Field Reviews

[Michael Schendel]

Ok here is mine, I just got an order to the field review on. This is by far the ugliest review I have done.

All they e-mailed was the appraisal and nothing else other than the field review request.

5 comparables were used.

Comp #1 sold for $390,000 adjusted to $501,075
Comp #2 sold for $532,000 adjusted to $672,950
Comp #3 sold for $525,000 adjusted to $696,250
Comp #4 sold for $625,000 adjusted to $722,150
Comp #5 sold for $760,000 adjusted to $903,600

If this was your adjusted values what would you conclude?

And this is just the begining of the review. I was pretty shocked!!!

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

The appraiser let his 5 year old do the appraisal?

 

[Mountain Man]

The worst one I have seen so far was one comp didn't even exist. The other 2 were my neighbors houses, that I know didn't sell, but were used as comps. Found out after some investigation, they had just refinanced. <_< Yeap, you guess it........ the appraiser added 20% for a reported "sales price"!
Sent it in, and the state liked that one so much, even the FBI got in on it. The end result, after all the dust had settled, was a minor slap on the wrist fee, and order for some CE. Claimed his unlicensed trainee stole his signature password, and was running around doing appraisals. Personally, I knew better.... had seen his work for tooooo long.

 

[Marty Skolnik]

This is what drives me nuts... it shows that the original appraiser doesn't really understand buyers and sellers.... The 5 sales prices all end in 000s -- the market is saying that buyers and sellers aren't "precise". However, the appraiser makes his/her adjustments down to the 5 and 10 dollar level... He/She is saying that his/her numbers are more precise than the actual market participants... FOOOEY!!!!


It shows me that the appraiser doesn't understand the nature of what adjustments are, nor understands how buyers and sellers interact to arrive at a negotiated sales price.


just my 2cents

Marty Skolnik
Baltimore, MD

 

[Mountain Man]

BTW, you going to tell us where it was reconciled??? $904,000?
Oh, they had Sweat Equity.... right? They be sweatin’ waiting for the loan to be okayed?

 

[Ghost Rider]

I had one like that about 3 years ago - Had across the baord view adjustments of something like $225,000 for view where the total appraised value was $550,000 - I saw the report, and my eyes popped out of my head when I saw it. I went out, and saw the property, it was basicially built into the side of a mountain, with these sweeping 270 degree panoramic views, just spectacular. I took some time with it, and dug through a lot of sales, both recent and historic to see what that kind of view was worth - there was actually VERY good historic data to determine the value of the view, and suprisingly, the adjustment the guy made was actually CONSERVATIVE based on what I was seeing. I disclosed what I had found, and agreed with the value - sometimes, just cause it looks ugly on paper doesn't mean the value isn't right.

 

[Nancy Wyatt]

They can get so nasty that all I do is sigh now. Its just to common.

Many have no clue how to do a HUD home. Don't even know the difference.

Most use comps outside the immediate neighborhood.

Few weeks ago had someone combine 2 parcels (one was a conservation easement)

Most don't correctly show the condition of the comps

Have had some use as comps on houses I've owned and sold-Now thats fun.

One of my appraisers called me today regarding a review she was doing. She said "I just don't know why he didn't consider these recent comps in the immediate area under 1 million" She knew.

It's so nice to get a good one. Another review just came in. Think I'll go take a peek.

 

[kim grant]

I've been waiting to vent this one....................my recent worst report reviewed: A duplex unit

1. Neighborhood description and boundaries depict a property in downtown San Francisco, 35 miles north of our subject which is located in Sunnyvale. Location map provided in this report also is of a property and comps in downtown San Francisco. Value ranges and predominant also, from downtown San Francisco.

2. Active listings provided have year built on the Site Area line of the grid, Site Area on the GBA line of the grid and MLS# on the Year built area of the grid.

3. Subject has one unit that 1400 SF and one that is 740 SF. Rental data has range of rent covering both ranges of SF, howver, the final market rent concluded by the appraiser is for 2-1400 SF units, not 1- 1400 and 1-740. The income approach is ruined by this mistake.

No matter because #3. Two of the three sales comps provided were reported to be on the MLS thus open market when in fact, neither property was ever listed and do not appear to be sales, rather refi's AND, the transaction values reported in public records were Comp#1 850k transaction value, sales prices reported on the comparison grid 925k and comp#3 825k transasction value, sales price reported to be 950k on the sales grid. Value concluded at 950k. Comps reported to be 1/3 to 1/2 miles in distances: reality, 2-3 miles. Highest sale of a duplex in subject's market area: 750k

Not the worst I have seen in my career but the worst this year!

--Kim

 

[Claude From NY]

Well, there were a few that were absolute and complete frauds. But that doesn't count.

The ugliest one would have to be an appraisal of a duplex unit completed by a designated member of a well known appraisal organization. Excellent comparables within 1 mile of the subject were completely ignored. The appraisal contained sales from over 30 and 40 miles away and came complete with a multi page tome on how sales were best available. Funny thing is the reported value was right on.

 

[Otis Key]

So many and so little time.

Try doing one where you're reviewing the review of an appraisal and find that the reviewer, of a well known appraisal organization, violates the scope, purpose and intent of the review, as well as the rules, regs, etc., of the organization.

Not the absolute worst but one of the more recent. Bet that person never really thought anyone would review the review.