• 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.

Judge Rules Appraiser/Lender Owe no duty of care

None of us were in the courtroom. So we have no idea how the arguments were presented by each side. Wonder if one of the defense questions was " Under the same conditions. If the buyer had been using conventional financing. Would they have also closed on the sale".
 
We're appraisers, not lawyers. We're not qualified to have an informed opinion about your legal options. That's for the lawyers to answer. You may still have a winnable case in there somewhere, we wouldn't know.

We already agreed that the appraiser made errors and failed to meet all of the terms of their assignment and that they get what they get for that. Nobody is defending the appraiser. Pointing out the fact that you didn't use the appraisal in your decision making and that you are not a party to the appraiser-client relationship isn't a defense for the appraiser's failings.

BTW, it generally doesn't cost $100k to drill a new well and install a new septic.
 
Why is it unhappy borrowers go after the appraiser when things go wrong?
Clients/Lenders by choosing the appraiser are responsible.
If the lenders take more responsibility, they would use "competent" appraisers.
It's a shakedown going after the lowly appraiser on the totem pole.
 
We're appraisers, not lawyers. We're not qualified to have an informed opinion about your legal options. That's for the lawyers to answer.

We already agreed that the appraiser made errors and failed to meet all of the terms of their assignment and that they get what they get for that. Nobody is defending the appraiser. Pointing out the fact that you didn't use the appraisal in your decision making and that you are not a party to the appraiser-client relationship isn't a defense for the appraiser's failings.

BTW, it generally doesn't cost $100k to drill a new well and install a new septic.
We need an emoji for heck, yes!
 
Semantics. Exactly so. The entire purpose of incorporating a Definitions section directly into the law/regs where they are being used is to prevent people from getting away with using fuzzy and undefined terms (like "federal definition of as is") in lieu of the real definitions as they actually exist.

Lawyers exist to carefully parse the meanings of these terms as are used in civil and criminal and administrative settings. Way of the world.

The entire purpose of an FHA appraisal BY DEFINITION is to ensure the
  • Safety: The home should protect the health and safety of the occupants.
  • Security: The home should protect the security of the property.
  • Soundness: The property should not have physical deficiencies or conditions affecting its structural integrity.2
and an appraiser is not allowed to submit an FHA appraisal "as is" that does not meet FHA minimum property requirements. HENCE WHY THE FEDERAL MEANING OF "AS IS" IS AFTER THE HOME MEETS ALL MINIMUM PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS.

"law/regs where they are being used is to prevent people from getting away with"

FRAUD
 
Why is it unhappy borrowers go after the appraiser when things go wrong?
Clients/Lenders by choosing the appraiser are responsible.
If the lenders take more responsibility, they would use "competent" appraisers.
It's a shakedown going after the lowly appraiser on the totem pole.

Notably I did sue the lender as well since they certify the appraisal/home meets all minimum property requirements.
 
FHA insures the loans for lenders. It's the lender responsibility to have property fit under FHA criteria.
Lenders have property as collateral.
I never had FHA loan but isn't down payment can be as low as 3%.
In any case, if lender takes back property if FHA won't insure, lender takes a loss.
 
We're appraisers, not lawyers. We're not qualified to have an informed opinion about your legal options. That's for the lawyers to answer. You may still have a winnable case in there somewhere, we wouldn't know.

We already agreed that the appraiser made errors and failed to meet all of the terms of their assignment and that they get what they get for that. Nobody is defending the appraiser. Pointing out the fact that you didn't use the appraisal in your decision making and that you are not a party to the appraiser-client relationship isn't a defense for the appraiser's failings.

BTW, it generally doesn't cost $100k to drill a new well and install a new septic.

You're also not a sanitarian engineer to make that statement.
 
The entire purpose of an FHA appraisal BY DEFINITION is to ensure the
  • Safety: The home should protect the health and safety of the occupants.
  • Security: The home should protect the security of the property.
  • Soundness: The property should not have physical deficiencies or conditions affecting its structural integrity.2
and an appraiser is not allowed to submit an FHA appraisal "as is" that does not meet FHA minimum property requirements. HENCE WHY THE FEDERAL MEANING OF "AS IS" IS AFTER THE HOME MEETS ALL MINIMUM PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS.

"law/regs where they are being used is to prevent people from getting away with"

FRAUD
Again, your usage of the term "Definition" is in need of improvement.

Those are not the primary purposes of an FHA appraisal. If they were then their policy would explicitly say that and the forms they use would say it that way. But those forms don't say that. They say this, instead:
1721320530630.png
 
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-2025, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top