Don't People check their reports?

[Tim Hicks (Texas)]

Ed, I COMPLETELY agree with your post #22.

Ed, I COMPLETELY disagree with your post #22. I think I will go read what what you posted now.

I have no problems with trainees reviewing reports for learning purposes under PROPER supervision. However, when I say proper, I mean the supervisor better be doing his own review and just checking the trainees work instead of letting the trainee do the review and scanning the trainees work. There are too many nuances and tricks in the appraisal industry for any trainee to sniff out some BS and be competent in certain segments of some markets.

What happens when the original appraiser rebuts a review done by a trainee with more detailed factual analysis because the original appraiser knows the market in more detail and knows more about the trainees data than the trainee?

We see this all the time on the forum. Reviewers or checklisters providing what they think are better sales, when they don't really know if they are better or not. Many times they are not.

Heck, in this market, you can have two sales a matter of two blocks away and the market for one block will be dramatically different than the other block. Yet, they will have the same subdivision name. Trainees and checklisters will not recognize this.

If you are doing reviews, you better know the market as well or better than the person you are reviewing or your credibility can be shot full of holes. Trainees may not be able to handle many review assignments for this very reason.

Plus, you have to be able to spot the magical skippies of the world who don't make adjustments to stay within guidelines and make vague comments so nobody can be sure of the true condition of the subject or the comparable sales. They can be vague and the home can be immaculate and the nicest home in the neighborhood or it can be much, much less. The problem starts is when it is a very nice home and the reviewer assumes it is not because of the vague comments in the appraisal. The most important thing is the true value of the property for your client and you can do yourself in by under valuing a property in your review just because you did not personally see the property. Sometimes you can sniff a rat out, sometimes skippy covers his tracks too well. It is up to an experienced appraiser to make the right call when reviewing. Trainees can not possibly be prepared for this situation in every instance.

 

[Financially Feasible]

Ed, I COMPLETELY agree with your post #22.

Thanks, Tim. I'd like to take this a small step further, if I may. I have not yet begun to persue my Certified General (I have taken all of the classes, though). Before I even start any sort of apprenticeship, I have had the good fortune to get my hands on a half dozen or so CG/MAI reports that I have studied front to back. It didn't matter to me what the subject was, I was more concerned in format type, order of analysis, how the three approaches to value were applied, what kind of pictures/maps/sketches/etc were given, how the reconciliations were reconciled... etc., etc. I'll admit, I'm only used to form reporting and the only "narrative" that I've ever written was for the SRA demo-alternative class (please, no thread hijacking! :icon_mrgreen. So, in reality, I don't really have any experience with writing a commercial narrative appraisal. So, where do I learn? Certainly, I will learn from a mentor when I get one. However, in the interim, I am "reviewing" any commercial report that I can get my hands on. Now, I realize that I am not "reviewing" the report in a way that Standard 3 requires, rather, for my own personal learning experience... but I would think that a mentor would give a trainee a report to review just to see how his/her thought process worked in looking at another person's work and how they picked up on mistakes or good portions of the report. It's all learning. Now, I'm not advocating that a trainee sign off on a review, but I would certainly give one to a trainee (if I ever decided to have one which I have absolutely no intentions about having one... ever) to review and to "learn" from.

To me... having a trainee "review" reports, in some fashion, is like having multiple mentors (each original appraiser is a "mentor") - you have good ones and bad ones... but you can LEARN from each of them.

As Mr. Evans says in his signature: "you do not know what you do not know"!

 

[Financially Feasible]

Ed, I COMPLETELY disagree with your post #22. I think I will go read what what you posted now.

Tim - I think that we were posting at the same time. Believe it or not, I think that we generally are in agreement on the trainee reviewer issue. As I said in my most recent post, I am NOT an advocate of having a trainee DO and SIGN OFF on a review. If I were a mentor, I would give a copy of the original appraisal to myself and to my trainee and would have the trainee report back to me with what they thought about the report, the sales used, any new sales (if applicable), etc. This would be purely for their educational edification... but I would not let a trainee sign off and submit any review to any of my clients for the reasons that you specified in your most recent post. I agree that 9.9 times out of 10, the original appraiser will know more about the market area and the sales than any trainee (although there ARE some exceptions!). However, like I said, I would want to get my trainees used to what it takes to make a good review... and not just in sitting behind a desk a "checklisting" either! I would take them out when I went on my review inspection to look at the subject, the original comps, the new comps (if any), how/if/why the original appraiser missed the external obsolescence next door to the subject (RR tracks, major airport, industrial park, etc) and how this has an impact on value, etc., etc. This is how they learn! Again, and I don't think that I can reiterate this enough, I believe that it is very important to teach trainees the "art" of reviewing... I would just never let them sign off on a review!

*Whew!* After having said that... it's official... I am NEVER having a trainee! :laugh:

 

[Michigan CG]

Ed, I COMPLETELY disagree with your post #22. I think I will go read what what you posted now.

Some people think they are comedians......

Ed, I couldn't agree more with posts 32 and 33 also.