Is Driving By Comps Still Necessary?

[Eric Bishard]

/..

 

[Dave Fitch]

William,
I fully agree with you that a full inspection with no comp photos would be highly superior to a 2055 exterior report. Especially with the very inaccurate Assessor's data where I work. Somehere 20 or so years ago we went to comp photos, and the fees and the turn times increased. Funny, there are not any photos with an AVM, let alone comp photos, which we are all competing against.

 

[William Cummings]

I drive by every comparable now, since sometime back I was doing a report, had a picture of the comp from a previous report and decided to use it. no sense in driving by somewhere I had recently been. I drove the other comps and decided since I was near that one why not get a updateed photo. Well, guess what I found when I got there, A tornado we had a few months before that took the house into another city and all was left was the vacant lot. :blink:

Since then I drive them all. Will only use MLS photo if the comparable is located behind a secure gate or on a road that has a sign that says No Trespassing.

 

[Otis Key]

Just to add fuel to the fire here, read my thread I started. If nothing else, it will give you a laugh but will also lead you to think twice about not driving the comps.

http://appraisersforum.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=25167

 

[jeff samolinski]

I posted this mainly for the thought of- that it may be of some benefit to periodically re-think the way in which we do things in light of changes in technology and sources of information lest we end up finding ourselves carrying a saddle when boarding the space shuttle.

Obviousely there can be many good reasons to continue certain time tested practices despite the temptation to short cut them due to time constraints imposed by others and the advance of modern technology.

The trend seems to be putting more and more pressure on the continued use of these methods though and with more and more emphasis on spotting flips and other outright fraudulant sales I see no comensurate acknowledgement on the part of Fannie Mae, asb or any other agency about the impact of the time and effort their new efforts are going to require.

Maybe its time for these agencies that are so bent on changing things in the so -called interest of improvimg the profession to address the impact of the time and effort associated with each new rule. Similar to what many other bureaucratic agencies have been required to do by adding an economic impact statement, environmental impact analysis etc... to proposed changes. To put in more directly an acknowledgement on the part of our clients that if this is the direction you want to take in terms of the services that are expected of appraisers that there is a potential downside in terms of turn-around time that has also become so important to them.

Some darn good posts. Just to stir the pot a little some of the posts hav eprompted me to think that this may be an area where some updating of USPAP might be of some benefit-as George says strict adherence to USPAP says that you must go by each comp every time- no exceptions.

 

[jeff samolinski]

Frank:

This might be another example of a change to USPAP that would be of benefit to us. These types of changes proposed by us as appraisers could be the types of responses we need to consider in order for us to help the users of our reports understand some of the consequences or needs that we have due to some of the other imposed changes that have come down the pike recently.

Just wanted to point that out. There are changes that we can push that come from a perspective of what can be done to help us and not come from the perspective that we already have too many rules imposed upon us.

 

[Mike Garrett RAA]

Things that make one go "hmmmmmm"

1. Asking questions to stir the pot. Don't we have enough to deal with already?

2. Constant REALTOR® bashing. Most real estate agents are good, honest, hard working people....just like appraisers.

3. Who cares that a comp burned down after the sale? What was it like when it did sell?

4. MLS is crap, public records are crap? Not in my market!

 

[jeff samolinski]

Maybe stir the pot was not a good way to put it. My intentions are legitimate questions meant to evoke some thoughtful analysis to respond the ever increasing pressure for more speed and speed can kill.

As far as realtor bashing goes-I think it depends upon your perspective but in any event it is a fact that there are un-ethical realtors out there just as tere are un-ethical appraisers out there and I don't see too much hesitation to bang on the latter here so as far as I am concerned un-ethical realtors are fair game.

It's fair though to point out that not all realtors are bad or are the only source of dis-information we have to deal with.

 

[Francois K. Gregoire]

Originally posted by jeff samolinski@Feb 19 2005, 10:23 AM
Frank:

This might be another example of a change to USPAP that would be of benefit to us. These types of changes proposed by us as appraisers could be the types of responses we need to consider in order for us to help the users of our reports understand some of the consequences or needs that we have due to some of the other imposed changes that have come down the pike recently.

Just wanted to point that out. There are changes that we can push that come from a perspective of what can be done to help us and not come from the perspective that we already have too many rules imposed upon us.

Jeff,

There is nothing in the USPAP that specifically commands an appraiser to drive by a comparable sale, photograph a comparable sale or, for that matter, to inspect the subject property or photograph the subject property. What change are you proposing?

-as George says strict adherence to USPAP says that you must go by each comp every time- no exceptions.

Is this a reference to George Hatch? Is this what he said?

 

[jeff samolinski]

OOps my mistake

I think george was referring to the certification statement and I mis-represented his comments- my mistake.

So we would have to just modify our canned certification statement and it would be ok not to drive-by every comp in every circumstance as long as we did not represent that we did?

Might have some relevancy in terms of what peers do, scope of work in terms of making it clear to client whether comps were driven by and at what time etc..

Even though it is cuurently not a requirement per USPAP there still might be a need for it to be addressed in light of changes in technology.