During 2020 & 2021, "typical external obsolescence" was not an obsolescence....
I believe someone may have even started a thread on the topic....
Pretty close. A bank I worked for hired a consultant because they got dinged with a bias complaint, they made it go away by booking the loan on the portfolio side. The new policy as of April 2023 states "..any request for a Reconsideration of Value (ROV) by an applicant will be immediately escalated and forwarded to the Director of Appraisal Services."Seems like a "too low" appraisal to get a loan is becoming a fair housing violation.
You do know the 1004MC is just for comparable properties and not the entire subject market? The differences between the 1004MC and first page don't have much meaning unless of course the MC was filled out incorrectly and included all of the sales in the subject market.The 1004MC in his report sure didn't do him any favors. It showed an increasing market while he chose stable in the report. His opinion of value is approximately 14% below the lowest median sale in the MC (out of 30 something sales).
Then he used some boilerplate commentary stating the MC data was not to be relied upon... without stating how he concluded the market was stable.
I don't think the dude is racist....it's just a poorly supported report.
Robot Man....I beg to differ...I stated last year that I would not want to go to court with that report. "If" you actually had 30+ "competitive" sales as his MC states, wouldn't you throw a couple more in the report for additional support? He reconciled by averaging the 4 sales, no documented analysis for that busy street adjustment.geez surfer dude...the appraisal wasn't that bad...anyways, the lender and the borrowers had options. no one pinned them to that number...
anyways
if any mistake was made, it was not researching the borrower enough...currently i am asking for i.d. at every appraisal and doing a google search on the borrower so not to fret
![]()
![]()
![]()