Reconsideration of Value: How to respond?

[Delta85]

Like I said earlier, such back and forth is built into my fee, it didn't come free. Relo fees range from $750 to $1,000.

Please don't misunderstand, however, many is the time I've spent on the phone answering questions to help clients better understand my reports. The fees for which did not include margins for such hand-holding. It's called goodwill. Apparently they don't teach much about in modern business schools, if the volume of complaining on this forum is any indication.

Your business model would have it priced a la carte. Fine. Go for it. Like you said, it's a business decision.

Modern business schools did not teach us anything about the AMC model when it comes to working indirectly with clients. They did however teach us to to read our contracts carefully and to charge accordingly for work above and beyond that contract.

Goodwill goes both ways. If a client feels ok with throwing random sales at me picked either by someone with a value agenda or simply without access to local MLS and without the knowledge of basic appraisal practise then they obviously are not concerned about wasting my time.

A good client with a legit question on a real sale is one thing. The waste of appraisers time with busy work meant to either pressure me towards a value or out of pure ignorance does not deserve my good will.

Again it appears we have an out of touch CG who admits to rare if ever AMC work chiming in about something he appears not to understand.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

Like I said earlier, such back and forth is built into my fee, it didn't come free. Relo fees range from $750 to $1,000.

Please don't misunderstand, however, many is the time I've spent on the phone answering questions to help clients better understand my reports. The fees for which did not include margins for such hand-holding. It's called goodwill. Apparently they don't teach much about in modern business schools, if the volume of complaining on this forum is any indication.

Your business model would have it priced a la carte. Fine. Go for it. Like you said, it's a business decision.

And now you're going to tell us about how you don't have to stoop to accepting AMC work. We all know that that is because you've been around since Hector was a pup. This providing a service thing (and sometimes going above and beyond what is expected and required) and that goodwill thing (them clowns ain't worthy of goodwill) is all well and good but you're just giving it away? Silly, silly Calvin!

 

[residentialguy]

[but obviously I failed to communicate to you, Res ] that these properties are not comparable.

LOL...you did fine; I just didn't communicate well to you :laugh:

Let me re-phrase. You can comment why you didn't use sale a b c if it is relative, but I think it is best to stay away from the term "comparable". I have 5 sales that I used as comparables 1-5. These were the best, not the rest. :icon_mrgreen:

 

[SANDY]

Modern business schools did not teach us anything about the AMC model when it comes to working indirectly with clients. They did however teach us to to read our contracts carefully and to charge accordingly for work above and beyond that contract.

Goodwill goes both ways. If a client feels ok with throwing random sales at me picked either by someone with a value agenda or simply without access to local MLS and without the knowledge of basic appraisal practise then they obviously are not concerned about wasting my time.

A good client with a legit question on a real sale is one thing. The waste of appraisers time with busy work meant to either pressure me towards a value or out of pure ignorance does not deserve my good will.

Again it appears we have an out of touch CG who admits to rare if ever AMC work chiming in about something he appears not to understand.

Well said!

 

[Calvin the Airedale]

There are some members of AF, who when they agree with me force me to reconsider my beliefs.

 

[JSmith43]

There are some members of AF, who when they agree with me force me to reconsider my beliefs.

My guess is that if Mentor were to read this thread he would be relieved to know Jgrant said she disagreed with him 90% of the time a few posts ago. :icon_lol:

 

[KD247]

...Just take each of the comparables or issues in turn and explain why it's not relevant or as relevant to the appraisal as what you have already used. Best way to make sure your comments don't get lost in the shuffle is to add them to your report. ...

... On the other hand, I may look at 10-potential properties that I think are the best comps; of those 10, I may end up ultimately using 3-5.
Do I comment on all 10? Not usually (in fact, almost never, but not "never").
Will I comment on those that, on paper, appear to be a really good fit but due to something I discovered during my research resulted in its rejection from inclusion in the grid? Absolutely.

...I've already done the research and know why I'm not using it. ...

Two voices of reason in a chorus of jeers. They say you can tell a lot about a person's character by the way they handle telemarketing calls. If I ever have to interview appraisers again, there's definitely going to be a question regarding how they handle value reconsiderations.

When I do an appraisal, I start with a print-out of twenty, thirty, forty, or more possible comparable sales and listings. Then I rank them, with notes next to each one showing why they did or didn't make it into the top six or nine. It usually takes about two seconds per sale to note why it's not relevant. That's an extra three or four minutes to make sure I've covered all my bases - well worth it. I don't think I ever got a reconsideration request that couldn't be simply (and nicely) responded to after a quick check of my original notes.

If NC Values' new comps are truly located in a completely different market and if there truly are more comparable sales that are more similar, recent, and proximate, it shouldn't take more than 30 seconds to explain why those three comps weren't strongly considered in the report. But, if something strikes a nerve; perhaps because those three sales were never considered, or perhaps because those additional comps have something to provide to the analysis, there's no reason to get all pig-headed and defensive about taking another look at things. It only takes a few minutes. It's just data, it's not going to bite.

 

[Meandering]

Did you ever wonder how many of these ROV threads get started after a home owner has come to the forum and asked what to do about a low value appraisal?

:Eyecrazy:

How come no one ever tells the homeowners to read cert #7 and take a hike?
:icon_question:

You guys are funny, double standards.

 

[residentialguy]

Did you ever wonder how many of these ROV threads get started after a home owner has come to the forum and asked what to do about a low value appraisal?

:Eyecrazy:

How come no one ever tells the homeowners to read cert #7 and take a hike?
:icon_question:

You guys are funny, double standards.

I don't have a problem with a ROV as long as they send appropriate comps and prove better then my comps. I can't imagine me missing something that significant, but it's not for appraisers that don't leave a stone unturned. It's for the appraiser that uses inappropriate comps that are inferior in some way, and they don't adjust for it....often involving distressed comps and/or often involving the appraiser ignoring the subject contract.

 

[J Grant]

If the people who sent sales for ROV sent better comps and appropriate comps then we supply, then they would be appraisers.

They pick agenda based sales, (usually on the high side , but could be either way)
Res Guy, your view about never using or adjusting an REO sale has little or nothing to do with many ROV requests.

An ROV comes up when the appraisal is below what is needed to make the deal work, doesn't matter which comps the appraiser used.

I address them professionally when they come up, but I am also of the camp that thinks they should be a sep assignment and the appraiser should be compensated for their time (unless it turns out that appraiser missed a sale that is more credible and supportable and including it would impact value. Then, the appraiser would not charge any $. )Otherwise, it is a waste of the appraiser's time, because the assignment has been completed, and then, some random call comes in , days, weeks, sometimes even a month later, for a "reconsideration of value".

The appraiser "considered " their value as MV the first time around. Why, suddenly, should they reconsider it? Because their MVO did not "make the deal work". That is the one and only reason a ROV is in play.

Thus, if ROV are going to be sent, then the MV definition should change.

Change the MV definition to "whatever amount makes the deal work". Then, realtors, buyers, loan officers, etc would all be "happy" with appraised values.

The problem with the appraisal profession , is that some appraisers are coming up with what they are trained to do and what standards direct : opine a neutral opinion of market value.

Other appraisers are opining a $ amount that "makes the deal work", and calling it market value.