Peter LeQuire
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Professional Status
- Retired Appraiser
- State
- Tennessee
Huh? I got couple pages of boilerplate in my report too. I don't know what you are getting all defensive about.
I don't think I was being defensive. I happen to have experienced years of having to resend, or clarify, or otherwise waste time and band width sending explanations or clarification of factual information or conclusions that are - at least in my opinion - adequately explained in the initial report. The request to explain why one three months' period reporting fewer sales, or lower rates of absorption, or lower median prices does not constitute a trend is - IMO - silly, defensive, and inconsistent with review by someone with any training at all. But it comes up regularly and frequently, and I've a hot key generating "boiler plate" to deflect having to address that matter de novo for each report
We owe lenders and their agents in appraisal management professional reports of accurate analysis, clearly reported and adequately supported. They owe appraisers at least semi-professional review, a knowledgeable review, and reasonable requests for follow up. We're not remedial English prose consultants, reading coaches or psychiatrists hired to cure reviewers' insecurities. I understand the frustrations of AMC managers and PMI underwriting managers - I really do. But the burden of providing knowledgeable review is theirs, not mine.
