1004D:Major Form

[Marcia Langley]

You could also tell them that if they wanted an appraisal as of an old date you could accept that assignment but a retroactive appraisal would cost more than an appraisal with a current effective date.

It sounds to me like this client is purposely seeking a new appraisal in their name but trying to weasel on the ethics and the fee.

 

[Couch Potato]

Ask the client questions instead of what form you want, then it is your decision of how and what form to use to reply to with the information they are seeking.

Yes. Then come to the forum and ask, "What form do I use?"

 

[Webbed Feet]

I verified with the lender and they say a recertification of value as you describe as this is what they want:

The appraiser’s definition of "recertification of value" as described in USPAP states: "A Recertification of Value is performed to confirm whether or not the conditions of a prior appraisal have been met … It does not change the effective date of the value opinion".

They are not asking for a new effective date. The definition above is what they are only in need of. Please advise when you can provide this. m2:

Dear Potential Client,

One more time! ... The original appraisal report had no appraiser required conditions! It was presented to you in a manner that is called "As-Is" with no "Subject To" conditions required. So please either specify the specific "conditions" this lender wants specified to have been met or not ... or have whoever you are communicating with at this lender personally phone me directly at my office. Because I strongly suspect something very important is getting lost in the translation between the three of us. It is my experience that the direct cause of any lender saying a appraisal report is "too old" is the time period that has passed since that appraisal report's effective date and today. The lender is almost always asking for a new effective date, a new market analysis, and a new opinion of value current to today's date.

Thank You,

Webbed.

 

[Webbed Feet]

<..... snip......>It sounds to me like this client is purposely seeking a new appraisal in their name but trying to weasel on the ethics and the fee.

Ms. Langley,

Sounds that way to me too. At this point I would inform them I want to see exactly what this lender is requesting directly from the lender to me. That I want to communicate directly with the person at the lender that is hiding in the background with this client trying to interpret everything as a go between. The client's staff is either playing games, or they don't know what the ding dong they are doing.

Webbed.

 

[Marcia Langley]

I agree with you guys. It's a no-win situation to argue with a client about nomenclature. If the contact person can't understand the logic the only recourse is to speak directly with the underwriter.

Scrapping back and forth with an illinformed contact person will only cause more hard feelings.

 

[OSU Beavers]

I send them the page of the ACLB letter on ROVs and they finally get it.

 

[Webbed Feet]

I send them the page of the ACLB letter on ROVs and they finally get it.

 

[OSU Beavers]

Or maybe not. They emailed today wanting to make sure they get the same value before ordering a second appraisal.

 

[Marcia Langley]

Aw, geez. Those people need to get an ethic.

 

[OSU Beavers]

"Oh and can we pay you out of closing?"