Okay, I agree with your assessment per your example...but if this were to transpire, aka new information comes to light post appraisal that would change the value , would a new assignment take place, if the value is to be changed? Because this foundation issue was unknown to the appraiser as of the effective date, and the appraiser can only base their MV opinion on what was known to them as of the effective date ( even if the condition existed as of effective date, due to limits of appraiser expertise it was not known or discovable to them at the time of inspection.
But if a new assignment is not needed, imo the appraiser would be within their rights to charge additional (though USPAP does not care about that lol), to go back retroactive and change value as of same eff date, due to information that became known about property after the effective inspection date ...because that information was not available to the appraiser as of the inspection date. Might need new comps if a value change, certainly new consideration of condition and impact on value.
Fees are what muddies this discussion. We don't need a new assignment to charge an additional fee. My example (and I disagree with Terrel here) requires no new effective date. The property was what it was on the date we inspected. Everything collected through that date is used to complete the analysis and our value is based on that data for that date. In my example, the foundation condition existed as-of the effective date; it just wasn't discovered at the inspection. It is being disclosed now.
Does this knowledge change the value? It would in nearly all cases.
Would it require a re-analysis of the data? Yes.
Does the effective date need to change? No.
Should I get paid for the re-analysis? Yes, but for certain clients, I may waive that (my business decision).
This would be no different than completing the inspection on the 5th, and receiving the contractor's report on the 10th. I didn't see the foundation issue on the 5th, but it existed. I became aware of it on the 10th. Do I need to go back out and re-inspect with an effective date of the 11th because of this new information? No.
The original report was completed based on the information available at that time. In my example, new information is disclosed that affects the subject's physical characteristics, was present on the date of the inspection, but was not identified or disclosed on that date. Do I need to complete a new assignment to incorporate this new information? No.
De-link the fee issue from the appraisal process and I believe most would not run to the "new assignment" corner of the room.
Again, I'm not saying an additional fee isn't appropriate. But "fee" has nothing to do with the scenario where a purchase contract has been amended and the amendment is due to something that existed as-of the effective date but was not discoverable or disclosed at that time.
community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.
