• 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.

can an appraiser do this?

Status
Not open for further replies.
1. Someone left the appraisal until the last minute, and it wasn't the appraiser.
2. If you're the agent, you should have caught the mold issue way ahead of time and addressed it. Again, not the appraiser's fault.
3. Yes, the appraiser can make the appraisal subject to a professional inspection and remediation. We're not qualified to determine what kind of mold it is or what type of remediation is required.

Next time be more proactive.
 
I'd like to see the picture. But after seeing the liability.com link I think the comment is good. If it's just a bleach job, someone should have done it sooner. :shrug:
 
From Fannie Mae:

16. What is the appraiser’s responsibility for reporting property condition?
The appraiser is responsible for considering all factors that have an impact on value in the development of his/her opinion of market value for the subject property. Fannie Mae requires the appraiser to express an opinion about the condition of the property on our appraisal report forms. The appraiser must report the condition of the property in factual, specific terms. We believe that an accurate description of the physical condition of the subject property is a critical element in arriving at a supportable opinion of market value, as well as in the prudent underwriting of a mortgage loan.
With the introduction of the Market Conditions Addendum, the appraiser must provide information about market conditions in the neighborhood of the subject property to provide additional support for his/her conclusions about the property’s value.

17. What is expected with regard to the appraiser’s inspection of a property?
Fannie Mae’s requirement of the appraiser’s property inspection for an appraisal based on an interior and exterior inspection is a complete visual inspection of the accessible areas of the property. The appraiser is responsible for noting in his/her report any adverse conditions (such as,
but not limited to, needed repairs; deterioration; the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, or adverse environmental conditions;) that were apparent during the inspection of the property or that he/she became aware of during the research involved in performing the appraisal.
The appraiser is expected to consider and describe the overall quality and condition of the property and identify items that require immediate repair as well as items where maintenance may have been deferred, which may or may not require immediate repair. On the other hand, an appraiser is not responsible for hidden or unapparent conditions. In addition, Fannie Mae does not consider the appraiser to be an expert in all fields, such as environmental hazards. In situations where an adverse property condition may be observed by the appraiser but the appraiser is not qualified to decide whether that condition requires immediate repair (such as the presence of mold, an active
roof leak, settlement in the foundation, etc.), the property must be appraised subject to an inspection by a qualified professional
. In such cases, the lender may need to ask the appraiser to update his or her appraisal based on the results of the inspection, in which case the appraiser would incorporate the results of the inspection and measure the impact, if any, on his or her final
opinion of market value.

18. In what situations should a property be appraised “as-is” versus “as-repaired”?
Fannie Mae permits an appraisal to be based on the “as-is” condition of the property as long as any minor conditions, such as deferred maintenance, do not affect the livability, soundness, or structural integrity of the property, and the appraiser’s opinion of value reflects the existence of these conditions. Minor conditions and deferred maintenance items include worn floor finishes or carpet, minor plumbing leaks, holes in window screens, or cracked window glass. Minor conditions and deferred maintenance typically are due to normal wear and tear from the aging process and the occupancy of the property. Such conditions generally do not rise to the level of a “required repair.”
Nevertheless, they must be reported. The appraiser must identify physical deficiencies that could affect the soundness, structural integrity, or livability of the property as part of his or her description of the physical condition of the property. These may include cracks or settlement in the foundation, water seepage, active roof leaks, curled or cupped roof shingles, inadequate electrical service or plumbing fixtures, etc. In situations where an adverse property condition may be observed by the appraiser but the appraiser
is not qualified to decide whether that condition requires immediate repair, the property must be appraised subject to an inspection by a qualified professional. In such cases, the lender must have the property inspected and any material conditions repaired before it delivers the mortgage loan to
Fannie Mae. The appraiser may be asked to update his or her appraisal based on the results of the inspection, in which case the appraiser would ncorporate the results of the inspection and measure the impact, if any, on his or her final opinion of market value.
 
I have to disagree with the appraiser, he did not observe any mold or dampness to justify his requirement, he overstepped his competency when he made a wrong conjecture.
 
The timing of closing the loan has nothing to do with reporting requirements placed on the appraiser. The lender should have ordered the appraisal much sooner as it was apparent there "could" be an issue (re: dampness) that any halfway knowledgeable property manager or Realtor should have known.
 
I have to disagree with the appraiser, he did not observe any mold or dampness to justify his requirement, he overstepped his competency when he made a wrong conjecture.

I'm confused. Did he or did he not indicate that he observed what might be mold? Or did he just add this requirement based on nothing?

In any case it bothers me when the appraiser is used as a scapegoat for things like appraisals being ordered last minute or details that a realtor or other parties involved in the deal should have been aware of beforehand. Sometimes I think realtors, borrowers, homeowners, loan officers, etc. order the appraisal knowing full well there are issues and cross their fingers hoping that either we don't notice it or do not mention it.
 
“discoloration was observed”, that’s all it said. Nothing about dampness or mold. The appraiser made himself a scapegoat with his unqualified statements, instead of stating that a qualified inspector should be consulted.
Providing a copy of the existing inspection by the buyers agent should have resolved the appraisers/lenders concerns.
 
“discoloration was observed”, that’s all it said. Nothing about dampness or mold. The appraiser made himself a scapegoat with his unqualified statements, instead of stating that a qualified inspector should be consulted.
Providing a copy of the existing inspection by the buyers agent should have resolved the appraisers/lenders concerns.

I'm still confused. The original post in this thread indicates the appraiser called for an inspection to check for mold which is exactly what you said he should have done. If "discoloration was observed" that may or may not have been mold and asking that a licensed expert come in and offer an opinion was the result then the appraiser did the right thing. If an existing inspection was/is available that specifically addresses this issue it should have been immediately provided to the appraiser so this requirement could be waived.
 
“discoloration was observed”, that’s all it said. Nothing about dampness or mold. The appraiser made himself a scapegoat with his unqualified statements, instead of stating that a qualified inspector should be consulted.
Providing a copy of the existing inspection by the buyers agent should have resolved the appraisers/lenders concerns.

Well that's easy for you to say as an agent, guess who they will come after later on if there is an issue, because I can tell you who they aren't going to go after and that's the agent. Just like when some one buys a house over market value and four years later the bank owns it, who do you think they come after, the agents involved in the sale or the appraiser? I think we all know the answer to that.

Appraisers should comment on what they see, if it's beyond their expertise they should recommend an expert in the proper field look at it. I see it happen all the time, something is wrong with the roof, plumbing, mold, etc., the appraiser comments on it and when the work is complete the lender wants the appraiser to go back to the property and then make a comment in the report that it was completed properly.

Now why in the hell would you send the appraiser back out to the property to check the work of someone when the appraiser stated to begin with that they aren't qualified to fix it. I can tell you why, because most appraisers have E&O insurance and that's who they will come after when something happens. Most agents don't have to worry about this an appraiser should only comment on what they see, what the lender or others involved in the transaction want to do after the appraiser has explained what he saw is their own decision and not the appraisers.

If the inspection by the buyers agent should have resolved the appraisers/lenders concerns, then how is that the appraiser fault, it's on the lender. You could have had the inspector write a note saying he is FULLY responsible, I'm sure he wouldn't have a problem with that now would he.
 
"Well that's easy for you to say as an agent, guess who they will come after later on if there is an issue, because I can tell you who they aren't going to go after and that's the agent. Just like when some one buys a house over market value and four years later the bank owns it, who do you think they come after, the agents involved in the sale or the appraiser? I think we all know the answer to that."

I probably have testified in court about real estate values more in the last few months than you will in a lifetime.

"Appraisers should comment on what they see, if it's beyond their expertise they should recommend an expert in the proper field look at it. I see it happen all the time, something is wrong with the roof, plumbing, mold, etc., the appraiser comments on it and when the work is complete the lender wants the appraiser to go back to the property and then make a comment in the report that it was completed properly."

I agree.

"Now why in the hell would you send the appraiser back out to the property to check the work of someone when the appraiser stated to begin with that they aren't qualified to fix it. I can tell you why, because most appraisers have E&O insurance and that's who they will come after when something happens. Most agents don't have to worry about this an appraiser should only comment on what they see, what the lender or others involved in the transaction want to do after the appraiser has explained what he saw is their own decision and not the appraisers."

Good question, why would you allow the lender to have you perform things you know nothing about and risk your E&O? BTW. you are not the only one having to pay E&O insurance, it's mandatory for agents in my state.

"If the inspection by the buyers agent should have resolved the appraisers/lenders concerns, then how is that the appraiser fault, it's on the lender. You could have had the inspector write a note saying he is FULLY responsible, I'm sure he wouldn't have a problem with that now would he."

Wasn't the appraiser made aware of the inspection and it's results?

Obviously additional info. needs to be provided by the OP to give a clearer picture.
 
Last edited:
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
Back
Top