I took USPAP seven hour update yesterday. The AI class really hit hard the appraisers responsibility in controlling the scope of work. The bottom line was "the appraiser is responsible for scope selection and implementation". There is no doubt this point was hammered hard. This aspect of USPAP seems really out of touch with the realities of the modern biding and puts an uncontrollable strain on appraisers. Especially on RIMs'. These systems provide much of the scope already. Their instructions are always spelled out, i.e., a drive-by, one approach to value, two approaches, etc......., I fully understand why the client would want this control. They are trying to get a handle on pricing appraisals in order to get the lowest fees. You simply can not have people making up scopes in the bid process due to fee spreads. What I do not understand is how the appraiser is suppose to provide a logical scope of work without pertinent information (remember you are totally responsible). The most important of which is credit worthiness. If I am a lender and have a client who has $2 million in the bank, a house that is paid for and excellent credit I may only want a drive-by for a $20,000 loan secured by a $500,000 property. However, I may want a complete report if it is a sub-prime loan where the property is near 100 percent financed. These are obvious scope of work issues. However, there are examples where latter loans only had drive-bys. Loan goes bad, regulators now can go after appraisers due to inappropriate scope of work. Everyone realizes value confidence intervals change depending on credit worthiness and security held. Much of the scope is based on the value confidence interval required. But we have little relevant information as to this issue. When I questioned the instructor on this issue his response was to call the client and inquire as to the borrowers financial means and credit worthiness. Are other people doing this? Further it was the instructor's opinion this is freeing allowing us greater ability to produce credibly. However, I see it as a step backwards. For the most part I think it will pigeon hole most appraisers into one product, complete self-contained reports due to liability. What do you think?