Challenging a Surveyors Valuation

inca_2

Ditch_Crawler wrote: »

I think this thread raises a question which I have never seen aired in the popular press, or anywhere else come to think of it...

To what extent do surveyors 'assess' the valuation of a property, and to what extent do they 'fix' it?

ie - whose 'side' are they actually on - their fees are paid by members of the public, but the people they are most afraid of upsetting are the lenders.

DC

By bringing in a valuation that is lower than expected they are upsetting both the public and the lender, customer cannot sell, lender cannot lend so I don't understand what you mean by this? We have lost no end of mortgage business that would have come from purchases recently due to valuations coming in lower than expected (I'm not a valuer so have no idea whether this is accurate or not) believe me it's bad news for both sides when this happens.

brit1234

inca wrote: »

By bringing in a valuation that is lower than expected they are upsetting both the public and the lender, customer cannot sell, lender cannot lend so I don't understand what you mean by this? We have lost no end of mortgage business that would have come from purchases recently due to valuations coming in lower than expected (I'm not a valuer so have no idea whether this is accurate or not) believe me it's bad news for both sides when this happens.

:mad: Angry Face :mad:

We have had years of coruption and risky lending creating a gigantic housing bubble that has brought the international economy to its knees. These lower valueations are good news not bad as they bring safety and affordability to the market.

By you wanting the surveyor to overvalue properties so buyers can pay over the odds for property is just simply corrupt.

happybroker

brit1234 wrote: »

:mad: Angry Face :mad:

We have had years of coruption and risky lending creating a gigantic housing bubble that has brought the international economy to its knees. These lower valueations are good news not bad as they bring safety and affordability to the market.

By you wanting the surveyor to overvalue properties so buyers can pay over the odds for property is just simply corrupt.

I think you're missing the point a little here, we can provide evidence of property sales at higher levels than the valuer is placing on subject properties yet they refuse to acknowledge that they have, possibly, made an error.

Also valuers are putting wildly different values on houses, personal experience has shown differences of over 30% within 2 weeks of each other on the same property........that's not me pushing for "overvaluing", that's me wondering what's going on in the minds of these "professionals".

I agree that houses have been massively overpriced. Overvalued? No. They were "worth" what people were paying for them as others that were comparable were selling for that money.

The problem was that the overly flexible mortgage products allowed people to buy houses that probably shouldn't have been able to which then flooded the market with potential ftb's meaning supply was short/ demand high which meant things were "worth" more.

I agree that every one needs to be more balanced in order to create a better market place. Lenders have a massive opportunity now to promote sensible borrowing by offering products with a tighter criteria than previously, training staff properly and doing everything they can to keep them so that standards don't become diluted (as they are now) and promoting the benefits of good advice to their clients by either employing people who know what they are talking about or working more closely with brokers (the ones who are left seem to be the ones who's clients value their service and have stuck with them as a result).

Anyhoo, that's my thoughts on it.

DWW

CloudCuckooLand wrote: »

Did you appreciate this? Do you think that it is *possible* that a professional operating in the field day-in day-out might have insight into local market movements that you might not have?

Present the survey to the vendor, and agree a compromise. You might save a few thousand £s.

Until you ask you won't know if the vendor has benefitted from a similar situation, and therefore has leeway in their budget.

If everyone does this, there would be no "blockage".

Yes I do appreciate that a professional has a better insight than me. That is why I instructed an independant surveyor, who actually thoguht the property was undervalued at £250000. It is the inconsistency that is frustrating?

I'm quite happy to show the vendor the report and then wait for them to laugh in my face.

Ditch_Crawler

inca wrote: »

By bringing in a valuation that is lower than expected they are upsetting both the public and the lender, customer cannot sell, lender cannot lend so I don't understand what you mean by this? We have lost no end of mortgage business that would have come from purchases recently due to valuations coming in lower than expected (I'm not a valuer so have no idea whether this is accurate or not) believe me it's bad news for both sides when this happens.

I suppose what I mean is that the housing market is not really a 'free' market at all - it is heavily influenced (some would say distorted) by 'third party' actions, judgments and opinions (estate agents, valuers and lenders immediately spring to mind). It's been said before, but it is high time the whole thing was brought kicking and screaming into the 21st century from it's medieval beginnings. Don't ask me how though - there are too many vested interests in the unwieldy and outdated systems which remain in use.

VIGILANT22

DWW wrote: »

Yes I do appreciate that a professional has a better insight than me. That is why I instructed an independant surveyor, who actually thoguht the property was undervalued at £250000. It is the inconsistency that is frustrating? .

The "independent surveyor" may have come up with a different figure if they had been valuing for lending purposes....When valuing for lending purposes they are pricing it in a market for a quick sale at a time when house prices have fallen and could be set to fall again.....

JA1000

I don't want to move, I don't want to buy, just a very simple remortgage. These valuations are not helping, I cannot negotiate with the vendor. I can only disagree with the valuation, for which I have provided evidence.

Doesn't seem alot but it makes a difference-
Esurv Valuation April 2009 £250k
Esurv valuation March 2010 £240k

Nationwide and Land Registry index showing a 8-10% rise, so I would expect £275 minimum

Comparable properties SOLD in last two months £280k - £320k handed to the surveyor!!

This makes a significant difference on the LTV and costs over the next 2 years.

They are due to come back and will be all defensive to stick to their valuation. It is on the £250k band so they wont move but I would take £250k


It's all getting very boring so I can only urge everyone out there who has significant evdience and it's easy to find. Talk to estate agents I found them quite open on actual sold prices. CHALLENGE THE VALUATIONS AND MAKE SURVEYORS WAKE UP, IF NOT BE SATISFIED THEY ARE HAVING TO DO TWICE AS MUCH WORK FOR THE PRICE.

DWW

VIGILANT22 wrote: »

The "independent surveyor" may have come up with a different figure if they had been valuing for lending purposes....When valuing for lending purposes they are pricing it in a market for a quick sale at a time when house prices have fallen and could be set to fall again.....

Yes I appreciate that. I thought that an independant surveyor would have a bit more time to look around the property - a more thorough job if you like. It was for piece of mind.

VIGILANT22

It is nothing to do "with looking round the property".....it is all about risk...

DWW

So a survey has absoltely nothing to do with looking at a property, where improvements have been made etc?