All Forum Posts by: John Clark

Quote from @Theresa Harris:

I've watched some people who deliberately don't park in front of the house where they are visiting and park blocking another person's garage across from where I live-there is no one parked in front of the house they are going to.  Yes common courtesy is you park in front of your own house (or the house you are visiting) if there is space, but there isn't always space.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Space or not, one DOES NOT block another person's garage or driveway. That has nothing to do with whether you are parking somewhere other than where you are going. I had a driveway and was on a busy street. I would be blocked, I'd take a photo, call the police, and the police would have the offending car towed, post haste. You don't block someone from his own property because there's no space for your car. P-E-R-I-O-D.

Quote from @Giovanni Cortes:

I bought these 10 years ago and did sign a hold harmless agreement.  So I was privy to this but didn't take care of these issues at that time and never imagined they would blow up as they did. 

When has a government ever ignored a source of funds? You knew there was a lien and you bought anyway?

And I notice you've ignored telling us what the liens are for.

I certainly hope the building is in the name of a corporation and not you personally, because what the city will do is go after you personally for what it can get, then maybe go after the building.

Am I right in assuming  that there's no mortgage? I can't imagine a bank would have lent money on a liened property.

Quote from @Justin Fox:

So is it federal law that the buyer must provide the seller with the appraisal if they back out due to the property under-appraising?  Or is it only state specific?

Not statutory law, but contract law. If I sue you for some loss I suffered, I have to first show that what you did caused my loss. So if I misrepresent your appraisal to the seller and the seller says "I want to see the appraisal,"  contacts you, you (unethically) give him the appraisal, and the seller comes back to me and says "I caught you in a lie, so no, I won't change the contract price," did you, the appraiser, "cause" my loss? Maybe the seller's motivation for refusing to drop the price is the fact that he just plain didn't like being lied to. So causation is up in the air.

There's also public policy issues. My misrepresenting the appraisal was a fraud. One can't hide it as a "negotiation tactic." I intended that the seller rely on my  false representation of a material fact (the value of the property as stated in the appraisal) when I knew the representation to be false at the time I made it. That's textbook fraud.

What is interesting is that the original poster never said whether the misrepresentation he made was about the ARV or the contract price, and whether the appraisal even had an ARV in it.

Quote from @Brad S.:

I honestly, don't mean to come across argumentative, but I'm guessing the basis for my "conclusion," wasn't clear.
My "conclusion" is based on my 25 years experience as a professional appraiser, along with many hours of confidentiality education and professional discussion, including directly with the source of the blog you quoted, so it based on some authority. I just want to be clear for anyone that may read or find this thread in the future, there is no gray area in what I previously stated.

So, to reiterate what I previously stated and to quote USPAP: If the appraisal assignment included developing an ARV, then "an appraiser must not disclose ... [those] assignment results to anyone other than the client, [or] parties specifically authorized by the client." In other words, the appraiser must not disclose the ARV to the seller or seller's agent, unless the client specifically authorizes it. And if the appraiser did disclose confidential information, theoretically, they may be liable for damages, if those damages can be proven, and if a judge would allow the Borrower (who is not the client) to bring such a lawsuit against the appraiser. But, as always, no one should rely on faceless posts on an online platform, from people that have no responsibility for the outcome, including my posts.


FYI - John, the blog entry you unearthed, only quoted the strict definition of "confidential information," and Mr. Harris was discussing confidentiality within a narrow context (different than the OP's situation). 

 ---------------------------------------------

Ah. Certainly superior to my brief internet search, so I stand corrected. Still the question of what constitutes "considering it" and whether the buyer opened the door, and all that other causation stuff.

So let me ask you, Brad: If the buyer "opened the door" (with, say, an e-mail stating that the ARV per the appraiser was too low) could the appraiser ethically defend himself from the buyer's charge by disclosing the ARV he generated?

Quote from @Brad S.:

If the ARV was developed for and during the Appraisal Assignment, then the Appraiser most definitely cannot and should not provide that to any other party, except the client (the Lender in this case), without specific authorization that it is permitted to do so. 

---------------------------------------------------------

I don't get your conclusion that the appraiser cannot/should not have provided the information to any other party, as the USPAP stuff I quoted from my internet search spoke in terms of receiving confidential information from the client (here, the lender), not disclosing his (the appraiser's) opinion, even if generated solely as a result of the commission by the client. Certainly better practice is not to disclosed it, but "better practice" and "cannot" are not the same based on my admittedly trifling research.

Then there is the question of proving causation. The original poster has not paid out or lost posted money -- yet. Also, he only said that the seller was "considering" his request to lower the purchase price. The seller could reject for a host of reasons having nothing to do with the disclosure by the appraiser, including the principled stance that he just plain didn't like being lied to by the buyer (if in fact that is what happened, the original poster is fuzzy on crucial details).

Then there is the question of whether the original poster/buyer has standing to bring suit. As others have pointed out, the buyer was not the appraiser's client, the lender was. Can you make an argument that the buyer was a third party beneficiary of the lender/appraiser contract for an appraisal? That's a VERY tough test to pass.

The original poster spoke of "los[ing]" his "leverage." This after he only states that the seller was "considering" his request to lower the price -- after the contract was signed -- by 50 big ones when you don't know what it was that the buyer/original poster said to the seller to justify his request to lower the price.

There is nothing BUT gray area based on the information provided. If the original poster mentioned the appraisal, and in any way mentioned that the ARV was too low (so much as a hint), then he opened the door to verification and -- in my book at least -- needs to stop whining that somebody with no relationship to him spoke out of school.

Quote from @Brent Huling:

Maybe I didn't explain myself well enough. The ARV did not come in, so I asked the sellers to come down $50k in price. They were considering it.

------------------------------------------------------

There are two separate issues here. Co-ordinated, but separate.

First: On what basis were you asking them to come down in price? If you said that the ARV didn't pan out, then all the seller was doing was verifying the information that you were giving out. Note that you don't have to use the magic term "ARV" or "after value" or anything else. ANY reference to the idea that the house wouldn't be worth after you finished rehabbing it what you thought it would be worth after rehab means that YOU put the ARV factor in play, and they can try to verify what you said. Now it appears that you want to whine because you were caught in a lie. Did it rise to the level of "deceit" or "intent to [commit] fraud"? Maybe. No one can rule it out on the slim and one-sided facts given.

Second: YOU did not supply the ARV to the appraiser. You may have given him your target and told him what you wanted to do to the house to get there, but the appraiser is the one who determined the ARV based on what you said you wanted to do to the house. The appraiser-generated ARV, however, may very well be non-confidential. I did a brief (5 seconds, literally), Google search and found this about USPAP confidentiality:

"It says “[c]onfidential information [is] information that is either…identified by the client as confidential when providing it to an appraiser and that is not available from any other source; or…classified as confidential or private by applicable law or regulation” (ibid; emphasis added).

Notice confidentiality flows to the client, not to any other party. What does this mean? Assume you measure a house at 1,945 square feet, but the assessor’s office states 1,893 square feet. Assuming your client is the potential lender, not the homeowner, your measurements of the square footage data are not confidential unless the client (the lender) specifically instructed you not to tell anybody about the “new” square footage"

theappraisercoachDOTcom/...

So the seller asked the appraiser what his opinion was as to the ARV -- a figure the appraiser generated. The appraiser gave it. Was the appraiser wrong to give it? Absolutely. Did the appraiser breach a duty, or breach a duty giving rise to an actual tort? Meh, very possibly not.

In any event, stop whining. You have no case in any event until after you either lose the $75k or pay the extra $50k. Figure out which causes you the least loss and go with it. Then sue the appraiser if you are so inclined. I got dollars to doughnuts you could very well lose in court, too.

Quote from @Ramki D.:

Signed a purchase (600k, 1650sqft single family home in Folsom ranch)contract last year, ....

 -----------------------------------------------------

You posted this in Mid-May, 2022, regarding a purchase contract you signed in December, 2021, at the latest. How did you manage to stall for over four months?

Focus your marketing. If you say 'three bedroom" you get people with children and have problems with no closets, etc. Market it to young couples (DINKs) and play up the large bedroom and two (count 'em, two!) separate work-from-home offices and Bob's your uncle. Logan Square is hot, so there's plenty of young professionals in the area.

Quote from @Nathan Pa:

Quote from @Nathan Gesner:

If he is threatening you in any way, you can file for a restraining order or no-contact order. Either of those would require him to move out.

He hasnt physically threatened me, just threatened to sue me and banging on the walls at night so I cant sleep and randomly screaming in his room waking me and other roommates up.

He is breaching the other room-mates right to quiet enjoyment. That's a for-cause eviction.

I have a very simple criteria for when an area is gentrifying as opposed to just generally improving: If it makes economic sense to buy (at market price) and tear down an existing structure in order to build and immediately sell a new building, then the area is gentrifying. General improvement is not gentrification.

So gentrification only occurs in areas with the right infrastructure that have hit bottom. Albany Park, West Elsdon, Hegewisch -- those places will never gentrify. They will improve, but never "pop." Why? They never hit bottom. Bronzeville hit bottom. It's gentrifying.