Report for Underwriter - They want specific language - Coercion 7

[siteturbo]

Hello,

I just did a structural report on a residential home stating whether or not a specific framing element was structurally sound or not. The lender/underwriter came back to me and said that they must have specific language stating this and that and the other.

How far can these underwriters go in stating what me report should say and tell me "how to say it". Is there any legal implication from them telling me what to say in my report. I mean, they're asking for my opinion and I gave it. Then they ask me to say it another way. How far can they legally go with this. Isn't this called coercion and isn't it illegal, or at least unethical, to say the least?

It's a little frustrating!

 

[dik]

Do your report as you see fit. Apologise and explain that what he is requesting is improper and/or incorrect in your opinion.

Dik

 

[ztengguy]

Yea, they want you to say it so they can get the loan out. they really dont care if it is sound or not.

 

[frv]

And then, if something goes wrong, they'll come after you because you said such-and-such.

 

[MikeHalloran]

Is your report subject to interpretation, or does it unequivocally say (yes|no}?

Does your report use words or technical phrases that a layperson would not understand?



I.e., it's not clear if your correspondent is actually asking you to change your conclusions, which you should of course refuse, or if (s)he is asking for clarity and/or plain language, which you might consider doing.

... or if you are actually dealing with a clerical person who has been ordered/trained to seek out specific words having specific meanings as defined by someone's lawyers, and they have been specifically trained/ordered to not interpret any words outside some defined subset as being responsive to the issue.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[woodman88]

I agree with MikeHalloran.

The problem with bureaucracies (government especially and private) is that they create their own report format and language. Follow their format for the report and ask for their definition of the words (if they appear to mean other than what you stated) they want and see if you can include the words per their definition. Add the definitions, as an attachment, to your report. Your using words that mean the same as or are similar in meaning to the words they are looking for might/will confuse the person (a government worker or possibly a person in another country) checking the report.

The biggest example of this, that I know of, is medical insurance (in the USA). Most doctor offices need to have someone on staff to fill out the insurance forms (difference for each company/plan) for payment. As each company appears to want the same thing stated somewhat differently.

Though building departments (and the third party) plan checkers come out as a close second biggest.

But do not change your meaning in the report!

Garth Dreger PE - AZ Phoenix area
As EOR's we should take the responsibility to design our structures to support the components we allow in our design per that industry standards.

 

[paddingtongreen]

I'm with MikeHalloran too. Are they asking you to lie or to clarify?

Michael.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a rain dance.

 

[msquared48]

If it does not change the engineering and legal based intent of my thinking, I have no problems with it.

As far as I am concerned, it is just trade specific language... most of the time.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

http://mmcengineering.tripod.com

 

[NS4U]

I wonder if their insurance policy has specific lanaguage and relies on the use of specific terms. They probably want your report to match their policy with their client so there is no ambiguity. I see it sometimes. Usually it's just word smiting, nothing devlish.

you don't have any examples so it's tough to say if they are trying to change the meaning of your report or just switch one term for another (without changing content). Obviously if they are trying to change the meaning of your report that is wrong.

Why not just ask them why they want you change the wording?

 

[miningman]

Submit your invoice. Invite the client to wordsmith your report in exactly the format they would like to see and submit it to you. For an additional fee, ( to be mutually agreed) you will review the revised report, and either agree to sign it (obviously on the understanding there is zero difference in technical content) or provide an additional report ( for an additional fee) explaining why their proposed changes cannot be signed by yourself. That should escalate the matter high enough to get the matter reviewed by someone with authority AND common sense.

 

[1gibson]

I just did a structural report on a residential home stating whether or not a specific framing element was structurally sound or not.

So was the answer yes or no? If it takes more than one word to compltely answer that question, then I can't say I blame the customer for wanting some clarification.

 

[dik]

I hate to be the odd man out, but I can handle it! Although your intentions may be good, or possibly questionable (prostitute comes to mind), it is a very bad idea.

Once I've prepared a report it is legally, technically and gramatically correct... and very precise.

I do not want to learn the 'jargon' of some other entity and whatever other meanings some 'catchall' phrases may have that may differ from my grasp of the vernacular.

If my report is reviewed, it will be reviewed and/or challenged by others using the same technical language and not by general underwriters.

I do not want to have to explain to the Judge, why I modified my report to suit my client.

Dik

 

[gte447f]

Agree with dik on this one.

You may respond to specific questions or inquiries about the content of your report. Asuming you have met your contractual obligations by delivering the final draft of your report ("final" based on your own internal process of report generation/review/revision, whatever that may be... not on their review and revision of your report), then if they need clarification let them ask, and place the onus on them to be specific about the information they need or want. Sort of like answering an RFI about a set of Construction Drawings.

Is the lender/underwriter your client?

 

[dik]

I sometimes prepare an addendum to a report, but, the original report stands on its own merit.

Dik

 

[woodman88]

Must be nice to write reports for “others using the same technical language” and not having to worry about whether the client (or anybody else) can understand it.

Garth Dreger PE - AZ Phoenix area
As EOR's we should take the responsibility to design our structures to support the components we allow in our design per that industry standards.

 

[GregLocock]

So, you occasionally write reports in Swahili, after all if they are technically correct then the language used is merely an inconvenience to the customer?

My /guess/ is that the underwriter would like a clear statement that confirms that structure X has been designed in full accordance with the regs and best practices of state Y, to the most conservative assumptions. My other /guess/ is that a young engineer might use equivocal language when supplying such an assurance.




Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[TenPenny]

You have a client who is paying you to write a report that answers a specific question (is the item in question structurally sound, yes or no). Did your report answer that question? If so, tell your client that you've done what you're paid for, and the bill is now due.

Did the client request the report in a specific format or with specific wording?

In other words, have you done what you were asked to do, or have you done what you think you were asked to do? There's a difference.

 

[gte447f]

A certain level of technical jargon is inherent to any thorough engineering report. Try asking your postman or your neighbor who isn't an engineer to explain to you what "moment" means as used in structural engineering, and see how close they come.

The underwriter may indeed want an unequivocal statement like "structure X has been designed in full accordance with the regs and best practices of state Y, to the most conservative assumptions", but you damn sure won't find anything like that in any of my reports for an inspection of an existing residential structure that could have been built by the lowest common denominator. In my opinion, to do so would far exceed the standard of care, based on my own experience with the time limits and the financial and physical constraints applicable to the residential structural condition assessment market.

 

[siteturbo]

Here's is the matter, specifically.

A homeowner built an addition without permits. The addition rest, partially, on an existing home.

My report stated that, "...there was no evidence to indicate that the addition is impairing the structural integrity of the existing home."

Well, the underwriters insist, and they want it to say, "...the additions do not impact the structural integrity of the existing home."

Do you see the difference.

Without a set of plans, and without taking off the roof, sheathing, etc, and viewing the underlying framing and fastening components, there is no way to determine, emphatically, what they are wanting. Our scope included observations of visible items only, not a complete forensic investigation. The order of magnitude just 10 fold in terms of scope and cost.

 

[siteturbo]

"The order of magnitude just 10 fold in terms of scope and cost."

I meant to say, "jumps 10 fold".