Appraisers' Free Forum

Are you that bored PC - bringing up old threads.

Pina Colada wrote:

Steve Owen wrote:I am in the process of updating all of my textual templates for compliance with 2008-09 USPAP.

A bit late?

I will not be responsible for either the client or any third party's failure to read the report.

Are you sure that's what you want to say?

You are right. I didn't realize that even at the top of lists around here, one might be dipping into antiquity.

Pina Colada wrote:

Steve Owen wrote:I am in the process of updating all of my textual templates for compliance with 2008-09 USPAP.

A bit late?

I will not be responsible for either the client or any third party's failure to read the report.

Are you sure that's what you want to say?

Not too late... Seems to me that December 30, 2007 is the perfect time to update templates for the 2008 USPAP.

Yep... I'm sure that is what I want to say. But, nope, I'm not sure that's the way I want to say it. If I think about it, I can probably come up with a better way to say it... can you?

You don't want third parties to fail to read your reports? I don't want any third parties reading my reports, and would rather warn them that if they have a copy of my report, they are using my property without my permission.

Pina Colada wrote:You don't want third parties to fail to read your reports? I don't want any third parties reading my reports, and would rather warn them that if they have a copy of my report, they are using my property without my permission.

Ahh - the key words

Good point. What I really don't want, however, is for a third party to only get a portion of the report and then try to hold me responsible for some erroneous conclusion they draw. When Fannie and Freddie came out with the new forms, the Certs made it clear that third parties might rely on the appraisal. As Fred and Fan go, to some degree goes the rest of the appraisal and banking world. What my language is trying to do is ensure that they do not believe they can rely upon just a portion of it. Can you come up with language you think would do that better?

Sure. "The intended user of this report is XYZ Mortgage, LLC. No other intended users were specifically identified to me at the time this assignment was engaged."
(Unless, of course, others were. It could happen, I suppose; but generally if it's not on the Calyx order form, the broker/LO won't include it in the order.)

I reason it thusly: Some classes of people are permitted to rely on my report. But in order to exercise that permission, they must be identified in the SOW. And SOW is based on specific agreement, not implication, supposition, or conjecture.

Not that it will do you any good. You'll be sued anyway. And it'll cost you $ to hire an attorney to get you dismissed. But at least if you have to go to trial, you'll have a position which can be argued.

I already had language similar to your first paragraph, Jim.

Jim Plante wrote:I reason it thusly: Some classes of people are permitted to rely on my report. But in order to exercise that permission, they must be identified in the SOW. And SOW is based on specific agreement, not implication, supposition, or conjecture.

I don't believe that is correct if you are using the new URAR. Read Cert #21. That's a pretty lengthy list of people who may rely on the report without ever having been mentioned as intended users. Cert #23 has some pretty interesting language, too.

All of this got me curious, so I pulled up my Contingent and Limiting Conditions template... probably a good idea to read these every now and then (like, maybe every time you do a report).

Anyway, Number 11:

Entire Document and Changes to Document: The appraisal is to be used only in its entirety, including all Addenda and attachments. Reading and understanding the entire report is essential to understanding the opinions, conclusions, analyses, and other information contained within. The appraiser will not be responsible for incorrect conclusions drawn by any party as a result of reading or accepting copy of only a portion of the report. Conclusions, opinions and analyses set forth in the report were prepared by the appraiser and/or appraisal firm who will have no responsibility for any unauthorized changes made.

This may not be perfect, but it's a lot better than what I threw off the top of my head a few posts back.

And, Number 13:

Authentic Original: The original copy of this report is signed in blue ink and embossed with the appraiser's seal. Any copy that does not meet these specifications should be assumed to be a photocopy; photocopied or facsimile signatures are considered valid only if the report is reproduced in its entirety. The appraiser will take no responsibility for any unauthorized alterations in the original or copies after delivery of the report.

Not as good as getting appraisals exempted from the electronic signatures act, but it will have to do for now.