New York appraisal Q&A: low valuations, timing and report access

I would not bypass the lender’s stated process. The agent can help prepare factual material, but the buyer should first ask the lender where it must be submitted and who may communicate with the appraiser.
 
A one-page comparison table could be useful: sale date, building, unit type, condition and the claimed omission. Attach support. Ten weak comparables will distract from two genuinely persuasive ones.
 
Keep the wording neutral too. “The report appears not to reflect this documented feature” is more useful than accusing the appraiser of protecting the lender or intentionally suppressing value.
 
Meanwhile, tell the financing and transaction contacts that a reconsideration is pending. Waiting silently can create a scheduling problem even if the valuation issue is eventually resolved.
 
Does an appraisal remain usable indefinitely if closing is delayed, or can the lender later require updated work? That could affect whether seeking extra time is actually harmless.
 
That is lender- and transaction-specific, so the lender should answer it directly. Ask whether the anticipated delay changes any valuation requirement, financing milestone, fee or document deadline.
 
Returning to document ownership: receiving a copy and having the right to reuse or distribute a report are not necessarily the same thing. Haruto should ask what access is available and what limits apply.
 
Exactly. The buyer may need the report to understand the financing result, while the engagement relationship can still affect reliance and reuse. Those are separate questions, not a single ownership issue.
 
I submitted a concise correction request through the lender. The seller is not reducing the price yet, and the transaction contacts are discussing more time while the lender considers the materials.
 
Would it be sensible to request a second appraisal now as leverage, or should I wait until the lender responds to the first submission?
 
The lender has confirmed it will consider the first request before discussing any further valuation work, so I am holding off. That avoids paying for something the lender may not use.
 
That is the orderly approach. In parallel, decide privately how much valuation gap you could tolerate, if any. A successful challenge is possible, but it should not be the only plan.
 
And do not let the pending request stop negotiation entirely. The parties can discuss conditional alternatives without pretending the appraisal will certainly change, subject to what their contract and advisers permit.
 
The earlier conflict question still matters if anyone involved has a financial or personal relationship that could affect impartiality. Raise concrete facts through the proper channel rather than making a broad accusation.
 
Would repeated comparable suggestions from a broker count as pressure? Frequency alone seems less important than whether the communication supplies evidence or demands a predetermined result.
 
Agreed. Ask the lender how communications are handled and disclose any relevant relationship. A factual submission and an instruction to “hit the price” are plainly different in character.
 
Haruto now needs a shared timeline: reconsideration response, financing decision, contract dates, seller response and any extra cost. One person should keep the dates aligned, even though different professionals control different tasks.
 
The seller’s refusal to move yet may simply be negotiating posture, especially if they expect other interest. The buyer’s limit should be based on affordability and the deal terms, not on winning the appraisal argument.
 
Even a revised value may not fully solve matters if it remains below price or the lender reaches another financing conclusion. Ask for the lender’s decision in writing before committing additional funds.
 
The useful lesson here is to prepare evidence early but escalate in sequence: understand the report, submit precise corrections through the accepted channel, protect the timeline, then negotiate from the lender’s actual response rather than assumptions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top