MLS Comp Photos WTF!

[New Orleans Guy]

You gotta love the 10,000+ reads on this thread. lol

Yeah I guess the title was catching. I should go into the advert biz

 

[New Orleans Guy]

Lobo, I agree. But it has become almost standard in my area. I think at the current fees they know it is happening. I am not justifing it, just stating the realistic facts.

Hey.... did the buyer inspect every possible house he could have bought from the street or rely on second hand filtered info from a realtor looking at the commission first and house quality second?... and only from MLS photos at that! Maybe the comps are really NOT indicative of the market value since the buyers don't drive the comps and don't know about the better deal they could have gotten?????? HMMMMMMM.......

 

[Lobo Fan]

Either you are doing a complete appraisal or you are not. If you cannot afford to complete a proper appraisal for the fee being offered, then you are making a choice to provide an inferior product. The quality of your reports should not be affected by the fee. It is like the restaraunts that save money by serving up the neighborhood cats.

 

[CANative]

If you had driven by previously do you have your own photo? Driving by at 75 MPH does not really constitute an inspection from the street. I am starting to get testy about how many of my competitors use MLS photos. I could do 4-5 more per week and save a lot of wear and tear on my car if I did not drive comps. I spent 9 hours on the road today, maybe 6 of that was driving comps. I am starting to see more reviews lately and I am shocked at how many use MLS photos. I have started including the MLS photos in my review so the client can make their own determination. Not driving comps may be the single best way to cheat.

It is an unfair advantage and should be a reason for sanctions. Or otherwise just allow the practice.

No, I don't have my own photo and I didn't drive by at 75 mph because it's in a cul-de-sac and 15 mph is about as fast as you can safely drive. I drove by it when I inspected 67 Wild Iris about a year ago. It wasn't for sale then but I did take a look at. Couldn't miss it actually.

When I did a more recent appraisal on a property about a mile away I didn't consider using this sale because it was a bit higher end and had a much better view and proximity to the ocean. The sales price was about $800k higher than the better comps. But after fussing with the appraisal for an entire day I finally decided I needed that one on 47 Wild Iris because it was a very recent sale and had some comparable characteristics not found in the primary comps. So I presented it as sale comp 4, used a photo from a website that has a high res picture of every property on the California coast from Oregon to Mexcico.

The Fannie minimum is 3 sales and they got the 3 sales with exterior inspections from the street. This is an extra sale that I could have left out of the grid presentation. Look, appraisers consider and analyze more than the 3 gridded sales. We don't need to drive by them to consider them in the analysis for them to be useful. Notice the spreadsheet of all sales. I considered all of those sales. What's the difference if I choose to put one in a grid without driving by as long as I "say what I did and did what I said?"

 

[CANative]

And FTR, I've even used my own photos of properties never sold or even listed for sale as support for adjustments I've made to other comps against a feature of the subject.

 

[Lobo Fan]

There are possibly reasonable explanations for not using original photos. I have used MLS photos in a pinch myself. What irritates me are appraisers that make no attempt at all to look at a comp. Just head out to the subject and straight back to the computer. I could save myself countless hours if I did that. I even take new photos of actives and pendings. If you cannot complete a proper appraisal for the fee being offered you are required to decline the order or get a limited scope of work in writing. I would not use the Fannie forms either.

 

[DMZwerg]

The Fannie minimum is 3 sales and they got the 3 sales with exterior inspections from the street. This is an extra sale that I could have left out of the grid presentation. Look, appraisers consider and analyze more than the 3 gridded sales. We don't need to drive by them to consider them in the analysis for them to be useful. Notice the spreadsheet of all sales. I considered all of those sales. What's the difference if I choose to put one in a grid without driving by as long as I "say what I did and did what I said?"

Nice photo ... who owns the IP on it?
Is using it "fair use"?



So, to sum what I have seen so far:
1) The Fannie Mae 1004 and other forms have language in them that the appraiser certifies he personally inspected each and every comparable from the street.
2) The IP rights of any photograph belong to the person who first took the photo unless sold or given away to a specific other person or group or the rights were deliberately given up and the photo put into the public domain (which would have to be proven). A MLS may or may not force the photographer to relinquish rights and may or may not control the rights themselves (aka, they often do not make them public domain and instead set limited usage for members, etc). Photos from brochers, etc, are usually the IP of the company and protected.
3) There are cases where actual inspection from the street is not possible (private property, long driveways, screening vegetation, etc) and thus "inspection" may well be via MLS photos and other sources (which should then have a disclaimer statement or comp not used).
4) Disclaimers as to source of photos used when not taken by the appraiser is SOP and should suffice for cases like #3 above.

That about covers it, right?
:icon_mrgreen:

 

[EDWARD BERRY]

Man, You California People Are About Surpass Us Arkies In Chicken House Design.

It It A Broiler House, Breeder Hens, Or Cage Layers.

Modest In Arkansas.

 

[444nutman]

I just did a review of a tear down in an area that older homes were bought tore down and McMansions were built. I used MLS photos on all the OA comps because when I took pictures of all the comps giant 5000 to 6000 sf homes were built or in the process of being built. I included both photos but to not use the MLS photos on the extra photo page could have misled the reader. The subject and OA comps were all built in the 40's and 50's and all sold just for the land.

 

[Steve122677]

The scope of work in the limited condition section states you must inspect (drive by) all of your comparables. It is your choice to take the pic or not but the comparable must be inspected. If you use an MLS photo, state why and explain you drove by the comparable.