I just recently got a QC reject on my order and it reads as follows:

"I have a previous BPO on the subject that supports a different value. Can you look over the following comps and give your opinion Comps:(she listed all 6 comp's addresses of the other agent's BPO). Please note whether each comp is good or not and why. Please give detailed comments on each one. Thank You."

I don't have a problem with further explaining my work but should I be irritated that they are asking me to go through every comp of somebody else's work and give them commentary? I guess I feel like they are trying to get 2 BPO's out of me for one fee. Anyone else run into this before?

I have had it before. The values were way off between the two BPO's. After I explained why my comps were better they accepted the order. It was not a big deal.

Did you look up every comp on the other agent's BPO and explain why each comp doesn't support the subject's value?

I have had them give 1 sold and 1 listing and asked to give details, never all six.

I would'nt mind doing a couple, but I would be a little irritated too if they wanted me to look up all six comparable.

Yes I did and it was interesting because the information the agent used was not accurate. I wouldn't want to do it all the time but it was okay in this case because the values were not close and they needed to know why.

I hve it happen quite frequently. I get a bit annoyed, look them up and provide commentary and submit. It is a pain in the [censored] but it happens...

I feel your pain, the worst is when the client pulls a batch from a lovely service like Trulia or Zillow IE 10 or 12 addresses. I guess your response depends on how much you value the client. If this is a good client, I have gone to lengths to illustrate how bad the other comps were. I have had several occasions where the subject was a vacant REO and the other bpo cited occupied comps with upgrades and amenities, no adjustments. I diplomatically let the client know that the comps where inappropriate and I reinforce with them just how available I am to avoid these conflicts in the first place!

This makes no sense to me. Why wouldnt if given the opportunity show how your work is superior to others in your area. There is no down side to this. Unless of course your work is the inferior work. And by showing that you do better more accurate work and you're accomodating by doing so, it may lead to you getting the next order and not the other agent.

You guys are only looking at the negative of this. If they have two bpos that are way off, it means one of the agents screwed up. If it's the other agent you can show them why their comps were garbage and it makes them look bad. I have found fake comps, incorrect data, and other bad things about their bpo, and im willing to bet they didn't use that agent again. I can look up 6 comps in 5-10 minutes so it's not a lot of time to waste.

BpoBill, I agree completely.

BpoBill I agree also. I usually look at this and most of the times they present the prior comps utilized. most of the time, depending on the market, the difference in value could be justified.

best way if you are confident in your value just explain to them why yours are better, or currently more comparable then the prior report.

But I also personally do get these also. why do they always think the first report is correct?? but yea if the values are way off I guess it does raise a red flag in the QC dept.

Remember they pull these standard notes all the time, doesn't mean yours or theirs is superior or inferior. I kind of like it if they would let me know if the prior is way off mine, I like to see if the other agents screwed up or sometimes I might be off. I don't care, but never gotten six.

Got this this week.

"There is a large Value Variance with your BPO and a recent BPO completed on the same property. Please pull the MLS sheets for the Previous Comps and provide DETAILED comments on these comps and why there would be a value variance between the two recent BPOs. Please send me the MLS sheets for your comps and the previous BPO comps provided. Also we would like you to provide an opinion of why you feel your BPO better represents Current Market. Please also state if previous comps used were REO/SS or FMV, as well as the comps you have used. Previous Comps: Sold: x,x,x,x,x,x,Thank you".

I think the thing I hate is having to do extra work based on something someone else did.

I used to get pissed off. But now weird as it sounds i actually get a kick out of seeing the prior bpo's cause it just enforces how good of a job I do!

And... I have never seen a Prior that was done correctly! One thing that does Irk me is after I have gone over the Facocta Prior order im often left wondering.... How the Hell did that order pass QC and I'm getting QC'd when my BPO is 100% Accurate?

Most of prior BPO were done by kookoo agents why used fake comps, GLA, etc. I receive one of those QC requirements sometimes, but it does not bother me to explain why my comps are better and more accurate then last ones. The best way to deal with this situation: pick the phone and call QC member who sent you the request and tell them why your comps are better. If they insist on providing comments on prior BPO, just deal with it and explain why. I have the highest score with this company, I am getting better BPOs that are close to my office and take 30 min. to complete. Sweeeeet

Be polite. Tell them "No". Your opinion is just that. Where does it say you must be in line with someone elses value?
Stand firm or these people will drag you around like sack of potatoes.

That depends on the age of the prior. I had one for CC very recently in The Hood.

The prior was 10 months old and came in at 30% higher than my value. The prior used legitimate comps for that time. The problem was the values in that area have fallen so dramatically since that time, that an explanation was needed. (It was on a CC form that did not allow us to state the percentage of depreciation during a given period of time)

I revised my report recognizing the prior report and the comps used. I also explained how the market has fallen so dramatically since that period of time in that neighborhood. My revised report that took about 10 extra minutes was later approved. Was it a PITA? Yes. Could I have used that 10 minutes more productively working on another report instead of rehashing one I submitted? Yes. Will I go the extra mile for a company like CC? For the third time, yes!

Explaining your position to a prior is a common part of working this niche. I don't like it anymore than the next person but you either deal with it, or go back to sales where people can waste your time in other ways. I'll stick to BPOs

Try this tact;
A brief review of the other BPO indicates the variance in value could be attributed to inexperience on the part of the other agent. As such, I stand by the value reflected in my BPO.
In addition to providing accurate BPOs we also offer additional services.
One of those services is an in depth QC review of other BPOs. This service carries a fee of $100.00, requires a 5 day lead time and includes all those items you've requested.
Please advise me if your client would like to purchase that service.

I hate the extra time it takes to prove that my bpo is accutate, but I am yet to have one of these situations where the other bpo was more accurate than mine. I especially love it when they mix distressed comps with fair market comps cause it tells me right away that it was either a newbie or a lazy bpo agent that did the order and it doesn't take me long to unwind their weak work. It's a good way to monitor your competition and while staying sharp.

I hate the extra time it takes to prove that my bpo is accutate, but I am yet to have one of these situations where the other bpo was more accurate than mine. I especially love it when they mix distressed comps with fair market comps cause it tells me right away that it was either a newbie or a lazy bpo agent that did the order and it doesn't take me long to unwind their weak work. It's a good way to monitor your competition while staying sharp.

I have been receiving these alot lately as well, almost everyone used distressed sales comps when the report specifically requests FMV. Less than 5 minutes and they get the response back, and usually get the accepted letter within a few minutes from that.

All my eML orders state to use only active comps......period. That leaves the bottom feeders, over priced, under priced, REO, Short Sale, Fair Market Value, 400 plus days on market......leaves a great choice of comps to select from. So, mixing the above, is not a choice, but a requirement.....That's not a newbie or lazy agent.....that has become a fact of life, at least with this one company.

As someone stated somewhere up the line here, it depends on the client. For a good client that assigns a lot of work, no problem. For the rest, I'll try Jack Reo's consulting plan, I like that.

I love it when they send you a comp that QC found somewhere on line and want it used on the BPO. Had one last week that they sent that was in an Age 55+ attached home community, when the subject property was single family detached in a typical suburban subdivision.

Ding! Ding! this is entirely true. I am not a lazy agent, nor an inexperienced BPO agent. With the one mill that my bruthah above speaks of I will sue both distressed and FMV comps on the same order. The most important thing to this client is that the comps are in close proximity. They want urba comps wihin a half mile, all active, quite often sold in the last 90 days. You telling me you can do that with all distressed or FMV comps? Sorry, if parameters are that tight and that is the main criteria, you will mot likely get a potpourri of FMV and distressed comps.

agree... my market shows both distressed and FM homes...and I show this on my reports... noting interior condition unknown and will effect end value...ie if it is a exterior...I believe this shows the client the potential value if subject is in good condition and the potential if it is not...now for a interior report... I will look for comps most like subject...

Sounds like an email I have gotten from my friends in Texas. They are in a pickle when there company provided 2 BPO's from different vendors and they are way off. Even though it irritates me to have to explain someone elses work, I still understand why it has to happen.......As a whole, it makes the mill look bad.

Verkackte...LOL

I love it when you do a ranch house and the last agent used a 100 year old colonial, a split foyer from 1979 and a cape and labeled them all RANCH. Then somebody from India in QC wants to know why MY value is different and I have to explain. SERIOUSLY? I had one where the previous 2 orders called the home a stick built and it was clearly a doublewide so I only used doublewides they called and told me I had to change it because the client had accepted the last 2 and mine was different. They wanted documentation as to how I determeined it was a doublewide. I said its called "a visual inspection" - look at the picture!! I politely asked "What if the owner is trying to do a loan mod and they are using these values which are #40,000 too high to decide? I refused to change it and went through 3 supervisors but in the end they took it. The last guy said all the Indian workers thought doublewides had wheels.

First, it's good to see the # of Agents that 'get it'. For those whining about reviewing someone elses work...not so much.

The thing to remember here is that you are not so much being asked to 'waste time' on another order as to JUSTIFY your own report first. The Client has no clue which report is accurate, and sometimes both are justified. The easiest way to justify yours is to simply point out any obvious errors in the previous report - or indicate why both may be accurate.

If it turns out you agree that some of the previous comps are better than yours, use the damb things and revise your order. QC has a lot more respect for Agents who can be objective than those who dig their heels in, all the while gnashing their teeth over the injustice of it all.

Don't forget the maxim "Methinks he doth protest too much"....

Resisting the request to help reconcile orders can make QC feel like you realize your order sucks - and yeah, we'll go after yer azz then... :evilsm:

Had a broker this week who self-righteously declared that reviewing another brokers opinion was UNETHICAL and 'probably illegal'....but he would do it for more cash. Go figger.

Further review showed that he had delayed 5 other orders in the last year and then asked for reassignment rather than make any revisions. Seems that if the order wasn't a slam dunk, he wasn't gonna play.

Happily, he has been disabled. :rockon:

From this lowly, humble QC - thanks and much Luv to those Agents that honor their commitments to submitting quality orders.
:woot:

Spoken like a true QC person, platitudes and all. First, we are paid to provide a quality bpo which most of us do. If you have a legitimate question about our reports, just ask. But don’t ask us questions about things that are already discussed in the report. That makes us think that QC people either don’t read the reports or don’t understand the basic concepts of how values are determined.

Secondly, quite often when I am asked to review another report done on the same property as my report, it is painfully obvious that the comps used in the other reports are inferior due to many things that should also be obvious to the review. As an example, I did a bpo on an 800 sq ft bungalow that was on a couple acres of land. The other agent used condo comps, looking only for square footage similarities. You waste my time telling you these things when, if you knew what you were doing, you wouldn’t have to ask. If you want me to do your job and review someone else’s work, pay me for my time.

I got one this week that was actually hiliarious. Called that there was an order done the last week of May that was very different and would I review the comps used then. I knew we had done the property before, and they said we did it in July and were much closer to the value assigned in July.

So they sent me the comps and they were all in a DIFFERENT city 35 miles from the subject. I called back the QC reviewer and suggested they contact the person who did the April report and request a refund.

We each have a job to do, I don't ask QC to pull my comps and take my photos and I expect them to handle their own QC issues. When they send me another agents work to review it indicates they're either not willing to, or incapable of performing their own work. Exactly what is the message they're sending? Kind of simple really, the message is they're not qualified to handle their job. Either learn how to handle QC or seek another line of work. I did my job, I gave you a quality BPO. I expect you to do yours and properly reconcile differing values. What I don't expect is to be told you need me to handle the job you're incapable of handling, and that you expect me to handle it free. You get paid to QC work and so do I. The reference to agents that "get it" indicates more that they don't necessarily get it, but rather they get used. Perhaps the real question here is, "do you get it"?

As an aside, my BPOs are only performed for listing companies. As such there are generally no questions since most of my AMs are qualified to properly evaluate the end product. They "get it".

I "get it." The QC only has power over the agent who has not yet been paid, so that agent is forced to bow to QC demands or not be paid at all. I have had to prove my work on a number of occasions, and it does help a little to know that I am killing off my competition when I prove them wrong. It does not, however, put money in my pocket.

It's funny how you guys bang on the QC department and whine about them not doing their job because they called in question your report because it was the most recent.

Let me ask you a question. Say you owned a house in another state and and last year you needed a value on it and you payed an agent to give you a BPO and he came in, lets say 100k. Then 6 months later you're thinking about selling and hire an different agent to do another BPO and comes in at 70k. What are you going to do? Contact the agent from the older order and see what the deal is. No youre going to the most recent one first.

And you're right, we are more qualified than a QC person in antoher state to determine a value on a property in our area. But youre forgetting one thing. They have two orders and two different values, so who screwed up? Rememebr you said we are more qualified and we dont make mistakes.

Nobody is whining. We are just saying that we should be paid for our expertise and we expect the QC people to also be professional. And, by the way, if the spelling and grammar in your post represents the quality of work you do on your bpo's, you deserve to have your reports Qc’d.

First of all we are paid for our expertise. Secondly I don't see where they are unprofessional by asking us to review our work. And lastly, sorry I didn't proofread my porst. I do will tri betttr next tyme. And by the way, personal attacks show how professional you really are.

Nothing personal meant. Just an observation.

Ay caramba, some of you have made really bad assumptions about the QC process.

Yes, I could resolve the variances on most orders - if I had the time. But our mutual Client expects me to close orders, and so when a variance between 2 orders arises, I'm not charged with reconciling them or even looking at them - I have 85 more orders to look at where the Agent made $.45/sf adjustments to comps that sold for $325/sf....

I send it to YOU because you're the Wizard that's gonna clear it up in 5 minutes...or you're the one with the bogus order, and I send it to you because that's the way the process works. History shows it's a tossup as to which order needs to be corrected.

Again, we could whine over a Cuervo as to how unfair the process is, but you and I don't get to tell the Client how we want things done. Go figger.

But certainly, if you're being asked to explain something in your report that you've already addressed, that shouldn't happen - unless your explanation doesn't make sense....

"Value is weighted on Actives as market is declining and Sold comps sold for much less..."

"Although all comps are Fair Market, the market is REO driven. Please pay me now...."

I can't help getting a little tear in my eye in the face of such clarity...
:cool:

"Rememebr you said we are more qualified and we dont make mistakes".
Read my post again..I did not write that. Consider this a free QC of your post.
BTY, I will say I get almost no QC kickbacks, but to an extent, that is also a function of the companies I work with. For the most part their QC folks are experienced.
I perform historical BPOs for a number of companies and I get paid for it. When a variance comes up on a listing BPO, the listing company orders another BPO and their internal QC department makes the decision. Quality control should extend beyond an "I can't figure this out, so I'll ask the agent to justify BOTH values" Ask your supervisor for assistance, maybe they have the necessary experience.
The influx of BPO providers extends well beyond the new agents jumping in. It extends to the BPO mills. They cut prices to get business, thus forcing them to cut the amount they pay the agents. Then they blast assign to the agents, since they lack a network of loyal agents, thus insuring they get the agent that accepts the quickest rather then an agent that has the most experience. Reduced profit forces them to hire inexperienced QCers and we then have QC issues. They created the very problem they now ask us to cure. Hire qualified people, pay for that quality and the issue disappears. Has anyone ever had a kickback from MGIC? Not likely, since they pay the agents a decent fee, pay within a week and pay for experienced QC folks. You don't get Corvette performance when you buy a Colbalt, you get what you pay for. This entire QC issue revolves around inexperienced people at all levels. I, for one, do not have the time or inclination to explain their stupidity to them and they probably wouldn't "get it" if I did. I'll stick with the companies, that I've worked with for years. They pay me well, on time and they actually understand the valuation process.
Just what do they expect for 30-40 dollars, a 48 hour TAT, and payment in 60-90 days? Regardless of what they might expect, QC issues are what they get. They broke it, they can fix it. If they want me to fix it for them, pay me. And they'll read this and probably still not "get it".

Quote:
Yes, I could resolve the variances on most orders - if I had the time. But our mutual Client expects me to close orders, and so when a variance between 2 orders arises, I'm not charged with reconciling them or even looking at them - I have 85 more orders to look at where the Agent made $.45/sf adjustments to comps that sold for $325/sf....
UNQUOTE:

I rest my case. It appears you have a ton of work to do and a half ton of time. But just where does it follow that I have to do your job just because you are busy? If your company won't hire additional help, it should not fall on the agent to cover the staffing shortfall.
When I get overloaded, I wouldn't dare suggest that my staff work for free. They work extra hours, I pay them extra money.

Regarding the $45 vs $325 sq. ft. The per foot price also includes land value and never will the sale price per foot be used as an adjustment.

Wait wait wait... I'm not exactly sure which company Strider324 works for but I as a QC'r don't really appreciate the attitude that is conveyed.

Here is my stance as a QC'r. You the agent are the expert. You the agent may know something about the area that I cannot see by just data and comps and maps. You the agent are my eyes in the area. This is suppose to be a symbiotic relationship. I need you to tell me if my prior is completely off basis. Sometimes, I can look at a prior BPO and say 'wow, that is completely off the mark.' but my client still wants to hear it from you the agent. The prior agent isn't likely to say 'Yeah, my work was shoddy'.

At the same time, the prior may have used something that didn't come up in your search or had a piece of info that you didn't see. QC's job is to try to provide you with this information to reconcile the report within a reasonable tolarance.

JackREO: I as a QC'r have apx 100 - 160 BPO's to QC per day. I work 7 days a week. To put this in perspective, I probably have to send back about 10 - 15% of all reports for corrections/Variances. Probably only 1 per agent. What makes more sense, having 100 agents work on one order each and can give my client more information than I would be able to do, or me to fix 100 reports.

You let me know which seems to make more sense logistically. The company can't hire 100 people more to do my QI's.

J~

Again, you need to understand my job - and yours - before you can spew about it. The CLIENT dictates what my job is, and there is no staffing shortfall when the point you apparently missed is that it IS your job to justify YOUR order - thus the Process.

If you had read for comprehension instead of speed, you would have seen that the example showed $.45/sf, not $45 - or was that just an ignorant typo on your part? :blush: (Geez, insulting other posters is kewl!!)

And no one said anything about using SP/sf as an adjustment factor - which just begs the question as to why I have to fail orders every day for that very reason...but I digress. Is there a lot of land value in Condos? Please clarify whatever justification you would have for the example cited.

But I'm pretty sure you're entrenched now, so I'll leave you to your obstinance. You trash a mans typos, and then say it's not personal.... okey dokey. I'm getting a sense of who the Professionals are here, and I owe it all to you.
:/

Strider324:

Some friendly advise;

I worked along time to get a bit of respect on this board as a QC'r and not an agent. These people have a lot they can teach you if you are willing to learn and not be so defensive. If you are on here to be combative, you are here for the wrong reasons. If not, listen to what they say, answer their questions as you can and they in return will provide you with a perspective that can help you in your career.

Take it or leave it. My 2 cents.

J~

I don’t think anyone is complaining about being asked to clarify issues in reports that we prepare provided that the issue hasn’t already been addressed in the report. What I do not appreciate is being asked to review work done by someone else for free. I am sure that you can come up with lots of examples of poorly done reports or stupid comments made by agents just as we can come up with many examples of stupid questions that we get from QC people. But it isn’t my responsibility to point these things out to you or to reconcile the report for you. Check out the forum and you will find a lengthy thread dedicated just too stupid QC requests.

It is your problem, not mine, that you are too busy to do a proper job QC’ing your reports. The 45 or 50 bucks that I get for a bpo doesn’t include free consulting services for a problem agent of yours. If you aren’t happy with an agent’s work, fire them. Do a better job qualifying agents to work for you and you will have fewer QC problems and more time on your hands. We had a new agent in our office a few years ago that went into the real estate business after a long career as a nail girl. Within two months, she was a bpo queen. Some of the reports done by other agents that are sent to me for review make it painfully obvious that you guys need to do a better job in choosing the agents that you work with.

I'm not the poster that mentioned typos. I make plenty.
I also have no issue with revewing my own work. I find it troubling that when I make extensive comments, including the dollar amounts adjusted for variances, I'm asked how I arrived at the value. SFN= simple flippin math. It;s an indication that the comments weren't read. My issue is when I'm asked to critique another agents work. Let that agent justify their results, I'll justify mine and mine only.

For the record- I understand being asked to comment on a previous BPO. It is annoying, but I do it here and there. In my opinion, it has nothing to do with the QC rep not knowing their job. We know the market here better than they do, thats a fact. The best QC rep in the world does not know the market here like I do. So, while I do not care to do these, I do them. It does not take that much time.
What I do not care for is the attitude, Strider. the forum is "Agents" online. We do have some folks here that are not agents. We treat them with respect and vice versa. I have benefited from discussing QC matters with ~J~. In your case, I probably will not read much more of what you have to say. Funny thing is, I agreed with your stance here on this topic, but your delivery of your message was pretty obnoxious. One could make a case that you really do not belong on this forum....

Jack,

Sometimes in order to justify your work being better, you have to show why someone else is poor quality. After all, on paper, houses can look very much the same but in the real world of pocket neighborhoods, they are not. Would you not agree?

J~

I appreciate that J.

But it works both ways. I learn something every day from my best Brokers, but I have probably forgotten more about this business than most of the Agents I have to QC have ever bothered to learn. It's the nature of the beast - the old 80/20 rule is now more like a 90/10, same as the mortgage biz I started in back when rates were 17%. Most of these guys will commit suicide if we bump back up to 7%... :silly:

If it's not an Agents job to justify their own work and review others, I guess I can claim it's not my job to train Agents in Real Estate 101.... but I spend 2 hours a day doing it without whining, because - that's the job. I'd love it if we could contract with more knowledgeable Brokers, but in my experience they don't exist. So I train them. I guess it's good that I got my Brokers license in '89 and committed to teaching Real Estate licensing courses early on.

You nailed it though - this should be a symbiotic relationship, and I have lots of Agents who are quite competent. But I have a lot more who can't tell the difference between a Condo and a TH, or why the Client expects like kind comps....

The only defensiveness I've seen here is from those who think it makes sense to blame a BPO firm for the policies of a mutual Client. (shrug)

Yes, we could suck up this sites entire bandwidth with tales of stoopid Agents and stoopid QC's, but that's not the point here.

Some orders require review. No, you won't get paid more for it - I don't get paid enough either. I've never met anyone who thinks they DO get paid enough, including the Enron executives. You can play or you can take your ball and go home. I just have little patience for the whining.
:)

Peace.

Consider how the QC issuse came to be such an issue. Once upon a time both partners, the agents and the BPO requesters, had extensive experience. Quality was requested and received. Payments were adequate and prompt, TATs were reasonable, and the orders were requested directly to the agents. A true partnership based on mutual respect.
Then it hit the fan and REOs became the dominant market force. Everyone and their kin jumped on board the BPO wagon. That's agents that took a 3 hour course and BPO mills that sold the courses. The supply of BPO agents (or warm bodies) allowed the Mills to lower prices. Rather then establish any meaningful relationship with agents Mills started shotgunning the orders to an broad number of agents. Payments were delayed 60-90 days if paid at all.
The net result is that many (not all) of the more experienced agents dropped the newer accounts.
When an order is shotgunned it is readily apparent that the requestor is focused on speed of acceptance. The low/slow/no pay will keep the newbies busy, but at what cost. The cost is QC issues. When QC issues were few and far between, evaluating anothers work wasn't all that diffucult. When the norm became hiring the lower end of the experience spectrum, QCing others started to resemble a full time job. It leaves some of us feeling used rather then being partners. Most of the evals I've handled have been so outrageously inept as to jump off the page. I'm tempted to comment "the values have an extreme variance due to inexperience on the part of the agent that performed same and lax hiring practices on the part of the party that hired them)". But that would not be an acceptable answer. No acceptable, but not necessarily too far off the mark. The first step in making a process foolproof is to stop hiring fools.
If anyone in my office had a 5% kickback rate (someone mentioned 10-15%) they'd be gone in a heartbeat. If they all had a 5% kickback rate, it indicates a systemic issue and the need to revamp my training.
I suppose my main objection to reviewing doesn't lie so much with the QC requesting it, but more with the application or approval process utilized when hiring those agents.
Pay a decent amount, request the order directly to ONE agent, pay quickly, allow a decent TAT, and the QC issues will evaporate. The alternative is keep doing it the way you're doing it and you'll have to live with the monster you've (not you personally, the system) created.
Just to mention one additional point. Those BPOs my staff handle are only for listing companies. We accept no blast assignments, pay for NO UFCs (usless flippin courses), no mill work, and no low/slow pays. I leave those to newbies and hopefully it keeps them too busy to go after the good accounts. (someone has to clean up after the party) Thus no QC issues.
As far at Strider's comments go regarding professionalism. I'm ranked the top 100 agents nationally based on gross commission income. Apparently more then a few companies are satisfied with my professionalism.
You ...J seem to have a few miles under your belt and could probably convince even a hardass like me to help you out once in a while. The newcomer to the forum would be lucky to get the phone answered.
Check your PM

Excellent post Jack. Glad you took the time to tell it like it is. I agree 100%.

Jack, I agree with just about everything you posted. It's common knowledge after all.

That doesn't change the fact that some orders have to be reviewed by the market experts, and that complaining about it is not productive.

Once upon a time does not exist today. Clients weren't ordering 300,000 BPO's a month back in the day. A suggestion to slow things down and let the really good Agents handle all the volume is just not realistic. I don't like it either. But it is reality.

As to Professionalism, it will take a little more than your income assertions to convince me (Ken Lay made a lot of money too....he's still a felon) - especially in light of your petulant personal attack on a poster with typos. You got pissed off and lashed out. That's not what an adult does, much less a Professional.

You owe the poster an apology. Everybody knows it. Will you step up? I suppose we'll see.

And for the poster concerned as to whether I belong in this forum or not, if this is such a petty place that its denizens can only dish out criticism without taking some in kind - then yeah, I would have no use for such a place.

I'm thinking there is much character and integrity that abides here, though. I've seen quite a bit already.

Strider, if you would bother to read the posts before you spout off, you would have seen that it wasn't Jack who chastised the guy with the typos. Jack even pointed that out when he was responding to one of your posts. It was me who made the comment. The guy deserved a bit of a smack down for piling on and calling us all whiners for expressing how we feel about being taken advantage of by QC people such as yourself. If a person expects to be taken seriously, it would help to communicate in a professional way. The guy was comfortable dishing it out but objected to having it thrown back at him.

You, on the other hand, owe Jack an apology and everyone else for your acidic, know it all and condescending attitude.

Strider,

You need to understand that this forum is for agents to vent. Just as we QC'rs go off when we have to fix bad photos, bad reports ect to other QC'rs. This is where these agents come to vent so that they can remain professional when dealing with the likes of us. I've spent over a year trying to convince these agents that QC'rs are not evil and you're not helping this with the tone of your replies.

Whether they are 'whining' or not... It is not directed at or to *you*. I think if you step back and try to understand that, you would get a different perspective of what is going on. Start asking yourself what you can do to help and not give a knee jerk defensive reaction which is what it seems you are doing.

If you choose to remain here, do so with the intention of assisting whoever you can with what knowledge you have in hopes that it makes the bpo's you get better quality. I am sure the company you work for would be happier with that type of representation than what you are currently giving.


J~

This has become almost comical:

Someone who has contributed 9 posts to the forum decides that he or she knows everything and everyone else is a dunce.

I've been doing BPO's since 1997 when we had to mail Polaroids then type the form on a typewriter (and fax it).

Our QC return rate is less than 1%, so a company that is having a 10% return rate clearly has an unqualified agent panel. If the QC return rate is client driven, then the requirements are clearly not realistic. The field agents live in the real world, not in some cubicle reading standards off of a computer screen and sending out HELP HELP HELP's.

Which is probably why most of the veteran agents have fired the low pay, high demand, short turn time mills and stuck with the companies that appreciate our work and our time.

Again, I was not the poster that mentioned typo's.
Perhaps reading the post would be akin to reading the comments prior to rejecting a BPO.
At any rate, I believe we can just agree to disagree.

Phoenix, you're absolutely right. Jack, please accept my apology. I am clearly the pot...and the kettle in this case.

Momma always said I'd lose my head if it wasn't up my azz all the time. :-(

Certainly is my experience that there are many new QC people who start off assuming they are in a power position somehow capable of making immediate demands and determining values or the adequacy of comparables from their office..but as time goes by they become more reality based and realize how little they know, how many inaccurate assumptions they are making and how few qualified realtors will take their crap. When I get an occasional completely off base request to look at another BPO- I usually point out the issues and comment, hey are you new? these are established and routine issues. Never had a negative response from then on........

I did a value variance QC this last week...gues who did the previous? Me...LOL. I got assigned the BPO and knew I had done a previous in September and they gave me the green light to go ahead with it. It was a 1BR/1Bath condo. All of the comps were from the same complex. They have come down in value. Previous which I did was all the same exact model, sold in late spring early summer. New BPO was also the same model, sold a few months later and values in this complex have tumbled. All of the comps from the previous and current are the same exact model as the subject.
I wanted to call the previous agent a moron, but he is actually a very cool guy.....

That happened to me SMG a few months back. I did both for Fiserv/ISGN where the instructions specifically asked me to use FMV comps. There were just enough to go around to use those sales/listings as comparables, and submitted the initial report as a non-distressed sale value.

Guess what happened? My updated report that was ordered about three months later had the same instructions, but I was forced to use distressed sale properties as the facet of FMV homes ran dry for that neighborhood. So my second BPO gets kicked-back for a value variance, and I explained to QC exactly what happened, and they accepted the explanation.

As far as the whole BPO agent/QC relationship, my personal take depends on which company is QCing me and for why? Is the QC kickback due to something that was already explained in my report? I have always had a problem with that as if the reviewer had just bothered to read my report, they would realize their needed explanation is right there in front of them. That is a huge pet peeve of mine. If QC expects me to be thorough with my job, then they should adhere to the same policy. I realize we are all human and make mistakes, but some mills habitually do that so I try not to work for them.

My QC kickbacks I would estimate to be at or below 1% on files as I explain things as much as I can. I would hope that would be average, but from what I am reading from this thread it is not I suppose. That being said, the mills that have a tendency to be QC PITAs I have "laid-off" over the course of time.

I think the new poster should use this forum as a learning tool instead of having an argumentative attitude. One can learn a lot by reading from those that have experience in this niche. We are all never going to agree with each other 100% on things, and it would be boring if we did.

I agree. This is an agents forum, hence the name. Coming in here from the other side is perfectly cool and as mentioned, I have gained some info from those that have come in and had dialogue with us. Coming in from the other side with a confrontational, condescending attitude will undoubtedly alienate you from most or all of us. What good does that do?

Funny, had to respond to the comment re agents who cant tell the difference between a condo or townhome. The legal definition actually varies considerably accross the country.
In some areas a townhome property means the land is owned, in others the land may not be owned as in a "condo". Pretty common to see a property legally classified as a townhome if it is a 2 story attached property independent of land ownership in many areas of he country.
(I'm assuming thats the issue you may be able to enlighten me differently, but the principle is the same, many differing laws, rules, accepted practices in different places)

Thus the agent's definition may be quite accurate for his area,, but different from your companies criteria. Doesnt make him wrong. just differing from your criteria which may need clarificaton.

Stew,

Very good point. As a QC'r you learn quickly that a duplex means different things in different places. After about the first 20 rural orders, you learn that they consider anything with a farm house 'Ranch' for style.... even two stories because they are on acreage and considered 'A ranch'. So having to explain that our client that sits in downtown CA doesn't consider the style 'Ranch' as requiring horses or crops is just part of the job. It doesn't make the agent or the company wrong. Just teaches both parties about how to communicate what is there in a way the client understands.

About QC reading notes it's the same thing. Sometimes agent’s notes are there but they are not conveying things in a way the client will understand. Some clients require more detail. I get agents that submit the note 'Best Comps available' but my clients are very specific with the fact that they need to know why these are the best available. It's kind of a given already that you should use the best available comps. Why would you use the comps that are not the best available? But why is generally the reason. Sometimes it's best to keep it simple. Things like 'Searched up to 2 miles due to lack of inventory' Will say more than an entire paragraph on the condition of the market and rates of decline.

J~

Wow I see nothing has changed. More of the same.

I have said it again and again that BPO's for mills will be more work and less pay.

I only do work for companies I have been with for years and years that pay well.Now that the mills have almost hit a bottom on the fees they are pushing the envelope on what they can dump onto the BPO agent with requirements and extra junk.

The sh*t rolls downhill and the agent is at the bottom.