Client Asking For Response To Rebuttal To Be Placed In Original Report

[bnmappraisal]

Why is it any more difficult for the appraiser to place the response in the report as opposed to via a separate letter?

Tim, see my response in post #32
But to answer your question directly, as DTB mentions, the appraiser has to open the file, unsign it, note in the addendum, etc (I'm not going through the step by step, you know the steps).

 

[J Grant]

Twice in the past years ..once an amount so nominal I might not have bothered, the other time for whatever reason I did miss a few good sales and raised the value a fair amount. It was a refinance, in a country club community with prices all over the place. The remainder over the years has been a waste of time with them sending sales already in the report or that are preposterous.

The only value in seeing the jaw dropping outlandishly bad, and generally vastly superior "comps" forwarded from RE agents is to show how poorly advised and informed most buyers are, despite all the information available they believe the hogwash RE agents tell them
Except for one occasiony, I have NEVER in nearly two decades seen a RE agent submit as a CMA they showed buyers or include for appraiser consideration a sold for less than their Sales contract, even if it is the most similar to the subject and sold yesterday across the street. (same for a listing/pending that does not serve their purpose) They simply ignore it, as if it does not exist.

 

[djd09]

Twice in the past years .

How did you miss better sales? And what is a nominal amount? If it was so nominal why did you change it? Number hitting?

On a side note we have been compared twice in threads. Do you think there is a comparison?

 

[J Grant]

Just a bad day...I missed them I am not perfect...it was a huge community with a large number of sales, almost too many...

nominal amount who knows...probably was a waste of time to change the value in that case ( I can't remember it was years ago, like 5k on a 300k property, made no difference to anything)

 

[The Warrior Monk]

I wonder in all the reconsideration of values that occurred how many appraiser actually switch the value. Anyone?

I have reviewed reports that have egregious errors that should've had the values changed. Most involved the improper selection of comps. For example, new, very-high-quality residences in other neighborhoods are not an appropriate comparables when a plethora of sales older homes similar to the subject already exist. Or in some cases the appraiser completely missed a factor that significantly affects value, and dug in an refused to acknowledge the impact on value after it was noted (e.g., subdivisible waterfront property in a densely develop residential neighborhood). These were real errors that any reasonable appraiser would recognize, and the response (rightfully) was to remove the appraiser from the approval list.

 

[residentialguy]

would you redo your report to convey this?

OP, you really should have handled this differently.
First off: Make them show the reason why their comps are superior to yours
Second: Charge them at least $75 per each review plus a $75 trip charge.

Do those 2 things and you'll find that the lender will send it back to the agent and never ask you to do it.

 

[jay trotta]

OP, you really should have handled this differently.
First off: Make them show the reason why their comps are superior to yours
Second: Charge them at least $75 per each review plus a $75 trip charge.

Do those 2 things and you'll find that the lender will send it back to the agent and never ask you to do it.

RG - Support for your thoughts can be found hear; (break out the rollsmobile brother) snowglobe library items:

FNMA LL 2015-02 clearly states: "Before asking the appraiser to consider any alternative sales, it is imperative that the lender analyze the relevance of the sale and determine if the use of such sale would result in any material change to the appraisal report". Therefore, if the appraiser is requested to review any other sales after the effective date, the appraiser will only accept the order to review the sale(s) if the following two (2) conditions are met:

1) A summary submitted from the lender/client or AMC showing their analysis supporting the premise that their sales are superior to that of the sales used in this report, with the understanding that closer proximity or more recent date of the sale does not mean it is a better indicator of value, as clarified above.

2) The lender/client must agree to pay a fee of $50* per sale reviewed, plus a minimal $75* inspection trip fee, which may be greater depending on mileage and drive time incurred.

*These fees will be waived and the report will be revised to include additional sales IF they are found by the appraiser to be superior to the sales used in this report and their use results in a material change to the appraisal report.

 

[residentialguy]

RG - Support for your thoughts can be found hear; (break out the rollsmobile brother) snowglobe library items:

FNMA LL 2015-02 clearly states: "Before asking the appraiser to consider any alternative sales, it is imperative that the lender analyze the relevance of the sale and determine if the use of such sale would result in any material change to the appraisal report". Therefore, if the appraiser is requested to review any other sales after the effective date, the appraiser will only accept the order to review the sale(s) if the following two (2) conditions are met:

1) A summary submitted from the lender/client or AMC showing their analysis supporting the premise that their sales are superior to that of the sales used in this report, with the understanding that closer proximity or more recent date of the sale does not mean it is a better indicator of value, as clarified above.

2) The lender/client must agree to pay a fee of $50* per sale reviewed, plus a minimal $75* inspection trip fee, which may be greater depending on mileage and drive time incurred.

*These fees will be waived and the report will be revised to include additional sales IF they are found by the appraiser to be superior to the sales used in this report and their use results in a material change to the appraisal report.

Damn...I like your style, brother!

 

[residentialguy]

Here is what I say:
1. We are obligated to take a look at data presented by the client. That "obligation" (IMO) is not without its limits, but a reconsideration within a reasonable time frame would fall under this category.
2. When I say "obligated" I mean we have a responsibility to look at the data and determine if there is anything in it that warrants a change. That is the function of the reconsideration; not "changing" anything but determining if the data warrants any changes.

Realtor is disputing value and has provided comps that are over 45% larger in sf along with comps from higher end neighborhoods.

@Denis DeSaix
Sorry, my friend....but requesting the appraiser to look at comps that are 45% larger in higher end neighborhoods goes well past those "limits". This is way above the high road; this is so high that you'll need a parachute and 2 year supply of Oxygen to get down to Heaven. If the lender wants us to do that, then the lender is "OBLIGATED" to pay us for that additional work order, which is way beyond the original SOW order. This is nothing short of the lender trying to pressure the appraiser for higher value. Highly inappropriate and should be reported. Frank-Dodd isn't dead yet.

 

[jay trotta]

As I had noted, there is a Lender specific rule to address the issue; that is the Due Diligence required of the Lender/AMC and if they want to jump on that boat, they need paddles, motor or whatever else keeps them going against the current.
The problem with all this regulatory stuff, is that there is so much, actually too much "Hear Say" and requires one to research the BS floating around the Industry today. We all may need an assistant, one or two days a week, just to keep up with what is actually Required.