Revision Request

[J Grant]

Not singling you out DWiley, just making comments about ROVs in general..."comps" sent by vested parties are 99% of the time nothing more than higher price non similar sales...on rare occasion they might identify a sale not included in report that can be a comp, but choosing comps does not mean every possible comp out there be used either. Sales sent from CU or a reviewer are in a different category imo...

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

I have more than once done a comparable search using MLS and inputted the same search criteria and had different comps appear or disappear for no rhyme or reason. I first noticed it when I pulled comps pre inspection then later did a fresh search after inspection using the same parameters and one or more of the comps that I had previously selected did not appear in the output. So sometimes there may be data/comps that are missed that are not the appraisers fault.

It's not their fault nor is it "punishment" as some have opined.

 

[DWiley]

Not singling you out DWiley, just making comments about ROVs in general..."comps" sent by vested parties are 99% of the time nothing more than higher price non similar sales...on rare occasion they might identify a sale not included in report that can be a comp, but choosing comps does not mean every possible comp out there be used either. Sales sent from CU or a reviewer are in a different category imo...

And? What matters is if there is pressure - not how relevant the sales are. Simply asking for a comment is not pressure, no matter how irrelevant the appraiser concludes the sales are.

Lenders often know that the sales are not relevant. They certainly know that 99% of the time ROVs will not change the results. I have had plenty of lenders acknowledge that they expect no action as the result of an ROV request. They (the lenders) are just asking for the appraiser to provide them a little customer service so they can do the same. The notion that there is always retaliation, or retaliation in a high percentage of cases, if an ROV does not change the value is just not reality. If that was the case no lender would have any appraisers left on their panel.

Can't have it both ways - appraiser can't yell about how 99% of the time and ROV results in no value change, but at the same time assert the lenders are retaliating over ROVs. It is oxymoronic. If the retaliation was as bad/widespread as some seem to claim/think, there wouldn't be any appraisers left, because 99% of the time the lender would be firing someone. That is NOT what happens in the real world.

 

[The Bob]

I have more than once done a comparable search using MLS and inputted the same search criteria and had different comps appear or disappear for no rhyme or reason. I first noticed it when I pulled comps pre inspection then later did a fresh search after inspection using the same parameters and one or more of the comps that I had previously selected did not appear in the output. So sometimes there may be data/comps that are missed that are not the appraisers fault.

I've had that happen too. Sometimes it's like the MLS is broken. If I suspect same, I will log out, log back in, and start new search. MLS seems to get "buggy" after doing multiple searches.

 

[residentialguy]

so if they sent you a sale that was better than the ones used in the report, and you added it to the report and resubmitted, would you have a problem with them turning you into the state board for violating the certification you signed?

No...I corrected it.

Now I'll swing it back to you as to the reverse. Would you have a problem with the State Board if you were given a ROV sale and you didn't correct it, now purposely violating USPAP with a misleading appraisal?

 

[TRESinc]

Frankly I have never heard a VA Panel appraiser complain. Its a coveted list to be on and these guys and gals don't let the VA down.

it used to be as you describe but not so much anymore. i know quite a few who have quit the VA panel, myself included. the county directly south of my coverage area has only had 3 on the VA panel for a few years now and i know one of those only is active for 2 weeks a month to be able to keep up with the work they send him (in all fairness he is semi-retired). if the VA was so coveted they would have ample supply but that is not the case.

No...I corrected it.

Now I'll swing it back to you as to the reverse. Would you have a problem with the State Board if you were given a ROV sale and you didn't correct it, now purposely violating USPAP with a misleading appraisal?

please clarify your answer -

no, you would not have a problem being turned into the state for violating the certification you signed when you did not use the best comps available?

no, you corrected it so you do not think there is cause to turn you into the state?

i ask because you quoted cert 7 earlier, and in the case where an ROV contains a comparable that is superior to the ones used in your report it would by definition violate cert 7, thus be more than eligible to be sanctioned in some form by your state board.


your question to me would never happen. i don't view ROVs as a punishment or a secondary income stream. when they are sent to me i address them as my clients request and review each submitted sale on it's own merit to determine why it was not used. i do not produce purposefully misleading reports.

 

[J Grant]

And? What matters is if there is pressure - not how relevant the sales are. Simply asking for a comment is not pressure, no matter how irrelevant the appraiser concludes the sales are.

Lenders often know that the sales are not relevant. They certainly know that 99% of the time ROVs will not change the results. I have had plenty of lenders acknowledge that they expect no action as the result of an ROV request. They (the lenders) are just asking for the appraiser to provide them a little customer service so they can do the same. The notion that there is always retaliation, or retaliation in a high percentage of cases, if an ROV does not change the value is just not reality. If that was the case no lender would have any appraisers left on their panel.

Can't have it both ways - appraiser can't yell about how 99% of the time and ROV results in no value change, but at the same time assert the lenders are retaliating over ROVs. It is oxymoronic. If the retaliation was as bad/widespread as some seem to claim/think, there wouldn't be any appraisers left, because 99% of the time the lender would be firing someone. That is NOT what happens in the real world.

i agree most times an ROV by vested party is nothing more than a nuisance to appraisers and a customer service issue ( which I said often in posts). I am not one of the ones here who takes its seriously as pressure...

Except in those cases, and I have experienced it, and there was a recent thread from an OP experiencing it, where a client abuses the ROV to send repeated, harassing demands and multiple sets of comps and requests for inane additional comments/informaton day after day , which imo is its own form of pressure, to wear the appraiser down into changing report just to get rid of it.
An ROV like so many other things is benign in most hands but has potential to be abused in others.

 

[residentialguy]

no, you would not have a problem being turned into the state for violating the certification you signed when you did not use the best comps available?

no, you corrected it so you do not think there is cause to turn you into the state?

Both. We've all made errors and have corrected them. Anyone one could turn any appraiser into the state, with or without cause. The correction, sanctioned by law, was made prior to any reliance on the appraisal and no harm was caused.

your question to me would never happen. i don't view ROVs as a punishment or a secondary income stream. when they are sent to me i address them as my clients request and review each submitted sale on it's own merit to determine why it was not used. i do not produce purposefully misleading reports.

What do you mean "it wouldn't happen to you"? Do you have different certs than the FNMA 1004 that I have?
So if you find the ROV supplied a better sale that changed the outcome and you corrected your report, how does that differ from my corrected report?

 

[Mr Rex]

If you are getting a bunch of ROV requests maybe its you. Just saying I can count on one hand the ROV requests I have had over the past 10 years. Of course I say what I do and do what I say with ample delineation of my comparable search criteria within the report so it can be duplicated by others with the same access to data that I have. And yes, I probably come in under contract on 5-10% of my reports, even after doing a full colonoscopy on the available market data before writing the obits. YMMV.

 

[Eli]

And? What matters is if there is pressure - not how relevant the sales are. Simply asking for a comment is not pressure, no matter how irrelevant the appraiser concludes the sales are.

Lenders often know that the sales are not relevant. They certainly know that 99% of the time ROVs will not change the results. I have had plenty of lenders acknowledge that they expect no action as the result of an ROV request. They (the lenders) are just asking for the appraiser to provide them a little customer service so they can do the same. The notion that there is always retaliation, or retaliation in a high percentage of cases, if an ROV does not change the value is just not reality. If that was the case no lender would have any appraisers left on their panel.

Can't have it both ways - appraiser can't yell about how 99% of the time and ROV results in no value change, but at the same time assert the lenders are retaliating over ROVs. It is oxymoronic. If the retaliation was as bad/widespread as some seem to claim/think, there wouldn't be any appraisers left, because 99% of the time the lender would be firing someone. That is NOT what happens in the real world.

Ok, with technology, can we correlate ROV’s with refinance amount or contract price?


I didn’t fall off the pumpkin wagon yesterday.