Quality Control audit

[Joshua Fookes]

I received a letter in the mail today from a company that reads

RE: ---borrower's name----

Property Address: -------subject property-------

Dear Sir or Madam,

We have been contracted to perform a Quality Control audit. As part of the Audit, we have been asked to verify that the enclosed appraisal was valid at the time it was originally produced. As you may be aware, the illegal use of appraiser names and licensing information to produce fraudulent documents, has been gaining increased focus in our industry. Enclosed please find a copy of the execute Appraisal completed by, Joshua J. Fookes, as the Appraiser. Would you kindly review te form and verify that:

1) You have prepared the document.
2) your signatures and date are accurate.
3) There are no material differences to the information you originaly have in your record.

If all the above is correct, please sign the copy of this letter and return it to us in the enclosed envelope. If there are any discrepancies between the original Appraisal you prepared and the enclosed document, please detail these discrepancies in the area provided below. If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 1-800-540-8440. Thank you."

The report was prepared by me it IS my report. But the requesting company is not my client.

My questions to you forum goers area these:

1) have you ever received a letter like this?

2) I feel that answering the questions to this third party may violate Appraiser/Client confidentiality. Do you feel the same?


They attached a Borrower's Certifiaction & Authorization form to the letter. This is a form where the BORROWER agrees to let the "Lender and the mortgage guaranty insurer (if any)", to "verify information contained in my/our loan application and in other documents required in connection with the loan".

HOWEVER, the borrower is not the client. They do not have the ability to release the appraisal to this other 3rd party. I feel that the original client should be the one's to tell me it is OK to talk to this third party, etc.


I DO appreciate that they want to validate that I am the creator of the appraisal report, but I don't want to be breaking the law, to make sure that someone else isn't.

I may call the state, but I've already spent too much time with this.

 

[xm39hnu]

Joshua,
You're not being asked to violate confidentiality.

Is the fact that you prepared the submitted document confidential?
Is the fact that the signature and date are correct confidential?
Is the fact that the report is a true copy confidential?

That last one may be in a grey area. If it were mine, I'd verify it and move on. I don't see any potential for skullduggery in this request. If it'll make you feel better, contact the firm by phone and confirm that they're really doing a QC audit.

 

[Artemis Fowl]

Ummm...

Be careful with your signature. I would definately follow up.
Or...verify that you DID do this appraisal but don't sign and explain that you will not because of the very ID theft problem they speak of.

 

[Laurie Collins]

...........................

 

[DTB]

Received via NON certified registered mail? Never got it. Move on.

 

[The Warrior Monk]

After verifying who they are, I would recommend resending the report. I feel that certifying that a report as original after it has left the office adds a new layer of liability. I wouldn't want to take the chance of missing something and certifying that a doctored report was original.

Send out a new original and let them handle the verification process.

 

[DJBanas]

I'm with Mike - "Letter, what letter?"

 

[Blue1]

I'm getting these too. I feel no obligation to reply unless my files indicate a problem. Then I would contact my client 1st.

 

[Otis Key]

I went to John Brennan at TAF a few months back about this in a very similar situation and posted in the Fannie/Freddie/USPAP section.

http://appraisersforum.com/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-USPAP/102991-signature-fraud-verify-appraisal-intended-10.html

Hope it helps.

 

[Robert Dunkle]

After verifying who they are, I would recommend resending the report. I feel that certifying that a report as original after it has left the office adds a new layer of liability. I wouldn't want to take the chance of missing something and certifying that a doctored report was original.

Send out a new original and let them handle the verification process.

I agree with David!! I am very much in favor of the clients verifying that I did the report and that it has not been altered. However, as you say, if you miss an item that HAD been changed, you have just said that it was yours. Unless you want to take the time to compare both reports word for word, I would let them do the comparison. I would get with my client to confirm that they are legit. It is worth a little of my time to help stamp out any theft of my signature or changing of the reports!! Just not worth adding to the potential liability!!!

However, the companies (our clients) SHOULD send out a letter on their letterhead indicating that this was coming and asking us to participate. This would alleviate the client confidentiality quandry!!