Reviewer's name withheld

[The Warrior Monk]

Else there would be no job security in reviewing.

Sorry Edd,

I disagree with that. Reviewing is not the same as doing lending work, where often the appraiser is in the position of "making the deal work." Lenders are required to have a certain percentage of reports reviewed, and do just that. Plus reviewers are generally held to a higher standard. Usually the reviewer has to have a minimum of five years experience. No pressure, no job security issues. In fact, in my own case, I wouldn't care if they dumped me. It doesn't pay enough for the aggravation.

I've received exactly on rebuttal out of about 200 reviews. The appraiser was pissed, but then again, this home, located in an Incorporated Village, was compared to homes outside of the village, with no explanation. Were there other homes in the village? Yup. Were there other homes on the same street? Yup.

Once again, forget SOW work issues. These reports I see don't need to be scrutinized to that level. That's simply a theoretical discussion. We may be able to have that some day, if these "appraisers" get retrained, start ignoring the blatantly obvious, and stop playing target practice.

To tie this in with another matter, remember our friend Phil Rice? Do you think that his scrutiny of those reports is called for, or is he on a witch hunt? Because I would be ecstatic to get reports that were as well written as those.

 

[xm72mhd]

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddgillespie
Else there would be no job security in reviewing.


That is harsh and I'm sure basically not true. I have no evidence that it is true and posted it for the purpose of provocation. The thread was dead and needed a defrib. And away we go.

Most of the reviewers I know are on here. I don't do very many reviews myself, because the requests I am getting are from the rubber stamp crowd that apparently use them to enhance the credibility of bad appraisals, and most of them have tuned into the "enhanced" whatevers for $75.00.

So I don't do them. It occurred to me in reading USPAP that there is not a clear requirement in SR-3 that the reviewer be aware of and follow the SOW that the appraiser used. Nor have I heard anything about reviewers commenting on SOW used or not used, as the case may be, in the appraisals they are reviewing.

I agree with Steven that SOW is most definitely on review. Departure is dead and the SOW is here to stay, for at least a year or two. Long live the SOW. It's the work you are reviewing, and without that your opinion of the appraiser's opinion is not worth a flip. Why not use this opportunity review specialists, to teach the crappy appraisers how to knit the SOW into the report. Which is already done for them on most of the new Fannie forms. Maybe they do not follow their own SOW, that too should be mentioned.

I am also concerned about reviewers having an entirely different SOW that the appraiser. How are you specialists blending that?

 

[hastalavista]

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddgillespie
Else there would be no job security in reviewing.


That is harsh and I'm sure basically not true. I have no evidence that it is true and posted it for the purpose of provocation.

I'm shocked you'd be provocative on purpose!!

While there's no arguing with Steven on the fact that the original appraisal's SOW is part of the review analysis completed by a reviewer, David's statement are more expressive of the process on a daily, practical basis.

If I determine that an appraisal failed to consider MLS comments about the sales comparables used that result in a significant change in value, I won't say that the report did not meet its SOW or failed to adequately develop one; although that is probably a fact.

So, IMO, either expressly considered or as a matter of practical consequence, the original appraisal report's SOW is part of the review.

 

[xm72mhd]

Well, what are we going to argue about now?

 

[Hal Mann]

Appraisers and Reviewers: Write your scope within the body of your report as you go along. Lose the pre-printed one size fits all scope with 7000 disclaimers you attach to every appraisal and review; the one with line after boring line of maybe I did (maybe i didn't) crap that leaves the reader to try to figure out what if anything he(she) was(was not) able(required) to do(not do) during the course of the assignment.

Thank you, Janet. It really is about time to lose all those conditional disclaimers.

 

[JSmith43]

Thank you, Janet. It really is about time to lose all those conditional disclaimers.

I don't blame appraisers fighting back, so to speak, with disclaimers. It is easy to miss something without a check list. Additionally, any Fannie work requires "clarification", since the certs have been crafted with a gotcha mentality.

How about including a decision tree that the appraiser reliably uses? I had a sinus infection that was diagnosed over the phone by a nurse following an elaborate decision matrix.

 

[Annemieke Roell]

I had a sinus infection that was diagnosed over the phone by a nurse following an elaborate decision matrix.

Diagnosis over the phone? Is that the medical field's equivalent of a comp check?



Sorry .... couldn't resist .....

 

[JSmith43]

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerwatland
I had a sinus infection that was diagnosed over the phone by a nurse following an elaborate decision matrix.

Annemieke says: "Diagnosis over the phone? Is that the medical field's equivalent of a comp check?



Sorry .... couldn't resist ....."



Comment: It does have some of the elements of a comp check scenario. More like prepaid comp checks, since it was a HMO that sponsored the help line. The advice worked well. It was amazing to consider all the possibilities the chart covered.

The person doing the questioning was a seasoned nurse. Naturally, I bugged her for details regarding the pattern of questioning, which was rather robotic. It was less like a comp check than like an appraiser tweaked AVM

Back on topic: Use scope, once in the morning, once at night. It helps prevent gingivitis.

 

[George Hatch]

All the extra disclaimers wouldn't have been necessary had Fannie not pre-loaded so many booby traps into their form.

 

[Brad Ellis]

Edd,

Actually just waiting for your medication to kick in and I see that it has.

Why you ask over and over again?

Answer: because too many appraisers just lie and seek out a number without telling the truth- so the net effect is that reviewers are being forced to ask the field appraiser about more proximate sales that "appear" on paper to be comparable, but which might not be.

THAT is why my really good appraisers do this routinely, i.e., telling me hey, Brad, I know you are going to find this one but...

Brad