Judge Rules Appraiser/Lender Owe no duty of care

[Huds_Harm]

I understand your perspective. I've been in situations where the supposed escape clause had little significance. The goal is not to evade accountability but to ensure that everyone comprehends the appraisal's specific use and limitations.

Then it should be used for that and not allowed to be used to escape accountability when there are clear errors and omissions.

 

[Fernando]

Three months later, the borrower began experiencing plumbing issues and learned the well and septic system needed to be completely replaced

So, as of the "Effective Date" everything was functional according to what you have said, so far and everyone involved in the transaction did their job (inspections, due diligence etc) so what was the "cause" of the malfunction??

Over here, some agents would help buy a home protection plan for buyer as insurance in taking care of potential problems.
Not sure if home protection plan would cover septic tanks since I don't worry about septics here.

 

[Mike Ault]

clear errors and omissions.

Much better phrase to use than "intentional fraud". Just saying.

 

[Huds_Harm]

Much better phrase to use than "intentional fraud". Just saying.

Yet the "errors and omissions" insurance get to use the CYA intended user clause to say yes there were errors and omissions but they were not intended for you.

 

[Raven59]

Over here, some agents would help buy a home protection plan for buyer as insurance in taking care of potential problems.
Not sure if home protection plan would cover septic tanks since I don't worry about septics here.

Good point! It seems obvious but hasn't been discussed yet. Most insurance policies I've seen don't cover wells and septics, but some offer riders for those items.

 

[Mike Ault]

Yet the "errors and omissions" insurance get to use the CYA intended user clause to say yes there were errors and omissions but they were not intended for you.

And most errors and omissions insurance policies, do not cover "intentional fraud". So, if the appraiser does in fact have E & O, and your tangent is "intentional fraud", you won't be able to collect from their policy if you succeed in that.

 

[Fernando]

Good point! It seems obvious but hasn't been discussed yet. Most insurance policies I've seen don't cover wells and septics, but some offer riders for those items.

Sometimes if you pay extra coverage, it's covered. Again I don't worry about septics here.
When I bought my house when I was young and dumb representing myself, the listing agent bought a home protection plan for me. Thank you.
The company tried to pay and do as little work as possible in repairs. Eventually I had to replace my roof and water heater.

 

[Surf Cat]

What's common sense is in any other industry other than the appraisal business

Hard to argue with that...

 

[Huds_Harm]

And most errors and omissions insurance policies, do not cover "intentional fraud". So, if the appraiser does in fact have E & O, and your tangent is "intentional fraud", you won't be able to collect from their policy if you succeed in that.

I have repeatedly stated I sued for negligence and the appraiser has openly admitted to the error and omission.

 

[Fernando]

I have repeatedly stated I sued for negligence and the appraiser has openly admitted to the error and omission.

Are you suing the appraiser for $100,000 as compensation?
As an appraiser, not only do I have to worry about getting in trouble with my client but a noninteded user.