Why I Use MLS Photos

[Kevin Mc]

I don't have to have original photos 5
I don't have a camera 9
I can cut cost and corners on FHA & Fannie Mae 5


It's so much easier and faster 15

These 34 idiots should have their licenses revoked.

 

[residentialguy]

These 34 idiots should have their licenses revoked.

Now we're on the right track. Revoke the licenses of bad appraisers. All of this other silly stuff about whether or not to use MLS photos will be moot.

 

[Delta85]

I recently appraised a $10million+ home. My appraisal included 5 pictures of driveways. None were visable from the street. My report also included 5 MLS photos cleary marked MLS photos. I understand the use of MLS photos in this case. i also understand the use in driving the comparables. Unfortunately there is a whole other school out there of corner cutting hacks who just don't get, understand or care about doing the work the way it is suppose to be done. I can post on here until I'm blue in the face and they still won't get it. Basics are beyond them. They are a problem in this industry and they do it with everyone's blessing as long as it is fast and cheap. End of story.

I agree. The reason I know these areas are all wooded, long private driveways is cause I drove the neighborhood and comps. Had a relied on MLS photos I'd have not known this.

So under these circumstances I deliver a report with a bunch of photos of driveways with corresponding MLS photos with full explanations of what I could/could not do.

 

[Delta85]

Delta85 - "Scope of work, if necessary, can be altered as long as you explain in detail what you attempted and what you could/could not do."

Really? I believe even a casual reading of the scope of work and the second paragraph on Page 4 of the URAR would lead a reasonable person to a different conclusion, unless you can effectively argue that not looking at the comps is an acceptable expansion of the scope of work.

I certainly agree that if someone can't arrange entrance in a restricted community, is faced with a "no trespassing" sign, or is intimidated by a long driveway s/he will have to do something else to provide photos. I'd guess that, if that were the case, one could possible assert that looking at the MLS photos satisfies the requirement to inspect the comparables, though I'd speculate that appraisers who don't inspect their comps, whether they attribute their photos or not, don't disclaim that part of the scope of work that says that they DID inspect them.

It may not be "misleading" if an appraiser clearly labels photos that s/he did not take, and it may not be "misleading" if an appraiser - in clear violation of that scope of work and the clear statement that the scope of work can't be modified - reports that s/he did not, in fact, inspect the comparables. That said, the fact of disclosing that the mandated scope of work hasn't been complied with is a pretty flimsy veil to try to hide behind if challenged.

It plays fast and loose with known requirements to willfully ignore them - there is real risk in doing so.

NC - Is common sense allowed? Perhaps that's set out in USPOOP's Certification #26 - you know, the one right below #25, which says something about intentional or negligent misrepresentation, civil and criminal penalties, fines and imprisonment......that sort of thing.:icon_question:

Reports are submitted every day across the country with photos of gates and long wooded driveways with explanations that these comps could not be seen from the street. MLS photos are added to these reports as part of this process. They are readily accepted by lenders and IMO no violation of USPAP as long as everything is detailed and explained.

I don't consider that playing "fast and loose" with requirements. Otherwise properties of these types would NOT be able to be appraised at all by anyone. If you appraise a luxury gated community in Greenwich, CT. and ALL the comps are located behind locked gates tightly watched by security what do you do? You can turn the job down as another poster offered but, if we follow the so called letter of the law, the subject property would be not be appraisable without seeing those comps in person. Now the entire report, and the borrowers deal, depends on how friendly and agreeable the realtors and or new owners of these comps are.

 

[residentialguy]

The reason I know these areas are all wooded, long private driveways is cause I drove the neighborhood and comps.

Absolutely. But this has nothing to do with the topic. You can drive the neighborhood and use MLS comps.

As far as inspecting the comps, yes that is required...at least due diligence in trying.

 

[Peter LeQuire]

Reports are submitted every day across the country with photos of gates and long wooded driveways with explanations that these comps could not be seen from the street. MLS photos are added to these reports as part of this process. They are readily accepted by lenders and IMO no violation of USPAP as long as everything is detailed and explained.

I don't consider that playing "fast and loose" with requirements. Otherwise properties of these types would NOT be able to be appraised at all by anyone. If you appraise a luxury gated community in Greenwich, CT. and ALL the comps are located behind locked gates tightly watched by security what do you do? You can turn the job down as another poster offered but, if we follow the so called letter of the law, the subject property would be not be appraisable without seeing those comps in person. Now the entire report, and the borrowers deal, depends on how friendly and agreeable the realtors and or new owners of these comps are.

I don't appraise in Connecticut, but I do work in an area where, from time to time, getting to a comparable can be difficult. At one time, I had a picture of the teeth and throats of a couple of very large dogs lunging at my car window as I turned around in a driveway - the owner was visible in the background holding his shotgun. The lender demanded a better quality photo of the house - I told them to take one themselves.

I'm not arguing that lenders accept those photos; I'm not dismissing the difficulty of accessing some comparable sales. I do think that, if access is difficult, diligence requires a little extra effort - I know what I do but I don't necessarily think that's prescriptive.

Having given testimony in an adversarial trial, and having been examined aggressively both at trial and in deposition, I have simply come to the conclusion that dismissing the scope of work by not looking at the comparables - regardless of the photos used - has an element of risk that doesn't attach to complying with the scope of work. Any moral or ethical component aside, not doing what you attest you do puts you at peril if Fannie, Freddie or some subsequent person or entity that relies on your report decides that your appraisal is deficient. You may think differently, but in a litigious situation I'd much prefer not to have to admit that I'd knowingly signed a statement I knew to be false. Read Cert. 24:

 

[Delta85]

Absolutely. But this has nothing to do with the topic. You can drive the neighborhood and use MLS comps.

As far as inspecting the comps, yes that is required...at least due diligence in trying.

Agreed. The due diligence is driving past the home on the public street. If you can't see the home or get a picture for some other reason you comment in the report and add MLS or online photos as needed.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Reports are submitted every day across the country with photos of gates and long wooded driveways

There was a time in my state that if you sent in a picture of a gate to FHA, the report got rejected...period. Find a way to see the property or don't use the pix. That was their rule.

With the advent of so many high hat houses behind closed gates, I am of the opinion that sooner or later I can weasel my way in - I am sure UPS and FEDEX can get in... so if I get it, I will have a picture of every *&^%ed house in that gated community...otherwise, Draganfly here I come ... (i can't get enough of that puppy..)

BTW, I know a couple of appraisers who do fly over ranches. One from S. Dakota is a pilot and he appraises large ranches often flying over the property rather than attempting to drive out a 20,000 acre spread.

 

[eld2310]

These 34 idiots should have their licenses revoked.

I think some of the poll responders are being facetious. The only true answer is that's it's faster and easier, anyway. All others are purely justification.

.

 

[NorthTexValuation]

I'm not arguing that lenders accept those photos; I'm not dismissing the difficulty of accessing some comparable sales. I do think that, if access is difficult, diligence requires a little extra effort - I know what I do but I don't necessarily think that's prescriptive.

Having given testimony in an adversarial trial, and having been examined aggressively both at trial and in deposition, I have simply come to the conclusion that dismissing the scope of work by not looking at the comparables - regardless of the photos used - has an element of risk that doesn't attach to complying with the scope of work. Any moral or ethical component aside, not doing what you attest you do puts you at peril if Fannie, Freddie or some subsequent person or entity that relies on your report decides that your appraisal is deficient. You may think differently, but in a litigious situation I'd much prefer not to have to admit that I'd knowingly signed a statement I knew to be false. Read Cert. 24:

Could not agree more.

Appraisers not "inspecting comps at minimum from the street" are using them at their own peril.