side Note: I just finished a Review this week where the Appraiser only reported 'Corelogic' as his data Source for Transfer History. Think about it a moment. Does Corelogic have ALL data on ALL Real Property Transfers? I know that they don't. Plus you always try and use multiple sources of Data and then reconcile the differences.
The question your answering is which one is the most reliable and Credible.

Recently I noticed that Corelogic has acquired Realist. They did this to add to their Data Base for Instant Evals. Problem is not all County GIS cross share info with Private Sources.

Yes so in those cases ONE must look further. I state the source ( to ALSO aid in Review ) where I found (the Deed Bk/Pg Number) which CAN BE more than 1-source. Very FINE print says Corelogic in tax records, Realist bought by Corelogic also. DO THE BEST you can.
Around here besides Corelogic you can also QUOTE deed book & page #s same data copied from the court house records. I take a photo (for workfile) & quote histories per the deed book/pages & use Corelogic TOO.
AND I do also use: Realist, Matrix, Tax/GIS, Online County too as stated in the Source Information Paragraph- Section of my Reports.

Look at the disclaimers:
** Realist: The data within this report is compiled by CoreLogic from public and private sources. The data is deemed reliable, but is not guaranteed.
** Matrix v8.3. Copyright © 2020 CoreLogic. All rights reserved. Terms of Use.

 

[Carnivore]

Bottom line is you should use as many sources as you can and then compare.

Case in Point: Review completed last month the Appraiser only used MLS as a source for prior sale. Big Mistake! The MLS printout looked like it was a New Construction Sale. Appraiser used this for a third comp outside his New Construction Subjects Hood. Here was his problem. The comp was a resale. Which is great! But he called it New C1 when it was actually a C2.

Had he researched the Meck County GIS he would have seen the prior sale. So not only was he in error of the Actual Age, but also did not report the Transfer History Correctly.

Here is the Irony. If he had did all the above properly his MV was great, but it would have turned out Rock Solid! It was a great report, but for that one USPAP error.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I usually say "assessor tax card" as the source. Realist is often behind.

 

[NachoPerito]

Public records is not a verification source. It is a data source.

Find out if it was on the MLS. Find out from the current owner if the prior sale was arm's length. You probably already have their number to set up the inspection? This will give you a little bit of context for the sale that will convince someone that the prior sale supports or does not support your current value opinion.

 

[friendlyeddie]

I put the specific source, deed book & page or instrument number, etc. so that it can be easily verified by someone else. Obviously for the subject, discussion with borrower/homeowner can verify the specifics of prior transfer if not apparent. I wouldn't consider MLS a source of prior transfer verification since most transfers are not through MLS.