Judge Rules Appraiser/Lender Owe no duty of care

[George Hatch]

ZZZZZzzzzzzzz

If anyone here doesn't want to respond to the OP anymore then just stop feeding the thread.

 

[Huds_Harm]

If you say so. Did you make sure to frame it to them in those terms and get their assurances as to the property conditions before committing?

The borrower is not involved in the property's eligibility process.

However, if HUD made the borrower aware of MPR on septic and well, just like they make you sign the "for your protection get a home inspection" form, I would've known I had to proof the appraisal for incompetence.

 

[Huds_Harm]

Would a "field review" have revealed anything that the "appraisal review" didn't? If not, why pay for one?

Yes it would have. A desk review does not determine all the physical things that should have been not only disclosed but marked "subject to" repair without being at the physical property.

 

[Huds_Harm]

If you say so. Did you make sure to frame it to them in those terms and get their assurances as to the property conditions before committing?

There is a statement in the appraisal that the subject property meets all FHA MPR.

 

[Fernando]

I always look at government funding even Fannie as partner with buyers in being vested in purchase of property.
The creditor actually has a larger stake and risk since usually the loan is at least 75% of sales price. It's like lender buying property with 75% copartner ship.
Lenders have their criteria in determining if they want to loan/"buy" the property.
And Buyers have to do their part (not rely on lender) in determining if property is suitable for them.

 

[Mike Ault]

Yes it would have. A desk review does not determine all the physical things that should have been not only disclosed but marked "subject to" repair without being at the physical property.

A "field review" is typically conducted on an "exterior only basis" from the street. Those are ordered after the loans have closed, and the homeowner is under no obligation to let some appraiser trespass on their property for the lender's quality control purposes. They wouldn't have seen a septic system, defective fencing, or a deck. I do a bunch of these, and I've never bothered the homeowner, or trespassed upon their property.

 

[George Hatch]

The borrower is not involved in the property's eligibility process.

However, if HUD made the borrower aware of MPR on septic and well, just like they make you sign the "for your protection get a home inspection" form, I would've known I had to proof the appraisal for incompetence.

You already have proof of incompetence. And negligence. Clearly.

 

[Fernando]

Lenders make mistakes. One time I indicated subject's water heater was not double strapped.
Loan closed and buyers moved in.
Lender asked me to check if water heater had been double strapped.
With Fernando charm, I got inside the property. It has been replaced with a tankless heater.
Everyone is happy.

A "field review" is typically conducted on an "exterior only basis" from the street. Those are ordered after the loans have closed, and the homeowner is under no obligation to let some appraiser trespass on their property for the lender's quality control purposes. They wouldn't have seen a septic system, defective fencing, or a deck. I do a bunch of these, and I've never bothered the homeowner, or trespassed upon their property.

 

[Tom D]

can this forum pass a guilty judgement with an amount for damages so this poor homeowner can have her piece of mind. no septic, no justice. no money, just a moral victory. can i also get a cease and desist order, from the big guy on this thread, for mental abuse just reading it.

 

[George Hatch]

TBH I don't think there's anything anyone here can do to further advance her understanding of her situation. She has a legal problem. We're not lawyers or judges and can't speak to the how that will/won't play out in a legal setting except to the extent of some anecdotals we might have seen in the past.

Whether we agreed or disagreed with all her legal reasoning is basically irrelevant. It doesn't matter to her outcome if we do or don't agree with her. Even if we did validate her reasoning that wouldn't improve any aspect of her experience in this saga. She's still going to be unhappy about the outcome, and for reasons which have nothing to do with us as individuals or with the profession as a whole.