The world is all a “Twitter” with “tweets.” And, almost everyone wants to put their face on “Facebook,” “MySpace,” “ActiveRain,” “LinkedIn,” “YouTube,” or any number of the seemingly countless “social networks” that are ubiquitous on the Internet.

However, for real estate professionals, writing or saying anything on a social network site is no less dangerous than handing a legal or business adversary a “loaded gun” to shoot down your credibility.

Let’s say, for example, you’re a real estate appraiser who specializes in condemnation / eminent domain litigation valuations. Naturally, this type of valuation typically requires the appraiser to appear in court to give testimony as an expert. And, as a valuation expert, the appraiser is required to make unbiased data analyses, form an unbiased opinion of value, and provide testimony that is also unbiased.

That said, let’s assume, that one day you’re sitting at your computer reading an article about something you feel extremely passionate about, such as eminent domain. The article is about some family being evicted from their home to transfer ownership of their property to a developer who’s going to construct luxury condos. And, the article goes on to report, that the family received $200,000 for their home, and you are of the opinion that was an unreasonably low amount.

So, without hesitation, or thinking about the potential consequences of your actions, you write a comment to the online publication saying that it is terribly unfair that the homeowner was only paid $200,000 when the developer will sell multiple condo units on that same parcel of land that will total several million dollars. You go on to say, that in order to be fair to the homeowner, the value of the homeowner’s real estate should be equal to a certain percentage of the retail value of the condos.

Feeling self-righteous and wanting to expose this “injustice” to the world, you immediately publish your comment to your blog, to your Twitter account, your Facebook account and your LinkedIn account.

Fast forward 1 year. Now, you’re on the witness stand in a condemnation case where you have appraised the value of a home for a property owner, and that home is being “taken” for the purpose of redevelopment with upscale residential condos. And, during cross-examination, the attorney for the condemnor (the entity that is taking the home) asks you a series of questions, that may go something like this:

Q: Mr. Smith. You are an appraiser. Correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you hold a state issued real estate appraiser’s license in this state?

A: Yes.

Q: And, as an appraiser, you’ve heard of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. Correct?

A: Yes.

Q: In fact, you say on page X of your report, that your appraisal of this property and your appraisal report have both been made in compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. Correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Your appraisal and report were both made in 2009. Correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Am I correct in concluding that you made your appraisal and report of this property in compliance with the 2009 edition of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice?

A: Yes.

Q: I have a copy of the 2009 edition of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. Please turn to the page titled, “Definitions” and read the definition of Appraiser.

So you read:
A: Appraiser: one who is expected to perform valuation services competently and in a manner that is independent, impartial, and objective.

Q: So, an appraiser is, quote, expected to perform valuation services competently and in a manner that is independent, impartial, and objective, correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Mr. Smith. Is it true that you have a Twitter account using the name AbleSmith?

A: Yes.

Q: Is it true that you also have a Facebook account and a LinkedIn account using the name AbleSmith, as well?

A: Yes.

Q: And, you also publish a blog using the same AbleSmith ID, correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Mr. Smith, I have an article entitled, “The Unfairness of Condemnation” that I printed from your blog. Is this the article that you wrote and published on your blog about 12 months ago?

A: Yes

Q: And, you also linked this article to your Twitter account, your Facebook account and your LinkedIn account. Correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Will you read the highlighted portion of your article that you wrote and published?

You read:
A: “It is my strongest belief, that when real estate is taken from one private party to be given to another private party for the purpose of making a huge profit, the owner of the property that is being taken should be paid based upon a percentage to be not less than 30% of the retail sale price of the newly constructed improvement.”

Q: Thank you, Mr. Smith.

After having read your own words to the judge and, perhaps, the members of the jury, do you really believe they will view your opinion of value as having been developed, “in a manner that is independent, impartial, and objective”?

Probably not.

Writing, appearing in a video, or having a casual conversation with someone has the potential to have a devastating negative effect on your credibility as an expert witness.

The moral?

Watch what you write and say, because it just may come back to destroy your professional credibility.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 10th, 2009 at 12:32 pm and is filed under Uncategorized, Valuation Issues. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.