I just stick with, it’s only an opinion, not a guarantee, any further participation by me is completely up to me and nobody else, etc. Mckissock classes on avoiding liability and such had a lot of great language which had already been through the fnma ringer and I tossed those into the template. Cheers.

First read Certification # 23 which the appraiser can NOT change. This implies that almost anybody in the world can rely on this report for whatever purpose they can imagine. The report usually has one “Intended Use” and it is stated in the report, usually mortgage lending. It usually has one or two intended “Users” the Client which are identified in the report. This wording which was provided by my E & O ins. is to provide some protection from those that are not the intended users and the report not to be used for purposes other than that which it was intended. California Case Law has stated that borrowers, seller, buyers and homeowners are not the client of the appraiser and cannot sue the appraiser and this was affirmed by the courts on appeal. If you disagree you may want to pass it by your E & O ins. Company.

I have been putting this in my reports for several months and have not had one comment from any client.

no comment

Also just to follow up. I’m not sure if you’re promoting such language or taking a jab at it. Please clarify.

Yes, an attorney recommended this as well specifically for appraisers. Can you imagine a doctor, a lawyer, a judge, even a plumber or utility technician of any sort using such language? If the goal is to make sure this industry is wiped off the map sooner than later, be sure to tell them the service is absolutely worthless, in other legalese terms. I believe another legal language for such a statement would be termed jargon. I can’t bring myself to use such self defeating language. If I ever end up in court, I’ll probably find a new line of work anyways. All it takes is once and appraisers who think they can cut corners and use clever jargon to stay off the hook are likely fooling themselves. I can not understand how an appraiser or lawyer can recommend such language with a straight face. Perhaps they should quit while they’re ahead if they find themselves compelled to make statements their own service is worthless. What exactly does ‘obligates the payor to the service’ mean? On one hand appraisers claim they’re not attorneys, then they turn around and act like slickster lawyers. It’s time to land.

This phrase completely defeats your certification of value and get you off the liability hook. The appraisal is worthless to any and all.

The suggestion that the fee paid obligates the payor to the service is easily overcome by an attorney, do you want the lender to turn down a potential loan.

Who wants to pay an attorney?? Anyway it’s your attorney against mine for all definitions. Your attorney commits to defend you. Yours may or may not defend your position.

When the borrower refuses to fess up a payment method, that’s when cod can happen. I don’t like cod because there is no ready to go who’s the client who owns the report, yada yada pre made fnma form. It’s easier to send the bill, then cash the check. Those fannie rules regarding payment are for lenders and borrowers, gse’s only provides guidelines for appraisers. Nobody is going to get an appraiser in trouble for accepting payment for their own services. What planet are we on?

When I corrected dozens of amc taxable amounts and voluntarily paid more on my taxes because multiple amc’s clearly and consistently under reported my income, nothing came of it.

However, AIR applies to lenders, not appraisers. An appraiser can not intimidate, coerce, or withhold payment from himself. Bureaucratic boondoggles further cemented by tech companies. Riddle me this riddle me that, why did alamode include the air doc in available forms meant for appraisers?

In response to Dustin’s comments:
I am strong a supporter of Dustin Harris. He is very intelligent and knowledgeable in the appraisal industry and probably many others. However I must disagree with his conclusion on how to handle this awkward situation for payment by COD. In this matter your client HUD has requested that the appraiser COD at the door. If you fail to follow that request of your client, in this case HUD, they can refuse to pay and tell you to collect from the homeowner. They already have the completed appraisal and you the appraiser are left holding the bag. You probably have very little recourse except to go to the homeowner on your knees and beg for your payment. I would recommend that you collect in cash or a check in which case I would take it directly to the bank that it was drawn on cash it.

As I stated earlier, California case law has found that the appraiser is not liable to the borrower, seller, purchaser or the homeowner for deficiencies in the appraisal report. This was upheld on appeal. This is in spite of Certification # 23 on page 6 of the URAR which may indicate otherwise. On advice of my E & O Ins. I have added a statement in all of my report to clarify statement # 23 which states that in part “This appraiser has not intended any purchaser, borrower or seller, as an intended user of this appraisal and no such party should use or rely on this appraisal for any purpose.” …etc I also include a statement about the limits of the Appraisers Liability which in part states the following. The appraiser’s liability for errors, omissions or other deficiencies in this appraisal report is limited to the “Intended Users” as stated in this report. …etc

On a related subject, many AMCs appear to be having trouble paying the appraisers. I put the following statement in all my report that are not paid COD. Pay particular attention to the words “severally and jointly” these are very important in a court of law when you are trying to collect a debt. This statement may allow you to collect your unpaid invoice from the Lender or others if your AMC filed for bankruptcy.

“This appraisal report is considered completed when it is signed by the appraiser and submitted to the AMC/Lender. The agreed compensation for completion of this appraisal assignment between the appraiser and the AMC/Lender is $ XXX. Use of this appraisal report for any purpose by any party, including the AMC/Lender Client named in the report, is prohibited without payment of the agreed fee to the appraiser. At the time of submitting the completed appraisal to the AMC/Lender the appraiser has not been paid the agreed upon fee. This is typical in the appraisal industry. The use of this appraisal report for any purpose by the AMC, Lender/Client (this includes the AMC & Lender/Client named in the report) or any other party, severally and jointly, assumes complete responsibility for payment of the agreed fee to the appraiser which signed this report.

FNMA DOES prohibit it but FNMA does not write the rules for all other GSEs. This was a non article stretched to ridiculous lengths to arrive at a misinformed answer. The ONLY credible information source for the questions is HUD regs and policies as published BY HUD. Sorry Dustin, this one went astray.

and yet they still pretend that an appraiser gets to review property and bid both fee and turn around time based on assignment complexity. It’s nothing short of PRICE FIXING for a lender to be citing fees. Where’s the FTC when there’s REAL anti trust activity going on?

Anyone can bring a suit. Whether they prevail or not is another story.

Tax benefit? Are you implying not reporting cash transactions? Sort of fraud, ethics violations etc???