Rebuttal from Listing Agent??

[alebrewer]

It's purely a business decision.

(c)Exceptions
The requirements of subsection (b) shall not be construed as prohibiting a mortgage lender, mortgage broker, mortgage banker, real estate broker, appraisal management company, employee of an appraisal management company, consumer, or any other person with an interest in a real estate transaction from asking an appraiser to undertake 1 or more of the following:
(1)Consider additional, appropriate property information, including the consideration of additional comparable properties to make or support an appraisal.
(2)Provide further detail, substantiation, or explanation for the appraiser’s value conclusion.
(3)Correct errors in the appraisal report.

The (VERY STRONG) implication there is that, when asked, a response will be forthcoming... To wit - when 'asked' to correct errors in the appraisal report, the expectation is that those errors will be corrected. Same for (1) and (2). You are correct, though, in that the appraiser cannot be physically forced to respond/correct. It seems to me that would be a really quick road to finding yourself defending your appraisal and workfile before the respective state should you choose not to correct/respond.

 

[George Hatch]

Unless the facts themselves are inaccurate I would decline to characterize or validate a characterization of a difference of opinion as being an error.

But aside from that, the appraiser/client (or user) relationship forms the foundation of the public trust in the appraisal profession in general and the appraiser's own credibility in particular. I can't leave a question hanging and still expect my users to trust my analyses opinions and conclusions.

 

[alebrewer]

I don't think that is what the Interagency Guidelines are speaking to...

 

[jay trotta]

I recently did an appraisal as a purchase for a lender thru an AMC. The appraised value came in lower than the contract price. Now I get a rebuttal request from the AMC. They are providing 2 other sales and lots of commentary, but it appears that this rebuttal was written by the listing agent and sent to the AMC via the lender. Since the lender is the client and the only intended user, I am not obligated to answer correct? The listing agent is not an intended user of the report. She legally should not have a copy of it unless the lender/client gave written permission. Not sure how to proceed with this. I have not done a response yet, but was thinking, wait a min, why does the LA have the appraisal report?

FNMA ML 2015-02 clearly states: "Before asking the appraiser to consider any alternative sales, it is imperative that the lender analyze the relevance of the sale and determine if the use of such sale would result in any material change to the appraisal report". Therefore, if the appraiser is requested to review any other sales after the effective date, the appraiser will only accept the order to review the sale(s) if the following two (2) conditions are met:

1) A summary submitted from the lender/client or AMC showing their analysis supporting the premise that their sales are superior to that of the sales used in this report, with the understanding that closer proximity or more recent date of the sale does not mean it is a better indicator of value, as clarified above.

I left out #2, because #1 needs to be met, prior to any conversation; "their analysis supporting the premise that their sales are superior to that of the sales used in the report", over the years I have yet to find the, lender/client or AMC to meet that guideline. If there is no supporting analysis provided, what response can you offer ?? Are you now questioning your own work ?

 

[alebrewer]

FNMA ML 2015-02 clearly states: "Before asking the appraiser to consider any alternative sales, it is imperative that the lender analyze the relevance of the sale and determine if the use of such sale would result in any material change to the appraisal report". Therefore, if the appraiser is requested to review any other sales after the effective date, the appraiser will only accept the order to review the sale(s) if the following two (2) conditions are met:

1) A summary submitted from the lender/client or AMC showing their analysis supporting the premise that their sales are superior to that of the sales used in this report, with the understanding that closer proximity or more recent date of the sale does not mean it is a better indicator of value, as clarified above.

I left out #2, because #1 needs to be met, prior to any conversation; "their analysis supporting the premise that their sales are superior to that of the sales used in the report", over the years I have yet to find the, lender/client or AMC to meet that guideline. If there is no supporting analysis provided, what response can you offer ?? Are you now questioning your own work ?

I don't remember this section as part of that ML: "
Therefore, if the appraiser is requested to review any other sales after the effective date, the appraiser will only accept the order to review the sale(s) if the following two (2) conditions are met:

1) A summary submitted from the lender/client or AMC showing their analysis supporting the premise that their sales are superior to that of the sales used in this report, with the understanding that closer proximity or more recent date of the sale does not mean it is a better indicator of value, as clarified above."

Is that in a different ML, or is that your take on the quote from ML 2015-02? Not trying to be argumentative - I just don't remember the 2nd part of that...

In general, though, that ML was addressing CU, and the guidance is (I believe) directed toward underwriters who were (and some still are) just sending CU sales to appraisers because CU ranked them higher than the appraiser's sales, without doing any analysis to determine if they actually would have an impact on the appraisal. No? I don't think the point of that ML was to address ROV's...

 

[J Grant]

Fannie guidelines refer only to fannie world, and indeed the "superior " verbiage may only apply to CU -

The dog that led us on this path is Dodd Frank, which applies to the broad umbrella of lending appraisals and in Dodd Frank, which permits a client to send additional sale or info to consider, the word superoir sales is not there. There is some verbiage ( can't remember it ) which is toothless about the sales. Bottom like is some clients respect the process and do not abuse it while other clients use it to harass or pressure

This a freebie customer service off loaded to appraiser , serving to appease a client's upset Borrower or RE agent Typically consists of sending less similar /cherry picked sales 98% of the time - 2% might see a viable additional sale to consider or a factual error found.

 

[The Bob]

Correcting an "error" is one thing. Having a party who has a vested interest in the outcome, but is not a party to the transaction, throwing comps at me is another. Pretty sure my board would see it my way.

 

[glenn walker]

Fannie guidelines refer only to fannie world, and indeed the "superior " verbiage may only apply to CU -

The dog that led us on this path is Dodd Frank, which applies to the broad umbrella of lending appraisals and in Dodd Frank, which permits a client to send additional sale or info to consider, the word superoir sales is not there. There is some verbiage ( can't remember it ) which is toothless about the sales. Bottom like is some clients respect the process and do not abuse it while other clients use it to harass or pressure

This a freebie customer service off loaded to appraiser , serving to appease a client's upset Borrower or RE agent Typically consists of sending less similar /cherry picked sales 98% of the time - 2% might see a viable additional sale to consider or a factual error found.

So What about VA- Tidewater Act ?

 

[J Grant]

So What about VA- Tidewater Act ?

I have the same opinion of VA Tidewater- I don't do VA btw

 

[glenn walker]

I have the same opinion of VA Tidewater- I don't do VA btw

I call it Whitewater : ) LOL