Valligent

[bnmappraisal]

No JG. I haven't (that I know of off hand anyway) and, no offense to CAN as I respect a lot of his posts, but I think what they're "looking for" is someone to load off the liability.

I will say, that if they're just looking for someone to tell them if the report meets/stands up to USPAP, it could be a decent gig (not the best, not the worst) for somebody, but when they add things like (and I paraphrase b/c I'm bad with copy/paste from prior pg posts) if you don't find the comps to be the best you have to add at least one, if not three! I think they're "it only takes 30 mins" type thing comes from the fact that they hope/expect most reports are completed by competent appraisers and it shouldn't take too long to verify this info. I personally disagree, because my general pre appointment research (and I do almost solely urban/suburban) takes about 20-30 minutes. So if I'm asked to verify another appraisers work and then to do a search to see if there are "better comps" ... I, personally, am looking at more than 30 mins/report, easy.

Once you start delving into that world ("are there better comps"), that becomes an appraisal assignment! I do agree with the USPAP that we can look at a CA report in FL and say whether it meets the standards ... But to be asked if a CA report meets market value or "are there better comps" while looking at it in FL??? Yeeeaaaa ... not so much.

 

[CANative]

I'm not giving my opinion of whether or not this "thing" is good or bad because I would have to see exactly what's involved.

I'm just saying it's not automatically bad and why I think that. Sometimes I question whether appraisers really understand all the things that go into this business.

 

[bnmappraisal]

Do them at your leisure between other assignments.

With all due respect (since this thread is about an AMC) .... when the #^!! did you ever hear an AMC utter those terms?!

 

[Evincere]

Is that how they assign? do at your leisure? If so, maybe, but every experience I have ever had with companies like this is about tight turn times and harassment to update the website.

You are absolutely correct on both counts. Did one and only ONE years ago mostly out of curiosity and constant solicitations. What the heck, right? Live and learn something new as I am very aware that the desire for alternate products is a reality.

Anyway, one was sent with the OA, and another which I never completed was sent with a BPO. I don't know about other peoples ability to be expeditious while maintaining due diligence but verifying comparable sales alone can easily take up to and no less than half hour, doing analysis, market trends, running comparable data, uploading to the website, to me was time consuming nightmare and I lost track of time because after a while I was not focused on time - fast or quick. And I knew, I would not be doing any other assignments of this kind.

Because of the (false) perception and hype associated with the marketing of these products, that these jobs are supposed to be quick and easy - there is most definitely associated stress. Fast and easy if you're accustomed by practice and training to be thorough and complete is NOT the case for these reports.

The experience reminds me of the commercials for new drugs. Couples smiling lovingly at each other over their new found intimacy, people who've discovered this new miraculous panacea for sleep, who wake up wake stretching with refreshed happiness and come hither smiles. And at the end of the commercial the narrator in rapid fire speech and lowered voice warns to call Dr. immediately if bleeding eyeballs, arrhythmia, itchy sores fever or diarrhea develop.

For the hours it took to complete, to learn the process, the stress and the subsequent "corrections" to use exact, precise client specific language, the research, etc. I would in hindsight consider wearing one of those chicken costumes, do the chicken dance in front of car wash and just leave with my $10 an hour.

PS. I do not know what Valligents product is like and what I have commented on was a product from another company which I am presuming to be similar, wherein the fee offered was similar to what's being offered by Valligent.

 

[CANative]

With all due respect (since this thread is about an AMC) .... when the #^!! did you ever hear an AMC utter those terms?!

Valligent isn't your typical AMC.

The assignment (from what I gather in the text of an email sent to an appraiser on Facebook) is for a GSE. There could be 10's or even 100's of thousands of these. The scope of work is to develop an opinion as to the quality of the comparable sales used on the adjustment table of a Fannie Form in context with the subject property characteristics as shows on the same table. Part of the assignment conditions might be the assumption that the subject data is accurate.

I would bet a nickle that these would be offered to the appraiser in batches and that there would not be an unreasonable turn time.

 

[CANative]

Anyway, one was sent with the OA, and another which I never completed was sent with a BPO.

From the descriptions I've read this does not seem like what you are describing.

 

[CANative]

Once you start delving into that world ("are there better comps"), that becomes an appraisal assignment!

No it doesn't. It's still a review which might or might not include the review appraisers opinion of value.

Also, read the comments to SR3-3(c).

 

[bnmappraisal]

Valligent isn't your typical AMC.

The assignment (from what I gather in the text of an email sent to an appraiser on Facebook) is for a GSE. There could be 10's or even 100's of thousands of these. The scope of work is to develop an opinion as to the quality of the comparable sales used on the adjustment table of a Fannie Form in context with the subject property characteristics as shows on the same table. Part of the assignment conditions might be the assumption that the subject data is accurate.

I would bet a nickle that these would be offered to the appraiser in batches and that there would not be an unreasonable turn time.

CAN, I agree with a lot of you quote above. I don't doubt they have 10's or even 100's of thousands of files/orders to DRiVE (as was stated before). As I stated above, I think I could look over one of your reports from CA and vice versa to see if it makes sense/violates per USPAP. I'm fine with that. I understand that.
But when it/they (input an AMC; not directed totally toward Valligent in this case) ask us, appraisers, to "The scope of work is to develop an opinion as to the quality of the comparable sales used on the adjustment table of a Fannie Form in context with the subject property characteristics as shows on the same table. Part of the assignment conditions might be the assumption that the subject data is accurate." That sort of changes things! I'm no longer looking over CAN's CA report, I'm now giving my opinion (IMO - OMV) of whether CAN's OMV is BEST AVAILABLE, ACCEPTABLE or UNACCEPTABLE.
I'm no USPAP instructor by any means, but ... to me, that's an OMV by an appraiser, hence, must adhere to USPAP and the standards.... not a $40-50 fee (yes, fee discussed is a business decision and I, personally, am not accepting that)

I was giving some details. They said they didn't want a value. But they did want the appraiser to grade the comparable as 1) Best available 2) Acceptable 3)Unacceptable.

I believe she said if acceptable or unacceptable was marked , new comparables had to be re-gridded . At least one new comparable, and maybe more for unacceptable.

It seems like close to the amount of work I do for one client who orders desktops at $125. So, really from my point of view, $50 does not seem like a market fee for that type of product.

They say they don't want a value but they are asking you to re-grid new comparables which would produce a value range even if they are not reconciled. That seems to me like an appraisal, even if they are saying no value is asked for.

At any rate, it is a business decision. I don't see any need to work for that kind of fee.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Here you go. Decided to accept a few to see what they were like and also to provide forum members with some insight

Client is a GSE
Assumption already in place that subject data is accurate
No opinion of value required.
CMA required for all situations. Has to be uploaded separately. Only have to provide additional sales if you check acceptable or unacceptable for original sales used
Not really a "grid". Just one line with address, MLS #, list price, sale price, S/L ratio and basic physical characteristics
Software they use has most of basic information on form filled in when you open it. Just a few items to fill in. OA name, type of interest, your data sources,
Software generates location maps
Generous turn time. Received 2 today with due date of 01/12/2015

Did 2 in less than an hour. Both in suburban neighborhoods I was familiar with. But I considered sales used in both of them best available so minimal time needed. Could take a little longer if have to provide better sales but the first 2 required a bit of a learning curve. Might accept some more since I am a little slow.

 

[nstanbru]

That sort of changes things! I'm no longer looking over CAN's CA report, I'm now giving my opinion (IMO - OMV) of whether CAN's OMV is BEST AVAILABLE, ACCEPTABLE or UNACCEPTABLE.
I'm no USPAP instructor by any means, but ... to me, that's an OMV by an appraiser, hence, must adhere to USPAP and the standards.... not a $40-50 fee (yes, fee discussed is a business decision and I, personally, am not accepting that)

I would agree that there is room for discussion about this type of work. But, I didn't read anything in CAN's post regarding what he saw on a Facebook posting, regarding an opinion, other than to comment on the quality of the comps. I don't see that as providing an OMV.