• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Revision Requests -having To Explain Peer Appraiser's Data In My Reports?

Status
Not open for further replies.
That would be an extraordinary assumption to some. Especially some hiring appraisers. I could go in to bad mentors too as well as bad clients.

When it comes to residential appraising, methodology and technique is limited. Right?
 
When it comes to residential appraising, methodology and technique is limited. Right?

Right. New ones can be developed, but are pretty much limited by the approaches to value.

Can't pull it out of the air nor can a client put pressure on value. Blacklisting.
 
When it comes to residential appraising, methodology and technique is limited. Right?

The problem is appraising methodology was developed before the mass data gathering of computers and ability of anyone to access data over a smartphone. Now, everyone with access to data is an "expert" , qualified in their minds to challenge an appraisal.

Add in after delivery of an appraisal clients or Fannie , reviewers at an AMC, use computer programs and software programs to vet results that a human came up with using human qualities of judgement, analysis, opinions. Appraisers are not just analyzing data, we are analyzing markets and buyer/seller behavior and factoring in market trends to the data. Which does not always result in computer friendly consistency. If appraisals start to mimic computers to deliver computer friendly results, such as using AVM type programs , then it is no longer an appraisal. Call it something else because it is at that point something else.

CU is a programmer's ideal that comparing appraisals to each other will reveal which is "right", or "better" or whatever they expect to find.

Except for outright bad/misleading results such as calling a C4 house C1, differences between reports are intrinsic to each reports' development.

Appraisal methodology was developed to be challenged by review performed by another appraiser (field or desk review). The methodology was not developed to be "reviewed" by computers, software programs, data dumps. or agenda driven ROV by non appraisers. Which is why appraisers have so much trouble coping with and responding to these kinds of challenges.

How do you respond (without crying or tearing hair out) to a set of "comps" clearly superior and non relevant sent as an ROV? How do you respond to inane set of non relevant "comps" spit back from a computer? How do you "explain in detail" how an adjustment was derived, when the method of developing that adjustment is partly intuitive aka judgments and conclusions of filtering data vs raw data math. How to respond to a CU blind type of question such as your adjustment or condition rating differs from a peers' or model? We respond as best we can but it's difficult to form defensible responses to a series of challenges that appraisals were not designed to withstand.
 
Last edited:
methodology and technique is limited. Right?
Everything has a limit but the variance between factors is high...probably as high as the variation between houses being built. So I can use room count and not make a GLA adjustment at all. That works within narrow ranges of home age/size/quality. I can adjust for room count AND GLA and the GLA adjustment in that case would normally be smaller than if I also parse the room count...otherwise, I double dip. Same with "Quality". Do I adjustment for overall quality? Or, the individual things that make up quality? Fireplace, crown molding, granite countertops, etc. Virtually any subject can be parsed by depreciated cost, income methods, SF adjustments, etc. Doing so consistently should result in similar results, but not identical.

In my specialization, I usually apply 3 different income methods and the results can be quite different. It then is my judgment about which is most applicable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eli
The problem is appraising methodology was developed before the mass data gathering of computers and ability of anyone to access data over a smartphone. Now, everyone with access to data is an "expert" , qualified in their minds to challenge an appraisal.

Add in after delivery of an appraisal clients or Fannie , reviewers at an AMC, use computer programs and software programs to vet results that a human came up with using human qualities of judgement, analysis, opinions. Appraisers are not just analyzing data, we are analyzing markets and buyer/seller behavior and factoring in market trends to the data. Which does not always result in computer friendly consistency. If appraisals start to mimic computers to deliver computer friendly results, such as using AVM type programs , then it is no longer an appraisal. Call it something else because it is at that point something else.

CU is a programmer's ideal that comparing appraisals to each other will reveal which is "right", or "better" or whatever they expect to find.

Except for outright bad/misleading results such as calling a C4 house C1, differences between reports are intrinsic to each reports' development.

Appraisal methodology was developed to be challenged by review performed by another appraiser (field or desk review). The methodology was not developed to be "reviewed" by computers, software programs, data dumps. or agenda driven ROV by non appraisers. Which is why appraisers have so much trouble coping with and responding to these kinds of challenges.

How do you respond (without crying or tearing hair out) to a set of "comps" clearly superior and non relevant sent as an ROV? How do you respond to inane set of non relevant "comps" spit back from a computer? How do you "explain in detail" how an adjustment was derived, when the method of developing that adjustment is partly intuitive aka judgments and conclusions of filtering data vs raw data math. How to respond to a CU blind type of question such as your adjustment or condition rating differs from a peers' or model? We respond as best we can but it's difficult to form defensible responses to a series of challenges that appraisals were not designed to withstand.

i can't wait for UCbruin to answer all those questions. Maybe you should have went one question at a time.:flowers:
 
When it comes to residential appraising, methodology and technique is limited. Right?

the question should be "when it comes to the client's methodology & technique for appraisal tolerances, it shouldn't be unreasonable tight for variances. i have my favorite client who doesn't ask you anything if your CU score is below 2.5. that is a reasonable tolerance. i understand i am in a big urban area with an abundance of data, some of you may not be. the problem is not appraising, it is the client accepted tolerances for appraising differences. after this thread is there 1 positive thing to say about our business. maybe one? you can still say "goodbye" to that annoying client. but say it nicely, you never know if they eventually realize they have no good appraisers left. and then maybe not.
 
I have had that come up twice with regard to room count on comparable sales. I send the MLS listing to the lender and ask how their data could come up with a different room count when it is easy to count on the MLS sheet.
 
I have had that come up twice with regard to room count on comparable sales. I send the MLS listing to the lender and ask how their data could come up with a different room count when it is easy to count on the MLS sheet.

How did that question get answered? I have a feeling I know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top