Appraisers' Free Forum

Annemieke Roell wrote:

Corporate Lackey wrote:So Annemieke, what if the appraisal is a piece of crap?

I am not going to take that question seriously as GP is one of the best and most competent appraisers out there.

Hmmm.

I think I'll chalk it up to Dutch determination and resolve. Nobody who knows her said Anne isn't capable of doing what she says she is going to do, close but not quite. What I heard, when we tried to tell it from what we think the perspective is of those who may not give a hoot about Anne or GP, is that it isn't a good idea.

GP is your significant other, business partner and mentor, Anne. Kinda complex. Why risk possible adverse scrutiny and sanctions for somebody like RELS? I can guarantee they will show absolutely no gratitude or loyalty to you, ever. You're giving far better than you'll get.

Why do they need a friggin' review of an SFR anyway? Must be some darned Fannie thing or another.

It is not for RELS.

These are not assignments that come in on a rotation. These are assignments from a portfolio lender client WHO KNOWS THAT WE ARE PARTNERS. They KNOW my partner did the original appraisal. They cannot find another appraiser who is competent in that particular rural area and have enough faith in us to know we will do a due dilligence, USPAP compliant job.

Obviously, if such order came in out of the blue the client would be informed immediately that the original appraisal was done in our office. It isn't as if we are hiding that fact. THAT would be wrong.

But quite frankly, if the client is fully informed and still wants us to do it, I don't see what the problem is.

I'm thinking the underwriter just realized their mistake and used the "I am required to order through RELS" as an excuse to not send a review to somebody that is heavily involved with the original appraiser.

Portfolio or not, if they want a review, they want a review from somebody not involved with the original appraiser. This is in no way a comment about your ability to remain impartial, but I think you need to listen to your peers on this one. Post it as a poll, see how many people think it's a good idea. Ask your E&O provider what they think about it.

Annemieke Roell wrote:I have an example of lender stupidity. It is slightly off topic but I think it is relevant.

Sort of lost track of that didn't we?

Maybe we should have stayed with that as the topic. Just listened to a pod cast with the VP of RealtyTrac participating. He says the lending industry has recognized and corrected (in some cases over-corrected) the problems that plunged the world into the pit. I'll tell you though, I'm a skeptic. Basically the national banks will resume their former position of seeing to it that excessive greed is not enabled.

Scares me.

I thought they and Fannie sponsored the party. Talk about a conflict of interest. If I make the loan, I make money. If I don't. I won't, but the economy is more solid.

Annemieke Roell wrote:But quite frankly, if the client is fully informed and still wants us to do it, I don't see what the problem is.

Disclosure is a part of it, but not all of it. The client is not the arbiter, you are.

Jrs at OBX wrote:Post it as a poll, see how many people think it's a good idea. Ask your E&O provider what they think about it.

I'm thinking we may be intruding in this issue, the decision has been made.

Its a jumbo loan

More window dressing and nothing more.

Edd Gillespie wrote:More window dressing and nothing more.

Frankly this is a complex property and their underwriters have a hard time dealing with it. The problem is we are the best in the area for this kind of property, so it is kind of like asking the sous chef at McDonalds to review Wolfgang Pucks latest creation......

Steve Owen wrote:I don't doubt what you are both saying. I'm just telling you that if it was me I wouldn't do it. IMHO, if the appraisal is good, then it doesn't make a lot of difference if the reviewer is really all that competent. IMHO, it would be better to have some desk jockey from California review the appraisal than to have your partner do it.

I agree with Steve. It doesn't appear right no matter how eloquently you put it. Not all desk reviewers are stupid you know. :)

Steve and CL,

I think you guys have the right instincts and I commend you for voicing them, but the Terleton contingent don't want to hear it. Give it a rest.

Goodpasture wrote:

Edd Gillespie wrote:More window dressing and nothing more.

it is kind of like asking the sous chef at McDonalds to review Wolfgang Pucks latest creation......

Annemieke Roell wrote:

Goodpasture wrote:

Edd Gillespie wrote:More window dressing and nothing more.

it is kind of like asking the sous chef at McDonalds to review Wolfgang Pucks latest creation......

I suspect Anne's contribution is more like a spectacular Julia Child refinement. My reference is to the client.