And not a proper/correct response from you either. Again. Evading the correct & proper answer. Please stop this ongoing nonsense and take this time and sign up with usres since you love doing free bpo's.

Thank God you have come along to set us all straight. Prior to your arrival we were just lost sheep not knowing how to do anything correctly. But making a ridiculously good living doing it and having long relationships with many clients and nary a lawsuit or ethics violation to our name. But now that I somehow managed "incriminate" myself, what ever will I do....

I'll tell you what you should do, you should MAKE HASTE and go sign up with Usres. Because goodness knows before Lucy came along we've never heard of such a company. Woe is us.

And my last listing sure didn't come from them (actually it did).

Well thank god you was smart enuff to turn on that there compuuter.

Isn't that really just your FEELING? Could you please stick to what is FACT?

Crap. Sue me.

Tsk...tsk...incriminating yourself AGAIN? You never learn.

See what happens when I don't check the boards for a day or two? I miss out on a whole discussion.

I stand by my original comment that if a company asked me to look at/change my value and it was a small change that still fit into the range of the subject's value, I would do it. I have been doing BPOs for several years, but I don't feel like I can always pinpoint the value of a property to the exact dollar. If I say it's value is X, it is possible that it will sell for a little more or a little less.

I have had several QC emails from different companies about my value not matching a "previous appraisal/BPO" and for those, I don't usually do anything. If I'm off that much from a previous report, either the report is old (in which case it means nothing to me) or one of us is wrong. As long as I used the best comps I could find, I stand by my values.

I completely agree with you OHAgent. I don't see what the big deal is.

I need some advice from the group.

I get this email over my cell phone from my favorite company stating "client dispute". I was on the road taking pictures (100 mile day) for some current orders. As I didn't have time to read the email I was going crazy trying to think of which order could have a problem. My last 4 orders had comps that I had to go to the moon for. So, I'm thinking it had to be one of those......wrong.......It was an order from about 3 weeks ago. When I finally read the email I thought they were disputing my repair costs. I reviewed the file and the numbers were good......told the company those numbers were good and I stand behind them. It wound up 2 supervisors and one QC person got involved before they actually spelled it out for me. Their client thought my rating of the property was too high. They wanted me to change the rating to fair. Value of the property was $270k......repairs were $5,500. It's always been my understanding that the 15% rule applied. If the repair costs exceed 15% of the value of the property then it is to be rated in "fair condition". With other companies I've had QC kick back the report if I rated one fair and the repair costs didn't hit the 15% mark.

Most interiors I do plus the REO's that I show to buyers need work........80% to 85% of them for sure need over $5k in repairs. The class I had with FARVV this year plus one class that I paid for both stated 15% in repairs before it can be rated "fair". I was told by this company none of their clients use the 15% rule......that if costs exceed $500 it's to be rated "fair"........somehow that doesn't make much sense.
Do I now rate all REO comps as "fair" as most need work?

The question to the group is this....WHEN DO YOU RATE A PROPERTY FAIR AND DO YOU USE A PERCENTAGE OF REPAIR COSTS TO ARRIVE AT THAT?

Well, isn't FARVV special? I say this only because while I attempted to take their various classes I could never log in. Since I've now completed more BPOS for them and am on auto-assign and my ratings are exceptionally high with them I feel competent to point out this discrepancy. When you provide any repair value over $1,000 on their BPO form, regardless of client, they make you downgrade the condition to fair or poor *before* it ever hits QC.

CC now has a major new client who considers trash out costs (under health and safety repairs which are separate from actual repair costs) to be COSMETIC. WFT? I only know this because I had a clarification last week regarding my repaired values (I erroneously thought trash-out costs and fumigation of the property were a safety hazard - they didn't argue that point) because in my head I lumped the 2 together (health/safety and repair) as one total cost estimate. No the form didn't call for it and I've never seen the breakdown done that way, but what would I know? Since when did trash-out become a cosmetic issue???? I know about As-is but come on now....

Personally I think 15% is way too high, I'd rethink that if I were you. By that I'd mean I'd give up on using a certain % as a guideline. As to coming back to haunt you 3 weeks later, well, bite me. It passed QC once, why didn't they call you on it then? If they don't know what the client wants, how are we?

CanDo

FARVV wasn't the company....not that's important. CC has kicked back when I rate fair and repair costs aren't close to that factor. SS has worked out well......each of their clients have different guide lines and you can print those out from their order. How do you decide at what is considerd fair versus good? I've done tons of reports and this was something new for me....especially after passing QC

If a property needs more than just a minor repair, for me it is only fair. It really doesn't matter how expensive the house is. I'd say anything over $1-$2k would make it only fair condition for me, but I am willing to be flexible with that. Using your numbers, a $200k house would need $30k in repairs before being downgraded to fair. In my opinion, that is way too high.

Jim, my point wasn't to bash FARVV, it wasn't. I was pointing out from the information contained in your post, that even if you are given a standard (in this case 15%) by a particular company it seems arbitrary (as in FARVVs case, which was my point).

I understand what you're saying. $5,000 to $6,000 in minimal costs for minor repairs seems like it shouldn't downgrade the Subject to fair or poor condition. $5,000 to $6,000 for repairs to a newer property worth $200,000 doesn't seem like much, those same repairs on an older property worth $60,000 is enormous.

Like I said, I'm still scratching my head regarding trash-out costs being considered cosmetic. Especially in light of a insect infestation. Oh well! Next!