Appraisers' Free Forum

What about that "market studies performed for other appraisals" statement in the remarks about sale #2?

I'm inclined to let it go, personally, since it doesn't seem to represent a significant influence on the value of a $200K house. I'm not inclined to zap this report for the trained trees, though. Like Hall, I found it refreshing to read something that's actually descriptive of the property without being mind-numbing. But I much prefer informal, irreverent narrative to anesthetic, antiseptic, "professional" prose anyway.

So far, I'm agreeing with Edd. That scares me.

Annie, what parts of Appraisal 101 do you think were violated?

The one minor inconsistency I've noted is that the description of the subject's amenities says no value was assigned to the fence or pond, but in Sale #2's discussion they are attributed as contributing to value.

Jim,

I just caught that too. Looks like a plain old mistake to me.

I have no problem with the other market studies bit. After all, half the stuff in my report is from other studies. I don't think any of us re-invent the wheel every time.

Seems to me that the appraiser really does care and is trying. I have to give credit for that.

Plus, the stream-of-thought writing gave me a good chuckle!

I should note that what you're reading is the tail-end of a two-page comment section, beginning in the Additional Comments on page 3 (URAR) and ending about holfway down the page of a comment addendum. Each element is addressed, and (mostly) supported. The "other market studies" thing is used on a couple of other elements as well, and that's one of the things that prompted me to ask your opinions.

The casual writing style doesn't bug me. But I'm curious as to why it seems to bother some of you. Is it a "professional image" thing? Do you think it compromises the integrity or reliability of the report? Indicative of lower-quality analysis? Or is it just unnecessary language? What do you think?

And where the hell is Joanne (Phat Underwriter?) Anybody seen her posting lately?

For me it is a combination of un-professional and unnecessary - I can't say that it bugs me; but rather that I find it to be a tad chummy for a report.

Of course, my opinion is colored by learning technical and business writing in school. It's just me.

Were it my review, I would not criticize or ding for style.

Jim,

I was curious so I email that little snippet to an UW I work with. This UW works for a lender that keeps all their paper and does not even hint at value. He also held an appraiser's license way back in the day - knows his stuff. Easy going guy but likes to see a really strong report.

His response? The appraiser who wrote that is "an idiot".

Hummm, I think I will stick to a more formal writing style.

WM, did he elaborate, or is it that he just doesn't like the style? I see support (sometime "other market studies") for everything in the report (although this snippet doesn't show it.) Why is he so strongly against it?

If I got a review worded anywhere close to that, there'd be hell to pay. Looks to me like the substance is there. There's an inconsistency, which I consider minor and not requiring correction. The math's right, the comps are reasonably similar (they're in my rural area, so I know there aren't any better ones.) So does the style degrade the support?

WM wrote:His response? The appraiser who wrote that is "an idiot".

Hummm, I think I will stick to a more formal writing style.

Does being an idiot have anything to do with USPAP credibility? I've never seen writing style brought up other than something to do with all caps. While personally I agree with WM about style, I think reviewing for stylistic preference, or making judgments about appraiser credibility based on style is dangerous territory.

Put yourself under oath and answer this question. "Why did you think the conclusions of the appraisers are unsupported?"
And you are seriously going to answer, "Because he writes like an idiot?"

No doubt appraisers need more education and elocution is not one of the profession's current strengths, but that UW's pronounced judgment borders on pure prejudice.

Hope I don't have to deal with that UW. He is as much of an idiot as the appraiser. Send him my way, I will deal with him by telling him what I think of him. Who is he to sit in judgment? What I have to say to him wioll not further the profession one iota.

WM, any time you can improve anything, do it. It is good for the profession. But help the guys who aren't as well equipped as you are. That is good too.

Edd, that got my hackles up too. But, if I were working for that UW, I'd be careful to stick to a formal style if that's what he wants. He'd call me an idiot exactly once, though.

Whoa, don't attack me. I never said the writer was an idiot - I was just passing on the reaction of a client.

I called him to chat about it and get his reaction beyond a simple email response.

Basically, the style of writing and tone for him immediately conjured the image of a 16 year old girl. He felt that the writing style destroyed the credibility of the writer as it lacked professionalism.

He did make a good point: Suppose he accepted that appraisal and loaned on the property. The loan goes south and he has to defend his decision. Would you like to defend that appraiser as being the best available? Regardless of the fact that the appraisal is basically sound and compliant, 90% of the people who read that are going to either laugh or declare the writer to be a bit dingy.

I'm not saying we all have to write as well as Mr. Hatch (I only wish I could). I just advocate a more professional style.

I don't show up at jobs in flip flops. Likewise, I don't write my reports in an informal tone.

Jim Plante wrote:Edd, that got my hackles up too. But, if I were working for that UW, I'd be careful to stick to a formal style if that's what he wants. He'd call me an idiot exactly once, though.

I guess I've somehow painted a rather bad picture of him by quoting only two words. Sad to see a good UW executed over two words. Kinda like cutting down an appraiser over a snippet of a report.....

I've had many very good conversation with this UW. His is astute and also very fair minded.

How many of you would love a client who calls you on every appraisal for a chat and to get your in-depth and personal opinion of the property? A client who is only cod full-fee, never hints or pressures, and is content with a 3-5 day turn? Trust me, I'm keeping this client.

No, WM, you haven't mischaracterized him. We'd all like to have clients like that. And certainly if I were doing reports for him I would be careful to stick a corncob up my ass to make me sound serious. Within reason, I respond to my client's needs. I'm sure that if he received such a report, he'd politely ask the appraiser to re-write his comments in a more serious tone. To be honest, I was somewhat concerned about the light tone of the report myself, but couldn't find anything really wrong with the content.

But I'd respond to your UW that if he's so dang concerned about language, he should've watched his own. But he was conversing privately with someone he considers a colleague, so no foul.

He and I do have a rather informal relationship in conversation and separate, and very formal one, in "official" reports.

As slow as I am now, I'd write in hieroglyphics if a paying customer wanted it!

Sad to see a good UW executed over two words. Kinda like cutting down an appraiser over a snippet of a report.....

Sort of goose and gander thing isn't it? Or maybe the UW has been knighted. I don't characterize the appraiser as an idiot and I doubt the UW is one either. But, I certainly hope our work is one day judged on more significant criteria than literary style and by people who are more thoughtful and probative.

Jim - so nice of you to think of me! Life has been crazy lately but I am hanging in there!

When I first read that - I thought this writer is an aspiring fiction author :) It was fun to read but maybe a bit too much for a professional appraisal. I don't think I would call him an idiot - maybe he just has too much time on his hands.

Jim, while I "nit picked" a couple things at the beginning, mainly because it is a different manner of presenting an appraisal reconciliation than I've seen before or that I'm used to, I still question it (what was presented) from the aspect that, based upon what you presented, because of the fact that there is a personal orientation or direction from that little piece. Now granted, after you've disclosed additional info, I might step back for a few minutes. However, from what I know and what I learned, we, as appraisers, are supposed to keep personal bias out of any and all of our work. I don't like a two-story but I live in one. Many don't like a mobile/manufactured/modular home but we still appraise them. The trainees I had in the past who would make a "personal bias" statement about a property always got a rather stern chastising from me - you're here to appraise the property and not let a personal bias interfere with the facts.

That is where I was coming from. You said there was other information in the report so I respect your judgment about that. Without the full details (report) of what's within it, I can only concur with your opinion of it.