• 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.

History-the old 442 Form vs the 1004D Form

Status
Not open for further replies.

VolcanoLvr

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
Washington
Relative to prior messages warning about JUST SAY NO to Disaster Inspections done on the current 442/1004D Form, here’s some history:

I went back into my forms ‘pile’ and found the ‘old 442 form.’ This thing has history going back prior to 1978, which was the revision date of the one I found. Its purpose was to document a property was complete if the original report was written ‘subject to completion’…a Condition report for that specific purpose.

Well, when Disaster Inspections were ordered, U/W’s would request that 442 form…….and of course, appraisers not thinking about it, would comply. U/W policy manuals apparently, incorrectly, reference that form for a D.I. assignment.

So….fast forward to 3/2005. The ‘new’ 442/1004D was instituted by F/F………..but lo and behold, they changed the scope of work on it to a Value report***, not a Condition report. Many appraisers did not realize that, and U/W’s didn’t (don’t!) know the difference……..so keep ordering a D.I. be done on the 442/1004D. Wrong-o Dan-o!

Countrywide is one lender who has been doing this lately.

I’m still trying to get my mitts on the Countrywide Seller’s Guide, Section 4.7.

If you know anyone (LO or MB) who’s with them, see if you can get a copy, & PM me. If I do, I’ll let you know.

***The top UPDATE part of the form.......which they want used for a D.I. report.
 
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