Developer Alleges False Appraisal Attempted To Sabotage His Project

In this case, a knowledgeable buyer who was aware of market values based on their experience in developing an adjacent subdivision, made a less-than-full-price offer on a property that was not accepted. In response to the rejection, the buyer made a lower offer which was likewise not accepted. The buyer then attempted to force the sale at the reduced price by claiming the real estate licensees had obligations inconsistent with state law and claimed they were responsible for perceived damages he claimed the licensees were liable for that again are clearly inconsistent with the duties and liabilities under state statutes and real estate commission regulations.

Based on state real estate regulations, only the broker in charge has the authority to supervise the licensed activities of the appraiser. In most cases, the property owners are not liable for an act, error, or omission of a real estate licensee that arises out of the licensee relationship.

The appraiser did not breach the standard of care that he owes as a real estate licensee to the property owners, the prospective sellers, in this matter, nor did he breach the standard of care that he owes as a real estate licensees to the prospective buyer.

Based on the evidence available, the real estate group did not breach the standard of care for supervision, given their business association with the appraiser, that they owe to the prospective buyers or sellers.

If the statements made in the published appraisal were false, they would not harm the plaintiff’s business by harming his reputation in the community. The appraisal was posted in a relatively obscure area in the listing in the area that is not available to the public and typically would not be reviewed in great detail by licensees given the age of the appraisal. Additionally the state real estate commission has decided that appraisals are not a material fact for disclosure by sellers. They are a subjective opinion of value.