ROV that results in a reduction in value

[alebrewer]

I think they were venting. Let people breathe and express their frustration - that is part of the beauty of this board. Appraisers are isolated and being weaponized against- this is one of the few places to connect. Not every post needs a debate or argument - just saying.

That's why I phrased it very gently. Learn to recognize inflection in writing, J. It will take you a long way. That said, of course it's ok to vent. When you start a 4 page thread venting over a make believe scenario that folks believe is true - and are trying to assist in helping OP, it tends to be a bit tedious.

 

[residentialguy]

Not possible in the lending world - would love for that to happen but it would not fit TRID and if an appraiser insisted on it, that would be their last order from the client imo.

Instead, appraisers need to charge enough upfront fee because an ROV could happen even with a well-supported appraisal. I hope fees finally go up with the UAD 3.6.

I disagree. This would not harm consumers. While I am not currently appraising, I did dispel that "that would be your last order" myth by doing it for many many years. It saved the clients and consumers a lot of time...which saves them money. Certainly a better route than to pad your fees for something that never occurred. That's fraud

 

[J Grant]

I disagree. This would not harm consumers. While I am not currently appraising, I did dispel that "that would be your last order" myth by doing it for many many years. It saved the clients and consumers a lot of time...which saves them money. Certainly a better route than to pad your fees for something that never occurred. That's fraud

I agree that it would not harm consumers. But that is not the reason. I wish we could charge for every stupid "comp" we have to review in an ROV!!

However, charging for an ROV with the regulations in place around TRID, plus the fear that an appraiser can disagree with a good sale comp so they could then charge for the ROV, would not make it practical.

 

[residentialguy]

I agree that it would not harm consumers. But that is not the reason. I wish we could charge for every stupid "comp" we have to review in an ROV!!

However, charging for an ROV with the regulations in place around TRID, plus the fear that an appraiser can disagree with a good sale comp so they could then charge for the ROV, would not make it practical.

It's always scary to try something you've never tried. It's way easier to say that it'll never work. But these fears are just in your mind. I never lost clients...however, I did lose having to do silly work for nothing.

 

[J Grant]

Back to development issue -there are nearly always other sales out there that we did not use. The question is, why do we exclude some sales and include others? Imo, this is the key skill of an appraiser and shapes the entire report.

Some appraisers are tone deaf at picking comps. Those appraisers, imo, should not be doing residential lender work ( unless they improve ). Some appraisers seem better suited to be a county assessor or commercial since they can't get their head out of numbers /data and into the market.

Other appraisers know what a good comp is, but cherry-pick to hit a value. Those appraisers also should not be doing lender work, and whose fault is it that they continue on every year?

For the appraisers who choose good comps that support their OMV then are stuck with unpaid time for an ROV if any party does not like the value. Some lenders and AMCs use an ROV or review as a form of punishment - come in low, get hit with a bunch of stips that they would ignore if the value hit the number.

 

[alebrewer]

Even the selection of sales for analysis is an opinion. Opinions are not fact.

 

[J Grant]

Even the selection of sales for analysis is an opinion. Opinions are not fact.

Jeez we know that !! Lol -The definition of an appraisal is that it is an opinion.

However, an appraisal opinion should be credibly supported by facts and a narrative that explains market behavior, which is what makes it a professional opinion. If an appraiser has a pattern of making poorly supported or agenda-driven opinions, the fact that they are in demand since they provide profit to an AMC or more loans green-lighted to lender points out the corruption and conflict of interests that is the real problem in the profession.

A competent review will reveal a well-supported opinion vs a poorly supported one. However, field or desk reviews focusing on that are not mandatory - instead, we have a minimal standard QC review, which is just a form of compliance that is imo close to worthless- scanning for a typo or USPAP petty violation.

 

[alebrewer]

Jeez we know that !! Lol -The definition of an appraisal is that it is an opinion.

And yet you just chastised me for calling someone out for stating the obvious. You're a true piece of work.

 

[BRCJR]

I agree that it would not harm consumers. But that is not the reason. I wish we could charge for every stupid "comp" we have to review in an ROV!!

However, charging for an ROV with the regulations in place around TRID, plus the fear that an appraiser can disagree with a good sale comp so they could then charge for the ROV, would not make it practical.

The lender could/should/would pay the additional fee, if applicable. The closing loan docs would then not have to be changed......it could be charged to the lenders loan expense on their ledger.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

The problem is who decides that and in what order? Does proximity outweigh functionality? How physically similar is similar enough? Does one weight location over what? With commutes in many areas often 30 miles or more, and many professionals now working remote at least 3 days a week, does it matter so much how close the properties are to services or jobs? What factor is the most important? Isn't that a personal choice? The single or childless might care less about the school as fewer and fewer people have families. Is the factors of one pool of buyers matter more than other? Working young, singles, retirees? That is a choice the appraiser necessarily has to decide. So, how can anyone dispute your opinion without being inside your mind?