Blind Squirrel and Acorns

[Tim Hicks (Texas)]

Typically, the reviewer does not "request changes" to an original report. (unless that is part of the assignment)

The review will address, section by section , items in original report, and if reviewer finds the info under review contrary to fact, or deficient /misleading, the reviewer addresses that in appropriate section of review.

It is up to client to ask that changes, if any, be made to original report .

Typically, a person in the OP's position can request changes to the appraisal report. Have you not been reading all his topics?

Appraisers tend to think that lenders and AMCs are actually doing real standard 3 reviews when they are getting stips back from their client. These are "reviewers" in job description, not appraisers doing full standard 3 reviews. It happens way more than the actual standard 3 review.

 

[George Hatch]

Just by way of inserting a tangent here, there is as much flexibility for what comprises an appraisal review as there is for what comprises an appraisal.

If appraisers can comply with the minimums in SR1/SR2 with the minimal workproduct (and they can) then the same is true for reviewers. Don't use the Fannie review forms as a benchmark for an SR3-compliant review.

 

[CANative]

The stupid Fannie review forms tend to steer the appraiser.

 

[George Hatch]

One aspect touched upon earlier is that it's the intended users who ultimately decide what's acceptable for their usage. They choose their own tolerance levels. That's how nitpicking an appraisal report beyond what's meaningful to that user's decision becomes counterproductive and even adverse to the reviewer's credibility.

Reviewers need to identify what passes for "meaningful" to the intended users of their reviews. The concept of the perfected appraisal report is only sometimes appropriate.

It's easy to envision a review that points out various errors or omissions of a trivial nature as a CYA for the reviewer but then concludes to the original report still being deemed acceptable for the client's use per their own policies. If a client thinks a 5% variance between the appraiser's opinion and the reviewer's opinion is still acceptable for their use then that's on them, not the reviewer.

We express an informed opinion; we don't make the clients' decision for them.

 

[timd354]

One aspect touched upon earlier is that it's the intended users who ultimately decide what's acceptable for their usage. They choose their own tolerance levels. That's how nitpicking an appraisal report beyond what's meaningful to that user's decision becomes counterproductive and even adverse to the reviewer's credibility.

Reviewers need to identify what passes for "meaningful" to the intended users of their reviews. The concept of the perfected appraisal report is only sometimes appropriate.

It's easy to envision a review that points out various errors or omissions of a trivial nature as a CYA for the reviewer but then concludes to the original report still being deemed acceptable for the client's use per their own policies. If a client thinks a 5% variance between the appraiser's opinion and the reviewer's opinion is still acceptable for their use then that's on them, not the reviewer.

We express an informed opinion; we don't make the clients' decision for them.

Different intended users of appraisal reports have different needs and that is something that some appraisers have a very difficult time understanding.

 

[djd09]

Everything about his posts lead me to believe that he is/was an appraiser. Look at his very first post and the references he makes are all about standards 1 and 2.

djd, from your posts I have the opinion you wouldn't know a well supported and explained appraisal if it bit you in the backside. But that is just my opinion based on your posts.

CG , I have a licensed and can verify it. If the op can verify a previous license I will apolgize. Dont hold your breath for it. Lets make a bet and see if the op had one. if not then he misled on the previous post. my anaylsis vs your anaylsis.

Now for the insult. It is laughable that a Professional would accuse another of not comprehending the "Profession" based on posts on a website. I guess the motto on here is if you disagree and do not have any facts then degrade the other.

And if you like to respond please quit cherry picking only parts of my posts.

 

[ctapraser]

i did not want to say this but. this guy is a shill. crying about the appraisals. boo hoo. so is joan. there both jokes and not even appraisers. if I was loaning $100,000 ++++ and thought the appraisal may be lacking, I would pull the money out and order a second appraisal you cheap @@@@.

CG , I have a licensed and can verify it. If the op can verify a previous license I will apolgize. Dont hold your breath for it. Lets make a bet and see if the op had one. if not then he misled on the previous post. my anaylsis vs your anaylsis.

Now for the insult. It is laughable that a Professional would accuse another of not comprehending the "Profession" based on posts on a website. I guess the motto on here is if you disagree and do not have any facts then degrade the other.

And if you like to respond please quit cherry picking only parts of my posts.

My bold,

I find the dichotomy of these two posts very amusing.

 

[J Grant]

Different intended users of appraisal reports have different needs and that is something that some appraisers have a very difficult time understanding.

Regardless of the different needs of individuals, appraisers have an obligation, per USPAP and professional standards, ( as well as their own standards) to develop an adequate SOW and derive credible and supported assignment results .

Do some clients/users have a very difficult time understanding that?.

Lender purpose appraisals have additional users and intended users from the original client or agent, such as FHA, Fannie, Freddie, VA, and appraisers have to meet their particular needs/requirements as well.

 

[timd354]

Regardless of the different needs of individuals, appraisers have an obligation, per USPAP and professional standards, ( as well as their own standards) to develop an adequate SOW and derive credible and supported assignment results .

Do some clients/users have a very difficult time understanding that?.

Lender purpose appraisals have additional users and intended users from the original client or agent, such as FHA, Fannie, Freddie, VA, and appraisers have to meet their particular needs/requirements as well.

I don't deny that some clients have a difficult time understanding USPAP. However, many appraisers clearly do not understand that whether the SOW is adequate and the assignment results are meaningful is measured in the context of the intended use. I am constantly amazed by the number of dopey appraisers who don't get that...and by the number of appraisers who have obviously never bothered to read and fully comprehend what USPAP actually says.

 

[J Grant]

What would an intended use be that allows for poor assignment results? I get that there are drive bys, or desktop products etc, and to a degree the level of research or narrative can be less extensive and some products don't involve an inspection or sketch...but that is format.....what intended uses of an appraisal are so casual or superficial that it relives appraiser of responsibility? I'd love to work on those assignments!