Appraisal Report Writing and Review
Report Content
A credible report states the intended use, intended user, purpose, definition of value, effective date, scope of work, and certification. It must contain enough information for the intended user to understand the analysis-not necessarily every data point, but sufficient support for the conclusions.
Writing Standards
Use clear, non-misleading language. Avoid unsupported conclusions; every adjustment and conclusion should trace to evidence. The trap is a report that is internally inconsistent-conclusion contradicts the reconciliation, or the value opinion conflicts with the stated highest and best use.
Appraisal Review
Review determines whether an appraisal is credible and compliant. The reviewer must have competency in the property type and must not have performed the original appraisal (or must disclose prior involvement). Review is itself an appraisal assignment subject to USPAP. A trap: reviewers who substitute their own value opinion without performing the required development.
Worked Rule of Thumb
If a report concludes a value that exceeds the highest and best use analysis supports, flag it as an inconsistency. If a review finds the original scope insufficient, the reviewer may need to expand scope or note the limitation.
Exam Traps
Do not confuse review with reconciliation (reconciliation is part of the original appraisal). Do not assume a review must produce a value-it may only assess credibility.