Another ROV story

[shrubberyvaluation]

You can do as you choose however, the job is to provide a credible opinion of value in a report conatining enough detail to satisfy the requirements of the Intended Users. If you are getting that sort of revision requests, seems like there isn't enough detail in your report.

The truth is.. if you get a ROV with a ridiculous sale attached... you will write an explanation as to why you didn't consider it to be a good substitute for the subject property.... or... you will no longer do business with that Client.

So I have to address what every sale in the whole county? Do you explain why you didn't use a sale in another state when all your comps are similar in the same community to ward off a ROV?

 

[sputnam]

100% disagree. No one is out to get you. They aren't trying to punish the appraiser. They are trying to accomplish their own goals.

 

[sputnam]

So I have to address what every sale in the whole county? Do you explain why you didn't use a sale in another state when all your comps are similar in the same community to ward off a ROV?

Did anyone say that? However you DO have to address, preferably in a professional and factual manner, sales that are suggested to you in an ROV... which is what you said in the previous post.

The best way, imo, to deal with it in advance is to describe your search parameters and state the number of sales and listings you considered. I usually say something like, 'Search parameters included age, size, date of sale for single familly dwellings within the defined subject neighborhood. Twenty-seven sales and listings were considered. Four were selected for further analysis and are included in the appraisal report.' It works.

These people are not appraisers. We shouldn't expect them to think like appraisers. We also shouldn't expect them to just bow to our superior knowledge. Remember... it's your OPINION of value. Some people may have a different opinion. Our job is to provide a credible opinion. Part of that is explaining what you did and why you did it. Not just writing the minimum you can. Not using boilerplate language throughout your report.

 

[Tom4value]

So I have to address what every sale in the whole county? Do you explain why you didn't use a sale in another state when all your comps are similar in the same community to ward off a ROV?

An ROV specifies a maximum of six sales or listing/pendings…

 

[J Grant]

100% disagree. No one is out to get you. They aren't trying to punish the appraiser. They are trying to accomplish their own goals.

Give us some credit. Nobody here wrote that they are out to get us. I used the term punishment to describe the result,I never said there was a deliberate attempt to use an ROV to punish.

However, some of the worst AMC's or lenders have used the ROV or a review in a punitive manner, which is why there was a reform to change it to only one ROV instead of multiple ROVs and limit the # of sales sent

It is ridiculous to pretend that a system for an ROV, which comes into play almost solely when a target value or sale price is not met, is neutral. An ROV can take several hours or time to research the sales sent, explain why they are not used, add that to the report, send it, and it is intrusive, interrupting other work in progress, as well as stressful since the client needs it done in X time frame.

 

[J Grant]

An ROV specifies a maximum of six sales or listing/pendings…

Addressing six sales is time-consuming. It should stop at 3 or 4 sales. Of course, not allowing it at all would be better.

 

[Hondo]

Addressing six sales is time-consuming. It should stop at 3 or 4 sales. Of course, not allowing it at all would be better.

Allowing an apprasier to charge a fee similar to a 1004D fee for the service would be better. If they had to pay for wasting our time would stop a lot of it.

 

[J Grant]

Allowing an apprasier to charge a fee similar to a 1004D fee for the service would be better. If they had to pay for wasting our time would stop a lot of it.

agree 100%

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

The key to not getting ROVs is to hit the bullseye. My last ROV was on a townhouse where all 3 comps were on the same street and warranted no adjustments. ROV sales were new construction miles away, subject was about 10 years old as well as the comps in the report.

A client I had starting out (that I stopped doing work for as soon as possible) sent me an ROV on an REO subject. One of the sales they wanted me to consider was a new construction 5 miles away. This was not a rural area. I can't imagine more detail in my report would of changed that.

If you are not getting ROVs you are either hitting the bullseye or you got great clients keeping the garbage from you.

Seems logical to me that an appraiser can ask for the ROV to be dismissed if it appears that the recommendations were not "vetted," which is a ROV requirement. Whether that can be based on an email, or whether the appraiser needs to create a very tme-consuming formal report just to say "Nope" is unknown. ?????

 

[shrubberyvaluation]

An ROV specifies a maximum of six sales or listing/pendings…

Right, but how do I anticipate them asking me to review some sale 20 miles away when all my comps are in the subject's community. No amount of explaining will prevent that.