Vendor agreements with "hold harmless"

[Carnivore]

I wonder if they are trying to duck responsibilty for altering reports and the possible ramifications of an altered report.

Yes! I am not sure its their responsibility, but they certainly would be dragged into a lawsuit if something did happen.

The Hold Harmless needs to be drawn up between Appraisers and the Actual Clients. We do this by notifiying the clients that FNC software is causing problems, but if the client insist on using Aiport then we insist on a hold harmless ALSO!

You see its all about ring around the posey(or is that rosie).

What do you think?

 

[Lobo Fan]

I just sent an e-mail to Landsafe asking them about altered reports and who is responsible. The Virginia REAB has documented that AP alters reports, yet according to USPAP, we are responsible until the report is in the client's hands. Is it delivered to the client when AP gets it or when AP delivers the altered version to the client?

 

[DWiley]

why are so full heartily defending it as it is OK for all of us to sign it, when you can not admit it yourself?

Defending it? I said that the language was unfair. I said all such agrements are unfair. And I never said it was Ok to sign it. I said that was a business decision for each person to make. The recommendation I made was for appraisers to carry general liability insurance.

Unless, you have something different than what most do?

First there was the insuation that I had some "special" version of AIReady software. Now comes the insinuation that I get sign a special user agreement.


Just so we are clear, the software I have is the same as anyone else's, and if I use AP I have to agree to the same things as any other user.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Is it delivered to the client when AP gets it or when AP delivers the altered version to the client?

AP is NOT the Client.

 

[Lobo Fan]

AP is the client's agent.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Not necessarily.

 

[McPheeters]

Mr. Woolley,

As I said earlier, how people choose to run their business is a private matter. Whether I have or have not signed the agreement is no one else's concern.

Your question did motivate me to do a litle research. I just uploaded an appraisal report to a web portal (not AP) for delivery to regional lender. I looked back through the file and did some additional research to attempt to idenitify how many hold harmless/indemification clauses I had to agree to in order to produce and deliver that report.



Counting just the agreements required to produce and deliver that one report, I found 15 of them, and I probably missed some. I had to sign one in order to:

• use the basic forms software
• use the mapping software
• use the sketch software
• use the portal
• create the PDF
• apply the digital signature

Just obtaining the data I used to do my analyses required agreeing to 7 different hold harmless/indemnification agreements. If I followed the advice in the OP, how could I even produce an appraisal report?

Perhaps some have been working totally unaware of the things they have agreed to and the liability they have taken on. These hold harmless/indemnification clauses are far more common than most realize. Anyone working without a good general liability policy is playing with fire.

A simple "no" would have sufficed, but thanks anyway.

 

[DWiley]

What do you think?

Since the ENV file with the AIReady version of the report is created by the appraiser, not by AP, I don't think they are too concerened about it. If the appraiser omitted something from the ENV file, that is the appraiser's fault, that's not AP's.

I know (not think) that one of the loudest voices in this whole mess is a person who was using AIReady without taking the time to learn how it works. How do I know? He told me that during a conversation we had.

He did not realize that the conversion happened on his machine, and he was not previewing reports before sending them. He was sending reports but did not know what he was sending. The lender's copy of the report did not look like the copy in hs workfile, but it was a true copy of the report he sent.

By his own admission, he is mad that he did not know what was sent, and he is looking to blame entities other than himself for not knowing how to use the software. Despite the fact that he now knows that the conversion is done by him, he is talking to lots of media and still claiming that the conversion is done during transmission and/or that it is done by AP.

Like signing the agreement, using AIReady is a business decision. If one decides to use AIReady, one is responsible for learning how it works. At least once a week I have to recompile a PDF file because Adobe did a poor job converting it. So what? I review the file before sending it, and if it did not convert correctly I run it again. AIReady works the same way, but lots of people are apparently skipping the preview step. This leaves them with the impression that AP or the lender has changed the file when in fact the file is just as they sent it.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

USPAP SOW RULE consideration

Lender client orders a SFR appraisal stipulating reporting format MUST be on a Fannie 1004_05 appraisal report form as designed published and required by Fannie.

Does anyone have any Lender Assignment form, or announcement, regulation revision, or statement from the GSES which authorizes an Appraiser who accepts such an order to deliver an appraisal report in ANY OTHER format? If so, please post same.

Thanks.

 

[TJSum]

Defending it? I said that the language was unfair. I said all such agrements are unfair. And I never said it was Ok to sign it. I said that was a BUSINESS DECISION for each person to make.


My skin starts to crawl whenever I hear someone say it is for the appraiser to make yet another business decision. Yes, we are set up to be the scapegoat once again, bend over and take another one in the shorts and like it, or get out of the business is pretty much the "business decision" we are free to make. "Business decisions" almost make me as warm and fuzzy as the term "vendor" does.