Peter LeQuire
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2005
- Professional Status
- Retired Appraiser
- State
- Tennessee
I feel like I've been reading cast off scripts for the next morphing of "Legally Blonde".
I think that for the vast majority of reports done for lenders, appraisers are not held to rules of evidence that pertain in a civil, much less a criminal, trial. We are - or ought to be - held to the (1) agreed upon scope of work, and (2) generally adhered-to standards of the profession.
I earlier posed the question whether I violated either if I cited MLS as a data source and (some version of) public records as verification source: no one rose to that bait. The question was posed because of a couple of posts about not seeing "buyer" or "seller" or "agent" noted as the verification source. I have routinely cited recording information (or the repository of such) as the verification source for GSE-related reports: in fact, for a period, several of my secondary market clients required that I put the deed book and page in that field of the 1004.
As to verifying information: I attempt to talk or exchange e-mails with one of the RE brokers involved with each sale (MLS sales, that is). I've even been known to get out of the car and talk with the new owner about the house while taking comp photos. That, to me, is part of the process of accumulating information, and I think it satisfies SOW and assignment condition expectations. There are occasions upon which properties are shown as "Sold" which have not closed - I've seen pending listings, expired listings and cancelled listings shown as "sold": that the sale actually closed and was recorded is a significant fact to be researched, probably more important that having a selling agent talk about the shag carpet.
There have been occasions when I did not put what appeared, from the MLS brief, to be the best sale on the SC grid because I couldn't talk with someone involved with the sale: example - a moderately priced house that sold for more than its list price, with a recorded mortgage larger than the sales price and financing noted as VA, FHA, or "Other" (which generally means USDA financing). Such sales usually involve significant seller participation in closing costs and prepaids.
It is not lost on me that "under certain conditions" deed records is noted as an acceptable verification source.
I'll have to be on the lookout for excited utterances, I suppose - I don't know that I've heard one in response to a question about concessions (though I've had several brokers get pretty ticked off when I asked them to confirm information in the brief, thinking I was accusing them, in a backhanded way, of misrepresenting their listings).
I think that for the vast majority of reports done for lenders, appraisers are not held to rules of evidence that pertain in a civil, much less a criminal, trial. We are - or ought to be - held to the (1) agreed upon scope of work, and (2) generally adhered-to standards of the profession.
I earlier posed the question whether I violated either if I cited MLS as a data source and (some version of) public records as verification source: no one rose to that bait. The question was posed because of a couple of posts about not seeing "buyer" or "seller" or "agent" noted as the verification source. I have routinely cited recording information (or the repository of such) as the verification source for GSE-related reports: in fact, for a period, several of my secondary market clients required that I put the deed book and page in that field of the 1004.
As to verifying information: I attempt to talk or exchange e-mails with one of the RE brokers involved with each sale (MLS sales, that is). I've even been known to get out of the car and talk with the new owner about the house while taking comp photos. That, to me, is part of the process of accumulating information, and I think it satisfies SOW and assignment condition expectations. There are occasions upon which properties are shown as "Sold" which have not closed - I've seen pending listings, expired listings and cancelled listings shown as "sold": that the sale actually closed and was recorded is a significant fact to be researched, probably more important that having a selling agent talk about the shag carpet.
There have been occasions when I did not put what appeared, from the MLS brief, to be the best sale on the SC grid because I couldn't talk with someone involved with the sale: example - a moderately priced house that sold for more than its list price, with a recorded mortgage larger than the sales price and financing noted as VA, FHA, or "Other" (which generally means USDA financing). Such sales usually involve significant seller participation in closing costs and prepaids.
It is not lost on me that "under certain conditions" deed records is noted as an acceptable verification source.
I'll have to be on the lookout for excited utterances, I suppose - I don't know that I've heard one in response to a question about concessions (though I've had several brokers get pretty ticked off when I asked them to confirm information in the brief, thinking I was accusing them, in a backhanded way, of misrepresenting their listings).