Standard 3 And A Summary Of The Review

[Michigan CG]

I am involved in a litigation case where my client wants the other appraisal reviewed (actually he wants it discredited) so that he can use it for questioning the other appraiser when we go to court. He wants a bullet point list only for the day of court and would like some of the bullet points to be in the form of a question to the other appraiser.

The bullet-point document would state what is wrong with the report and contain sample questions for the attorney to use. Since the bullet-point document is an opinion of the other appraisers work does it need to abide by any standard or rules of USPAP since there is a separate Standard 3 review?

Obviously the review and the separate document are not discoverable by the other side but attorneys like to settle before court and it is possible for the document(s) to be sent to the other side to settle before court. Should they not settle in my testimony the opposing attorney could ask if I performed a Standard 3 review and if he is a smart cookie could ask about the bullet-point document and if it meets USPAP standards.

In the past I have provided Standard 3 reviews and the attorney either prepares his own list or in a pre-court meeting we discuss the shortfalls of the report.

I am thinking about putting a letter of transmittal with all the bullet points on the front of the Standard 3 report to cover all my bases and make the attorney happy.

But surely there are appraisers who just give the attorney the bullet-point document with no standard 3 report and no certifications.

 

[hastalavista]

IMO,,,,
.
If you are working as the consultant (as an appraiser) then your work is not discoverable as you point out.
However, I have an issue with just providing a review with what is negative in the report. IMO, the way to do this is to do the review; point out the sections that are acceptable and unacceptable and then make a conclusion of the overall quality.
The report's overall quality might be acceptable but there may be deficiencies nonetheless. Alternatively, the deficiencies could be either significant or of a sufficient quantity to have a cumulative and negative quality rating.
You can expand the discussion of the negative points and provide insight into the questions to ask (provide the foundation for why they are issues and the line of inquiry to expose the deficiency).
This way, you are providing objective and impartial analysis.
"Here's the good, here's the bad. Here's my overall quality rating. Given the intended use, I've expanding my discussion on the bad stuff so you have the foundation to ask the questions you want to ask."
The attorney is then free to use the information for his/her intended use.
You've provide an objective and unbiased review.

That's my advice.

 

[Eli]

I am involved in a litigation case where my client wants the other appraisal reviewed (actually he wants it discredited) so that he can use it for questioning the other appraiser when we go to court. He wants a bullet point list only for the day of court and would like some of the bullet points to be in the form of a question to the other appraiser.

The bullet-point document would state what is wrong with the report and contain sample questions for the attorney to use. Since the bullet-point document is an opinion of the other appraisers work does it need to abide by any standard or rules of USPAP since there is a separate Standard 3 review?

Obviously the review and the separate document are not discoverable by the other side but attorneys like to settle before court and it is possible for the document(s) to be sent to the other side to settle before court. Should they not settle in my testimony the opposing attorney could ask if I performed a Standard 3 review and if he is a smart cookie could ask about the bullet-point document and if it meets USPAP standards.

In the past I have provided Standard 3 reviews and the attorney either prepares his own list or in a pre-court meeting we discuss the shortfalls of the report.

I am thinking about putting a letter of transmittal with all the bullet points on the front of the Standard 3 report to cover all my bases and make the attorney happy.

But surely there are appraisers who just give the attorney the bullet-point document with no standard 3 report and no certifications.

Your on track. Include the kitchen sink and all. Everything you know. Don’t sweat it.

 

[Michigan CG]

..............you are working as the consultant (as an appraiser) then your work is not discoverable as you point out.
However, I have an issue with just providing a review with what is negative in the report. IMO, the way to do this is to do the review; point out the sections that are acceptable and unacceptable and then make a conclusion of the overall quality.............

My work is not discoverable BUT I would not be surprised if the attorney were to send my work (he wants bullet points of what is wrong..........he wants the report discredited which is not hard to do). If the attorney submits to the opposing side what he wants, a bullet-point list of what is wrong, then that document would be open to all in the case. My thought is to provide a letter of transmittal stating what is wrong with the report, per his request, attached to the review which will review the report on both what is acceptable and not acceptable.

 

[timd354]

I am involved in a litigation case where my client wants the other appraisal reviewed (actually he wants it discredited) so that he can use it for questioning the other appraiser when we go to court. He wants a bullet point list only for the day of court and would like some of the bullet points to be in the form of a question to the other appraiser.

The bullet-point document would state what is wrong with the report and contain sample questions for the attorney to use. .

From your description of what you are being asked to do, that is not an appraisal or an appraisal review assignment, but a litigation support/consulting assignment. The reason I am stating that is that your are not being engaged to provide an unbiased review, you are specifically being asked to discredit an opposing expert's report in litigation and to formulate questions the attorney can use to further the interests of the case.

If you were also retained by the attorney to do an appraisal in this case an are already acting as an appraiser, then there is a real problem doing what you are being asked to do since you are essentially being asked to advocate for your client's interests.

If you have not been engaged to perform an appraisal in this case and are not providing expert testimony then you can work perform the work requested as a litigation consultant but you need to tread very carefully and you really need to make it clear that you are not performing appraisal work but litigation consulting work.

 

[Michigander]

So you completed an appraisal and because you did, you were hired because you are an appraiser. Now the attorney wants you to "discredit" the other appraisal. Sounds to me, that no matter what you do, you have to abide by the Ethics, Competency and SOW rules, definition of appraisal practice, appraisal review, and appraiser. Seems also you are treading into review. Appraisal Review definition is:

APPRAISAL REVIEW: (noun) the act or process of developing an opinion about the quality of another appraiser’s
work that was performed as part of an appraisal or appraisal review assignment; (adjective) of or pertaining to an
opinion about the quality of another appraiser’s work that was performed as part of an appraisal or appraisal review
assignment.
Comment: The subject of an appraisal review assignment may be all or part of a report, workfile, or a
combination of these.

Why not simply do a review in a manner that is independent, impartial and objective, meaning that you acknowledge both the good and the bad and let the client choose what they want to present. Food for thought, wouldn't the client also benefit knowing what was well done in the report as well? Remember as an appraiser, you cannot advocate (other in defense of your own work of course).

A reviewer who only seeks to find things that are wrong does everyone a disservice. All reports have good and not so good, so just lay it out as what was done right, and what was not. My opinion of course - obviously I do not do the type of work you are suggesting. TimD is an attorney too, he can be a good guide on this.

 

[Michigan CG]

Why not simply do a review in a manner that is independent, impartial and objective, meaning that you acknowledge both the good and the bad and let the client choose what they want to present.

Yes I am doing that.....but he wants this bullet-point list of everything that is wrong in addition to the review.

 

[Michigander]

Yes I am doing that.....but he wants this bullet-point list of everything that is wrong in addition to the review.

Okay, how about laying out an executive summary which divides the bad and the good and the attorney can copy and paste what they want, but you deliver an unbiased product.

The report was strong in the following manner:

• The legal description and property characteristics were well defined
• The highest and best use section was well developed and logical

The report was weak in the following ways:

• The sales comparison approach included two sales that were not adequately verified and sold for prices that were lower than disclosed (whatever, I am trying to come up with some examples)
• The cost approach could not be replicated within reason from the cited source
• blah, blah, blah

 

[Michigan CG]

Okay, how about laying out an executive summary which divides the bad and the good and the attorney can copy and paste what they want, but you deliver an unbiased product.

The report was strong in the following manner:

• The legal description and property characteristics were well defined
• The highest and best use section was well developed and logical

The report was weak in the following ways:

• The sales comparison approach included two sales that were not adequately verified and sold for prices that were lower than disclosed (whatever, I am trying to come up with some examples)
• The cost approach could not be replicated within reason from the cited source
• blah, blah, blah

Above I talked about doing a letter of transmittal at the front of the report similar to an executive summary.

The report was strong in the following manner:

• The legal description and property characteristics were well defined
• The highest and best use section was well developed and logical

He did get the legal right.........no highest and best use analysis, box checked though!! You should write an article about that.

 

[J Grant]

Yes I am doing that.....but he wants this bullet-point list of everything that is wrong in addition to the review.

In addition to the review...how can it be a review, which is an evaluation of an appraisal from an unbiased perspective, when the assignment purpose, which you acknowledge here, is to discredit the appraisal?

Why not disclose you were hired to find material flaws in the appraisal , if there are any, as a consulting assignment. Then list what flaws you found ( bullet point list for atty).

If you do develop a review, one assumes it would be done impartially-, then state as an additional assignment, you used some of your findings from the review to prepare a bullet point list for the attorney to use as a list of questions.

Thus imo it would be 2 assignments, 1) an appraisal review, 2) a consulting assignment for purpose of preparing a list of questions for attorney based on any deficiencies found in the review.