StreetLinks - New Limited Desk Review Product

[Tony Ebeyer]

How can an appraiser know what's comparable unless the appraiser understands what makes them comparable?

You clearly have no clue about real property appraisal. Therefore you shouldn't be creating "products."

Greg,

From the SCORe form:

EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION: This review is made based on the Extraordinary Assumption that the report under review includes credible factual information for the subject property's physical features and characteristics, market data, and related market area information (unless otherwise noted in this review report). If the assumption is incorrect, it could have a significant impact upon the accuracy of the conclusions developed within this appraisal review assignment.

The review appraiser obtains the "what makes it comparable" information from the appraisal report being reviewed and assumes that it is correct. Again, it is a limited-scope review (see Scope on the SCORe form), as permissible by USPAP, with only the comp selection being scrutinized.

The process is as follows:

IF the highest-and-best use is as reported, and
IF the GLA is as reported, and
IF the Bedroom/Bathroom count is as reported, and
IF etc, etc.

Then an MLS search by a geo-competent appraiser can provide lenders with a second opinion as to the adequacy of comp selection.

 

[CANative]

So what benefit does the client get if the "product technician" bases his comp conclusions on incorrect HBU or market data contained in the work under review?

 

[Tony Ebeyer]

It's bad because you're creating a shortcut to giving them what they "want" instead of what they need.

And you're in cahoots with Bradford to create forms that appraiser will have to pay for to do work they shouldn't be doing. All you'll do is attract appraisers too stupid to understand that the scope of work decision is their responsibility and not the client's or the AMC's responsibility.

Greg,

Lenders are making a lending decision - what they "need" is defined by what they "want". And what they want is a second opinion on comp selection. They have been trying to get that from an AVM. SCORe gives them that second opinion from a geo-competent appraiser.

As my previous post mentions, there is no charge for the SCORe form from any of the software providers that we have engaged to provide it.

Tony Ebeyer, COO
StreetLinks National Appraisal Services

 

[Doug Meyer]

When the Indiana bill is signed into law, USPAP Standard 3 reviews of appraisals on property located in Indiana that are performed by an AMC must be performed by an appraiser who is licensed in Indiana

Tony, that is the new Indiana law requirements is it not? Your firm must hire competent local and licensed in our state. Is this part of fulfilling that requirement?

 

[CANative]

With bradford the appraiser must be current on very expensive yearly maintenance fees in order to get these new forms.

 

[CANative]

what they "need" is defined by what they "want".

How naive of you.

 

[Mr Rex]

Sounds like some lenders might be getting some heat from the State Appraisal boards regarding geo-competency on those wonderful LARA type reviews from someone with a license and a pulse in some state somewhere other that the state of the appraisal under review and have decided to replace that POS with this POS.

 

[CANative]

Clearly what's needed is more products and more licensed product technicians.

 

[hovious]

Tony (the COO of Streetlinks)...

I have a question for you.

Have you ever thought of telling your contracted lenders that, if Streetlinks were to pursue the most qualified appraisers in this country to perform appraisals for Streelinks, none of this would be necessary?

 

[CANative]

I'm not trying to bust Tony's chops but this is just the same crap repackaged with a clever sounding acronym (funny the "e" is lower case like e-appraise-****).