Found Health & safety violations on 1004D; Different appraiser did the original report

[Steve Pendleton]

I received a rush 1004D assignment this morning for a FHA SFR. Original appraisal was subject to installation of a CO detector. When I got there the CO detector had been installed but two of the bedrooms were missing smoke detectors and the interior cover for the circuit breaker box wa not properly installed. I told the AMC I couldn’t approve the 1004D. The AMC asked me if the CO detector had been installed? I relied that it had. I’m concerned that they are going to tell me I have to approve if the original conditions were satisfied. What would you do?

 

[TerryRohrer]

If your engagement letter was about the CO detector, I would report, "Yes", conditions have been addressed, and would add a very clear statement about the other conditions that concern you. That should protect you and let them ignore the warning/facts at their own peril.

 

[shrubberyvaluation]

I received a rush 1004D assignment this morning for a FHA SFR. Original appraisal was subject to installation of a CO detector. When I got there the CO detector had been installed but two of the bedrooms were missing smoke detectors and the interior cover for the circuit breaker box wa not properly installed. I told the AMC I couldn’t approve the 1004D. The AMC asked me if the CO detector had been installed? I relied that it had. I’m concerned that they are going to tell me I have to approve if the original conditions were satisfied. What would you do?

What was your original engagement? If it was just the CO detector, say its completed. I would put CYA language, the appraiser does not guarantee anything other than the CO detector was installed. Since its FHA I'd make sure to relay that it was not in your engagement to look for health and safety issues and you cannot comment on whether or not it meets their minimum requirements, if it was part of your engagement to do an FHA level inspection then I hope you did the full inspection and point it out.

 

[CGinMN]

Did you do a full FHA inspection, including testing the appliances, HVAC, etc? If not, I would carefully craft my comments to explicitly state what I didn't do or conclude.

 

[Steve Pendleton]

Thanks guys. I reviewed the engagement letter again. They are only looking for completion on the CO detector. I'll advise that it was installed and note the other conditions.

 

[Mike Ault]

Here's how I handled a similar situation the other day. Client ordered another 1004D about three days later to ensure that the tank had been covered.

All repair & inspection requirements of the original appraisal have been completed in a satisfactory manner. Although not addressed on the original appraisal report, the septic tank has apparently been replaced but left uncovered and currently presents a safety hazard.

 

[sputnam]

Just write the report detailing what you found. Let the Client sort it out. If they must have a 'clean' report, they can require that the issues be dealt with and you get to reinspect (and charge another fee). Mike Ault's approach is a good one.

 

[Tom D]

I never, never, do someone else's 1004d. Unless it's my better clients, as a favor. You don't have to be involved in the original appraisal to be sued by an attorney blanketing anyone involved.

Requested smoke detectors has been installed. I was not involved in previous appraisal done on the subject, no warranties are implied, or given. by this statement. yada yada yada.

 

[The Bob]

I received a rush 1004D assignment this morning for a FHA SFR. Original appraisal was subject to installation of a CO detector. When I got there the CO detector had been installed but two of the bedrooms were missing smoke detectors and the interior cover for the circuit breaker box wa not properly installed. I told the AMC I couldn’t approve the 1004D. The AMC asked me if the CO detector had been installed? I relied that it had. I’m concerned that they are going to tell me I have to approve if the original conditions were satisfied. What would you do?

Anytime I got one of these I wrote a specific SOW for exactly what the client wanted verified and what photos they wanted. The potential problem with disclosing things you were not specifically asked to do, is what if there is some other defect neither you nor the the OA discovered? At the very least, I would point out the other defect was not discovered as part of any inspection...it was obvious to any casual observer.