Appraisers' Free Forum

"Reading the entire report is essential to understanding the value conclusions, the subject, and the market conditions in the market in which the subject is located. The appraiser cannot be responsible for failure to read and understand the report on the part of the client or any third party attempting to utilize the report."

It would carry more weight if typed in all caps.


tc

Not sure of it is appropriate, but I like the idea. It's a nicer way of say RTFR.

I really like the section of the GP form in wintotal where you tell how many pages the report has.

Well, it's not inappropriate, that's for darn sure.

Makes sense to me.

I'm going to start using that AS my reconciliation!

Goodpasture wrote:"Reading the entire report is essential to understanding the value conclusions, the subject, and the market conditions in the market in which the subject is located. The appraiser cannot be responsible for failure to read and understand the report on the part of the client or any third party attempting to utilize the report."

Place similar verbage in the SOW.

State in some form or fashion you wrote the report in a manner the entire report must be read to be understood. State you did not write the report in a manner without reading the entire report the intended user possibly would not understand opinions and conclusions.

Covers what you did and did not do in regards to SOWR.

Just a thought.

Jim Plante wrote:Yeccch! Third person, passive voice. I'd do it like this:

Reading the entire report is essential to understanding the subject property, the conditions in the market in which it is located, and the resulting conclusion of value. I will not be responsible for either the client or any third party's failure to read the report.

I agree with Otis: It's not inappropriate. I would, however, leave off the "understanding" part, since you're supposed to include enough information for the client and intended users to understand it.

Well, isn't that the point of the comment? You have to read the report to understand it.

I think it could be argued that no matter how much information you put in the report, some “intended users” will not understand… Maybe there should be cya that we are not responsible for the level of intelligence of some intended users.

I think Ray got busted for repeating that multiple times in his reports.

I am in the process of updating all of my textual templates for compliance with 2008-09 USPAP. As I do this, I always look for other areas of improvement. Currently, my Contingent and Limiting Conditions contain the language "The report is to be used only in its entirety," which is part of the "Confidentiality" sub-section. This could use a bit of beefing up and deserves it's own sub-section. Thank you, Greg.

Okay. Here's what I came up with. Further comments would be welcome. Edd?

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.

As I was reading through the first post that Greg made, it occurred to me that there was some possible liability opening up by saying that the appraiser would not be responsible for damage to the client or any third party if they only read part of the report. The other side of that coin is that the appraiser might be responsible to such persons if they do read the entire report. I think that my wording pretty effectively closes that loophole, since most courts would probably not hold an otherwise innocent party responsible for someone's incorrect conclusions (the usual standard is one of negligence... therefore, you could be responsible for someone's incorrect conclusions if you produced a misleading report). But, others may yet come up with a better way to say it. Edd?