Probate Appraisal in California

[Joyce Potts]

You use the Personal Representative of the Estate and/or the attorney for the estate. That's pretty much all you'll need to do. Once the PR has the appraisal (and make sure they want it as of the Date of Death or DOD) they can submit it to the probate proceedings. If you want to cite probate or estate purposes as the purpose you can, but regardless of what you do, 99.9% of the time (in Florida) regardless of who you cite as intended users, the court will use it as will the remaining beneficiaries, etc. You really have no control over that--what you have control over, however, is that you limit your liability to the other parties or decide to rely on it, in my NON LEGAL opinion.

 

[Ca Ar Independent]

For the sake of discussion, what if the client asks you to add a party (as intended user) with whom you are not familiar, such as siblings?

If the client names an additional intended user, such as a sibling, then I add the sibling. Similarly, if they request that I NOT discuss the appraisal with anyone else, even a sibling, then I do not. My client is my client and all confidentiality applies. Once I deliver my report per the clients instructions, it is up to them what they do with it and how they distribute it. This is not my concern. My concern is writing the report correctly, based on who my clients wishes to be named in the appraisal, for THEIR purposes and per their written instruction. I am always very clear with estate work as to the effective date since sometimes they want a current market value, sometimes the ED is the DOD and sometimes the ED is the "alternate" date which is 6 months after the DOD. I urge you to be very specific with your client and have all of this defined before you proceed.

 

[Rich Heyn]

If the client names an additional intended user, such as a sibling, then I add the sibling. Similarly, if they request that I NOT discuss the appraisal with anyone else, even a sibling, then I do not. My client is my client and all confidentiality applies. Once I deliver my report per the clients instructions, it is up to them what they do with it and how they distribute it. This is not my concern. My concern is writing the report correctly, based on who my clients wishes to be named in the appraisal, for THEIR purposes and per their written instruction. I am always very clear with estate work as to the effective date since sometimes they want a current market value, sometimes the ED is the DOD and sometimes the ED is the "alternate" date which is 6 months after the DOD. I urge you to be very specific with your client and have all of this defined before you proceed.

There is no ability when communicating on an internet forum like this to detect body language or tonal inflections, so again, please take this under the heading of "for the sake of discussion" but when asked to name a sibling as an intended user, do you take steps to determine the ability of the sibling to understand what you are communicating?

 

[Ca Ar Independent]

There is no ability when communicating on an internet forum like this to detect body language or tonal inflections, so again, please take this under the heading of "for the sake of discussion" but when asked to name a sibling as an intended user, do you take steps to determine the ability of the sibling to understand what you are communicating?

My response is in the "for the sake of discussion" tone. Why do you think it is your call to determine if your client's additional user is able to understand what you are communicating? If Joe wants his brother named on the report, I will add Joe's brother. Hell I don't even know if JOE is able to understand my report! If I tried to ensure that all of the intended users had the "ability to understand" my report, this would rule out 99% of the underwriters and review appraisers! All kidding aside, if my client wants his brother named, then I believe it is HIS business. If my client wants the "residents of the state of Ohio" named, then that is also HIS business. If you or I have an issue with who the client's intended user is then I would think that would fall into the category of unacceptable assignment conditions. This is how I see it.

 

[Rich Heyn]

...Why do you think it is your call to determine if your client's additional user is able to understand what you are communicating?...

For starters, I'll go with the second sentence of the Preamble to USPAP.

"It is essential that appraisers develop and communicate their analyses, opinions, and conclusions to intended users of their services in a manner that is meaningful and not misleading."

 

[Ca Ar Independent]

My communication is clear and not misleading. This does not guarantee that the intended user understands.

YOU asked "do you take steps to determine the ability of the sibling to understand what you are communicating". No, I do not, which does not equate with my report not being "clear and not misleading". Do you guarantee that your intended user can understand your report prior to sending? Do you verify that the AMC, lender, underwriter or client is able to understand what you have communicated? This is not possible and really off topic. The issue you and I seem to disagree on in this and the other thread is whether YOU have the authority to name additional users and to make the determination about who the (additional) intended user should be, regardless of what you and your client discuss. My point and my ONLY point it is up to the client to name their users, not the appraiser.

 

[Rich Heyn]

..My point and my ONLY point it is up to the client to name their users, not the appraiser...

And on that point I will politely disagree with you. I believe that the "intent" in intended user refers to the intent of the appraiser. I do agree that the appraiser's decision to identify intended users is influenced by communication with the client, but ultimately, the identification is made by the appraiser, not the client.

 

[CANative]

It's on the appraiser to identify intended users. It's on the appraiser to make sure that anyone identified as an intended user can understand the appraisers conclusions and opinions for their particular intended use(s).

I don't see why there is such a disconnect here.

 

[Flygirl 152]

This is a totally different situation. I too have done appraisals for bail bond companies. You're correct, in that they are ordered by the attorney or by the bond company. The property is being used as collateral for the money the bond company is providing and for the bond guarantee. When a will is going through probate, it is done through the probate court. A judge or referee is appointed to handle the probate and, if there is property involved (real or personal), appraisals are ordered by the court. They are not ordered by an attorney who may have prepared the will. Property held by a trust is a whole different matter. In these caes the attorney who is handling the trust will order the appraisal. In some cases, they might have the beneficiaries of the trust contract directly with an appraiser.

I respectfully disagree. My parents died 3 years ago. My sister was the personal representative and the estate went through probate court. The court DID NOT ORDER THE APPRAISAL. WE ORDERED THE APPRAISAL THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT APPRAISAL COMPANY, THEN PASSED THE COMPLETED APPRAISAL TO THE ATTORNEY. The attorney was NOT listed as an intended user of the report.

LA woman, take the order and provide the heir a copy of an engagement letter to sign which states the intended use of the report to be retrospective, date of death for estate purposes. I am an Appraisal Institute member, and like their free (to members) preprinted engagement letter. If you too are a member you can go to tools, and download it right to your computer in Word format. If you are not an AI member, check your software. Some software companies offer lettersengagementment you can modify.

PM me if you have other questions. I do a significant amount of these every year.

 

[gregb]

flygirl has her wings