• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Am I being too nit-picky

Status
Not open for further replies.

CANative

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Professional Status
Retired Appraiser
State
California
Desk review of an FHA appraisal. Comps good, value is reasonable and supported. But, IMO, the report doesn't meet FHA requirements. This is from my supplemental comment page.

Deficiencies noted in the original report (scope of work for FHA/HUD assignments)

Intended use/users statement: The report under review did not identify the intended use as being to support underwriting requirements for an FHA-insured mortgage. Reference: ML2005-48, Appendix D, Page D-7. HUD/FHA was not identified as an intended user. Reference: ML2005-48, Appendix D, Page D-8.

Photos: The photos in the report under review did not include front and rear taken at opposite angles to show all sides of the dwelling. The street scene does not show a portion of the subject lot. Reference: ML2005-48, Appendix D, Page D-13.

Highest and best use: Support and rational for the opinion of highest and best use was not summarized. Reference: USPAP 2-2(b)(ix).

Location: The location was marked as "Suburban" in the report under review when it is clearly "Urban" (located in a city). ML2005-48, Appendix D, Page D-17.

Neighborhood boundaries: The report under review has described neighborhood boudaries as "West of Hwy 101 and east of the hills." This description is too general and includes many neighborhoods within the city which have different characteristics, appeal and property values. Due to limited sales in any given year in this small, incorpoated city located in an otherwise rural region, it is common practice by appraisers to included sales data from competing neighborhoods. The report under review has used such data and this is acceptable. The neighborhood should have been described in more detail and narrative comments used to describe competing locations as being a part of the overall market. ML2005-48, Appendix D, Page D-18.

View: Page 2 of the report under review has reported the view as none. This is unacceptable for an FHA appraisal report. ML2005-48, Appendix D, Page D-19.

Functional Utility: The report under review lists "Functional Utility" as "Three bedroom" and "similar" for the comparable sales. The protocol for this field is to enter "Average" "Superior" or "Inferior." ML2005-48, Appendix D, Page D-31.

Estimated REL: The report under review has reported the REL as being 70 years. This is not a reasonable number for a structure of "Average" quality that is already over 50 years old. Published cost sources such as Marshall & Swift state that the total economic life of a residence of average quality is 50-60 years.

Lead based paint: The scope of work of this review assignment did not include a physical observation of the subject property or the comparable sales and listings. The reviewer has observed digital color photos of the subject. It appears that there are defective paint surfaces to the wood trim work of the residence at the rear elevation above the concrete block siding and defective paint surfaces to the door of the detached garage. This may simply be a matter of the way the photographs appear in a .pdf file or it may be that the condition was not reported correctly. The reviewer cannot determine this without an onsite inspection. If there are defective paint surfaces than inspection and repair of the condition is required.
 

Mike Kennedy

Elite Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
New York
Failure to Adhere to Assignment Conditions (AO-30)

Failure to recognize and adhere to applicable assignment conditions violates one or more of the USPAP requirements previously identified.
  • An appraiser who represents that an assignment is or will be completed in compliance with applicable assignment conditions and who then knowingly fails to comply with those assignment conditions violates the ETHICS RULE.

    An appraiser who unintentionally fails to comply with or fails to recognize those assignment conditions violates the COMPETENCY RULE.

    An appraiser who fails to develop assignment results in accordance with the assignment conditions necessary for credible assignment results violates the SCOPE OF WORK RULE and STANDARD 1.
An appraiser who fails to report assignment results in accordance with the assignment conditions that are necessary to enable intended users to understand the report properly violates STANDARD 2.
 

Kevin Mc

Elite Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
New York
Desk review of an FHA appraisal. Comps good, value is reasonable and supported. But, IMO, the report doesn't meet FHA requirements. This is from my supplemental comment page.

I think you are. Nothing sounds glaringly amiss and by your own words the comps are good and it is supported and reasonable. That is the scope of a desk review no? While there may be additional items that you don't agree with, or have verbiage issues with, they certainly don't seem to have an adverse affect on the report. I would tone it down.
 

stefan olafson

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2003
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
North Dakota
Greg,

I believe you have done what your scope of work describes you do. What it looks like you have is an appraisal completed by a competent appraiser who understands value, the market, and the property type. The appraisal does not appear to be compliant with standard 2-2(b)(1-11).

It's your call as to how much is incorporated into your review, I'd send it in just like you've written it up. The value is supported but the methodology is incorrect or incomplete.
 

Mountain Man

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
Georgia
Nit picky? No, the word anal comes to mind. :)
:rof:
 

CANative

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Professional Status
Retired Appraiser
State
California
Anal? lol

How can a report be acceptable for it's intended use if it doesn't meet the scope of work requirements?

I checked the box "Accept with changes"
 

Kevin Mc

Elite Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
New York
Thats cool.

I checked the box "Accept with changes"

Stated your items but basically said the report was ok with comps,support etc....can't do anything more than that. I got the intial feeling you were gearing up for a lynching......:rof:
 

CANative

Thread Starter
Elite Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Professional Status
Retired Appraiser
State
California
I never lynch an appraiser. I just supply the rope.
 

Scott Kibler

Elite Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
Illinois
FWIW: Some of the FHA field reviews I get are due to the report failing a desk review over protocol violations such as those.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Top

AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks