GeoPro360, LLC

The appraisal of the property was prepared for the sole intended user that had ordered the report and for their decision making for lendingThe person filing this complaint is not the homeowner and not the intended user of the reportThe report is USPAP compliant and written in compliance with the terms of the engagement letter and to Fannie Mae reporting guidelinesI have a legal requirement to respond only to the concerns of the sole intended user which by law, is required to review the report for accuracy and complianceAlthough the home owner is required by Fair lending to receive a copy of the report, they are not familiar with all market data available, aware of all housing trends and factors that influence value or marketabilityAdditionally, they are not familiar with Fannie Mae reporting requirements or USPAPI have fulfilled my professional, state, federal and legal obligation to the sole intended user of the report100% I did have initial contact with an occupant of the home and the actual homeownerThey had brought to my attention further data they would like addressedI then asked that they formally ask my client to provide this information to me and that would in fact address itMy client, not the home owner, indicated no errors/no omissions per USPAP or Fannie Mae reporting guidelinesMy client, did not question the value indicated or state any unsatisfactory items with the report or the analysis precedingI addressed all "comparables" the client via the homeowner providedIn turn, the homeowner then contacted me indicating the properties I addressed (they provided) were not even comparable I have done my best to satisfy the homeowners questions through legal chain and my legal and professional responsibilityIt was obvious that the homeowner (not my client) simply wanted the value of their property lifted in spite of having no evidence or support from the market placeMy client has no concerns regarding my report, my analysis or my assignment results I was very polite to the homeowner and tried to answer their questions in a manor which would be understandable to those not familiar with the scope of the assignment (outlined in my report, USPAP or Fannie Mae guidelinesIt was only after it became apparent that they were attempting to pressure me for a higher value estimate through nasty voice mail and email that I asked them not to contact me further on the matterAny and all correspondence needs to come directly from the sole intended user of the reportMy client and only intended user of the report has also informed them to stop contacting meI have retained all corespdence with the homeowner as well as my client and the intended user of the report Please advise the homeowner to contact Wisconsin Department of Professional Regulation-Appraisal Division to file a formal complaintThey are familiar with USPAP and Fannie Mae requirementsIf they feel my report or valuation is in error, I assure you they will conduct a full investigation on the matterI would be happy to respond to them In summary, I have acted professional regarding this entire matter and have gone beyond the scope of my assignment as set forth by my client to answer any questions or concerns they haveI have been polite to the homeowner in spite of their intimidating and threatening attitudeI feel their complaint is completely unfounded but based on their lack of knowledge of my legal requirements to my client, a lack of understanding to current USPAP and Fannie Mae reporting guidelines and driven by the sole intention for a higher value appraisal, in spite of support from the market place

The appraisal of the property was prepared for the sole intended user that had ordered the report and for their decision making for lending. The person filing this complaint is not the homeowner and not the intended user of the report. The report is USPAP compliant and written in compliance with the...

terms of the engagement letter and to Fannie Mae reporting guidelines. I have a legal requirement to respond only to the concerns of the sole intended user which by law, is required to review the report for accuracy and compliance. Although the home owner is required by Fair lending to receive a copy of the report, they are not familiar with all market data available, aware of all housing trends and factors that influence value or marketability. Additionally, they are not familiar with Fannie Mae reporting requirements or USPAP. I have fulfilled my professional, state, federal and legal obligation to the sole intended user of the report. 100%.
I did have initial contact with an occupant of the home and the actual homeowner. They had brought to my attention further data they would like addressed. I then asked that they formally ask my client to provide this information to me and that  would in fact address it. My client, not the home owner, indicated no errors/no omissions per USPAP or Fannie Mae reporting guidelines. My client, did not question the value indicated or state any unsatisfactory items with the report or the analysis preceding. I addressed all "comparables" the client via the homeowner provided. In turn, the homeowner then contacted me indicating the properties I addressed (they provided) were not even comparable.
I have done my best to satisfy the homeowners questions through legal chain and my legal and professional responsibility. It was obvious that the homeowner (not my client) simply wanted the value of their property lifted in spite of having no evidence or support  from the market place. My client has no concerns regarding my report, my analysis or my assignment results.
I was very polite to the homeowner and tried to answer their questions in a manor which would be understandable to those not familiar with the scope of the assignment (outlined in my report, USPAP or Fannie Mae guidelines. It was only after it became apparent that they were attempting to pressure me for a higher value estimate through nasty voice mail and email that I asked them not to contact me further on the matter. Any and all correspondence needs to come directly from the sole intended user of the report. My client and only intended user of the report has also informed them to stop contacting me. I have retained all corespdence with the homeowner as well as my client and the intended user of the report.
Please advise the homeowner to contact Wisconsin Department of Professional Regulation-Appraisal Division to file a formal complaint. They are familiar with USPAP and Fannie Mae requirements. If they feel my report or valuation is in error, I assure you they will conduct a full investigation on the matter. I would be happy to respond to them.
In summary, I have acted professional regarding this entire matter and have gone beyond the scope of my assignment as set forth by my client to answer any questions or concerns they have. I have been polite to the homeowner in spite of their intimidating and threatening attitude. I feel their complaint is completely unfounded but based on their lack of knowledge of my legal requirements to my client, a lack of understanding to current USPAP and Fannie Mae reporting guidelines and driven by the sole intention for a higher value appraisal, in spite of support from the market place.