That is the basis of my post: Literally . . . judged by whom, with what tangible implications for failing to do so correctly?
I had clear language in a report I prepared about 1996 or so. Six years later the borrowers sued the bank and yours truly along with the chicken company that had the contract. We were sued under RICO, Packers and Livestock Act, and the Sherman Anti-trust Act. My appraisal was prepared 4 days AFTER the sale had closed. The bank had forgot to order the appraisal. I actually had a copy of the deed in my report.
None of that keeps you from being sued. None. It does mean you are more likely to prevail. As for the board, don't worry about it because a complaint is automatically investigated to some level. And they don't care about the issue of "intended user", they are looking for bad USPAP wordsmithing.
In my case, it was ultimately dismissed after being rejected by a FEDERAL court 3 times, then appealed to St. Louis. I sent a lawyer to St. Louis to speak in my defense for a whole 7 and one - half minutes. Figure $1k per minute....Ultimately, after 2 years of stress, the court ruled that the statutes of limitations had run out. The "intended user" defense was never raised by the court. The fact, the report was after the date the property sold was never raised. RICO was laughed out of court. Packer and Livestock was ignored. Etc.
The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the market value of the subject property, as defined in this report, on behalf of the referenced client as the intended user of this report. The intended use of the appraisal is to assist the client, as the intended user of this report, in evaluating the subject property. This report is addressed to a specific use for a specific intended user. The use of this appraisal by anyone other than the stated intended user, or for any other use than the stated intended use, is discouraged. Any person other than the named intended users above are advised to seek an independent opinion of value and not rely upon this report. The appraiser is asserting the right of privity. This report is the intellectual property of the appraiser. The appraiser is not responsible for any other use nor is responsible to either the borrower or anyone not named under the section above titled "Intended User(s) of Report."The borrower(s) have not been identified as "intended users."
Read Varner v. Peterson Farms, 371 F.3d 1011, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database
casetext.com
The Varners complain that Decatur Bank, Peterson Farms, and Shields committed fraud and civil conspiracy by enticing potential poultry growers to contract with them by providing false and misleading information in documents and through representations by employees of the companies.
community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.
