Verifying Sales

[Lee Lansford]

Once, when conferencing an appraiser and his appraisal, I was aware that the appraiser had included a co-op apartment as a "comp" in the appraisal of a nearby condo-apartment.

The appraiser was not aware that the "comp" was a co-op apartment.

IF...IF...the appraiser had attempted to verify the sale via a public record source, the appraiser would not have found a transfer and, perhaps, just perhaps, a light-bulb would have been turned-on.

 

[Delta85]

I don't think you are trying to be neglect. But how would the eyes of the court see it? Client required verification. You neglected that order and gave them results without verification (and without explanation) that could have an affect on the appraisal results. Did you perform the appraisal in a negligent manner? My opinion is not the one you need to worry about.

I'm wondering how a court would view a hearsay conversation with a realtor? Especially if the realtor contradicts some of the data in the MLS listing. If realtors are capable of making an error on a MLS listing, who's to say they can't be in error verbally relating some details on a sale they closed 8 months ago? And I wonder what would happen if that realtor was called into court a couple years later and claims he can't remember ever speaking to the appraiser? And then the realtor contradicts what he told the appraiser on the phone and things get even more complicated. Just thinking out loud.

I like to get feedback via e-mail when possible so I can print out and stuff into my workfile.

 

[hastalavista]

I'm wondering how a court would view a hearsay conversation with a realtor?

Delta:
It is not hearsay if you tell me something and I repeat what you say:
"Delta told me that it is better to speak or at least try to speak to parties to the transaction than not to speak or try to speak to them."

It is hearsay if you told me Resguy said something and I repeat what you told me he said:
"Delta told me that Resguy said he gets $800 on average for each assignment."

But regardless of that technicality, I doubt if any of it (agent told me "X" directly, or the agent told me that the buyer said "X") would be considered "hearsay" in the context of how that is usually applied in court.
All of it would be part of the data collection and verification process used by the appraiser to consider in his or her analysis and, ultimately, used in forming his or her conclusions.

 

[residentialguy]

1. The only people who truly and accurately know the motivations of the buyer/seller would be the buyer/seller themselves. But I'll humor you by allowing that agents can tell you what the motivations were.

The agent doesn't know that the buyer wants that house because his mom lives next door??? They don't know that their client has to sell because they're facing foreclosure??? They don't know that their clients have to sell quickly for a dire relocation situation? They don't know that the concession was placed because the buyer had radon mitigation done?

so your argument is don't call them because there is a chance that they may not know a hidden motivation??? Why do an inspection...it may not reveal some problems. :mellow:

I would think what the agents tell you is data/information, therefore it would be your responsibility to obtain "verification" from the buyer/seller. Otherwise, what the agents tell you is only data/information, not "verification".

Not according to FNMA - they list the selling and listing agents as a verification source. FNMA set the terms, not UCBruin :new_smile-l:

 

[DTB]

Delta:
It is not hearsay if you tell me something and I repeat what you say:
"Delta told me that it is better to speak or at least try to speak to parties to the transaction than not to speak or try to speak to them."

It is hearsay if you told me Resguy said something and I repeat what you told me he said:
"Delta told me that Resguy said he gets $800 on average for each assignment."

But regardless of that technicality, I doubt if any of it (agent told me "X" directly, or the agent told me that the buyer said "X") would be considered "hearsay" in the context of how that is usually applied in court.
All of it would be part of the data collection and verification process used by the appraiser to consider in his or her analysis and, ultimately, used in forming his or her conclusions.

That is actually the definition of hearsay.

hear·say [heer-sey] Show IPA
noun
1.
unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge:

Interesting, the first word used in the definition.

 

[hastalavista]

That is actually the definition of hearsay.

hear·say [heer-sey] Show IPA
noun
1.
unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge:

Interesting, the first word used in the definition.

Ok. 123456

 

[Delta85]

Delta:
It is not hearsay if you tell me something and I repeat what you say:

I thought that was the very definition of hearsay. If I run into you at a coffee shop and you admit to mass murder and I go directly to the cops isn't that hearsay?

If a realtor gives me some details over the phone about a transaction isn't that the same thing? Especially if it contradicts the MLS listing or is new information not mentioned on the listing.

 

[residentialguy]

I heard Dennis peed in the bushes on inspections

 

[DTB]

Ok. 123456

Glad you got a chuckle, I just don't know why?

You cannot give testimony of what someone said to you, that is hearsay. You may call that person to testify and be cross examined. The cross examination part is a major reason that hearsay is not allowed. You cannot put words in another's mouth essentially.

 

[Eli]

A statement offered as evidence of the bare fact that it was said, rather than for its truth, is not hearsay.