How long the comps we can go back?

[sputnam]

I caught an AMC adding to the clients statement of work. I read the LOE on line then downloaded it in legal length paper form. about 5-6 inches Below the Lenders instructions it said and I quote "and additionally our appraisers do this.

So I ignored the AMC stuff. I sent in report and they conditioned me for their added SOW. I told them I would for extra bucks. They promptly deleted their added sow and removed the request and accepted the report.

The AMC is allowed to have requirements that are more than the Client's requirements. If they added it before you accepted the assignment then, you do it. If they added it after then, you hit them up for more $ or decline.

However, I agree that some AMCs add on a lot of nonsensical requirements. One of the reasons they do that is to simplify their lives. They push the requirements for every assignment to meet the all the requirements of all their Clients.

 

[Carnivore]

I respectfully disagree with you.

The AMC is not my client nor are they my supervisor of my firm. In the case I cited they did not add those additional requirements in a prominent way. Those additional requirements were at the bottom of a legal length sheet.

FTR in later assignments they removed those additional requirements from the LOE.

What I speculate they are attempting to do is make all reports fit the needs of all their clients and bypasses that re-addressing issue. Certification say any lender can use the 1004/1073 no matter who the named/identified Client is in the report. something like that. Maybe orne of our USPAP AQB members will chime in on this topic/disagreement.

'our' appraisers comes across as if I was their employee. I know 'our' is a determiner its possessive.

1. 1.
   belonging to or associate

 

[TerryRohrer]

I quoted one the other day that had about 5 versions of mostly the same requirements, all slightly different. My triple price quote included a provision that if the didn't choose, upon engagement, the controlling version, then I would apply the first encountered in the EL. Of course, that couldn't be accepted, but they probably didn't understand the caveat.

 

[TerryRohrer]

I respectfully disagree with you.

The AMC is not my client nor are they my supervisor of my firm. In the case I cited they did not add those additional requirements in a prominent way. Those additional requirements were at the bottom of a legal length sheet.

FTR in later assignments they removed those additional requirements from the LOE.

What I speculate they are attempting to do is make all reports fit the needs of all their clients and bypasses that re-addressing issue. Certification say any lender can use the 1004/1073 no matter who the named/identified Client is in the report. something like that. Maybe orne of our USPAP AQB members will chime in on this topic/disagreement.

I think if a provision is in an engagement letter you accept, then it is an assignment condition you must meet to comply with USPAP.

The only way to address it is to carefully read their EL the first time, demand unacceptable provisions be removed, and dump them quickly if they don't address the problem. I had one that routinely included a trip fee of $50 if the assignment was canceled. Many were rural. I refused to quote them until the cancellation fee was based on work completed to that point. That worked for a bit, then they refused to change it and I no longer open their emails.

 

[Cob]

Mike Rowe of the show Dirty Jobs has it right. You don't need a college education nor do you need a high school diploma. People can learn how to operate heavy equipment at a fraction of the cost of the college education and make two or three times the money annually than a 2/4 yeAR college grad.

We are rapidly heading towards a cashless society. So that is a problem for many sub-contractors like a res appraiser. Private non-lender assignments for res appraisers will be forced to report that income. The banks reporting of cash deposits threshold was $1,000 now it is $600.

So suggest a res appraiser get multi-licensed. i,e. NC has a licensed home Inspector. You should also make sure you have an RE Broker license. It is all about revenue streams. The more you have the better.

Mike Rowe, the actor, producer, television host, narrator???

 

[Carnivore]

Mike Rowe, the actor, producer, television host, narrator???

Dirty Jobs' Creator Mike Rowe Releases Historical Docudrama Just in Time for Independence Day - The Stream

"Something to Stand For," Mike Rowe's film about “untold stories of American heroes,” will be in 1,000 theaters for one week starting June 27.

stream.org

 

[George Hatch]

When it comes to adding extras at the internal level I don't know if there's a significant difference to whether it's the individual choosing to do more, a fee shop choosing to do more or an AMC choosing to require more. They're all (most commonly) trying to do that as an expression of beating out their competition.

• "I choose to show the most recent prior sale and listing info regardless of how far back"
• "We choose to require that the appraisal show the prior sale and and listing info regardless of how far back"

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Just get an purcahse loan assignment in. The contract price is high. I only find one comp sold in Jun, 2022 with such high price. I was heard we can't use the comp more than 2 years ago, even with time adjustment? Can someone confirm that?

Also, per ACI system, the final appraisal value must be bracketed within comps' price range. Is it true? Thanks!

To answer your questions specifically:

1) As the AF says, just use the most appropriate comparables and describe the rationale for doing so. I implemented a AF recommenation from about a year ago based upon a brief description of each successive search for comparables:, e.g. "The initial search was based upon 1/4-mile and contract dates within 2 months of the Effective Date of this assignment in an attempt to determine whether a model match to the subject exists in the local market. Like in just about every assignment, that initial search did not reveal appropriate comps.. Consequently a supplemental search was conducted, of 1-month and 6 months prior.... That search was successful, with the SCA grid consequently populated with zzz sold comps, xxxx that are pending sale, and xxxx that are active listings" Blah, Blah, Blah.

2) The ACI Review Master that is wack includes conditions that might or might-not be pertinent--Lord only knows where some of them emanate. However, an appraiser must be sufficiently aware of industry standards to know which are and which aren't pertinent, as well as being familiar with the specific client standards expressed in the appraiser's Engagement; and if the appraiser is unable to satisfy industry and/or client standards, the reason(s) for failing to do so should be reported in order to avoid arduous follow-up conditions. IMO there's nothing more embarrassing than needing to respond to a client condition that is perfectly plausable although I forgot to describe [anything that appears to be an anomaly] a factor that I should have described in the report.

[Just me trying to avoid getting beat down justifiably; and although to be thorough requires more time, it's still less time-consuming as responding to client conditions...]

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

I respectfully disagree with you.

The AMC is not my client nor are they my supervisor of my firm. In the case I cited they did not add those additional requirements in a prominent way. Those additional requirements were at the bottom of a legal length sheet.

FTR in later assignments they removed those additional requirements from the LOE.

What I speculate they are attempting to do is make all reports fit the needs of all their clients and bypasses that re-addressing issue. Certification say any lender can use the 1004/1073 no matter who the named/identified Client is in the report. something like that. Maybe orne of our USPAP AQB members will chime in on this topic/disagreement.

'our' appraisers comes across as if I was their employee. I know 'our' is a determiner its possessive.

1. 1.
   belonging to or associate

The AMC that provides the bulk of my assignments provides a client engagement addendum with every order...although it is the same boilerplate for 90% of all assignments. I advised them that to do so appears IMO to pose a liability although the protocol never changes.

 

[George Hatch]

I respectfully disagree with you.

The AMC is not my client nor are they my supervisor of my firm. In the case I cited they did not add those additional requirements in a prominent way. Those additional requirements were at the bottom of a legal length sheet.

FTR in later assignments they removed those additional requirements from the LOE.

What I speculate they are attempting to do is make all reports fit the needs of all their clients and bypasses that re-addressing issue. Certification say any lender can use the 1004/1073 no matter who the named/identified Client is in the report. something like that. Maybe orne of our USPAP AQB members will chime in on this topic/disagreement.

'our' appraisers comes across as if I was their employee. I know 'our' is a determiner its possessive.

1. 1.
   belonging to or associate

No different in application than the internal requirements of any fee shop. Or any "supervisor" signing for a trainee. Or what any individual appraiser chooses for themself.